WOW, Just when I thought I've read it all... I read Mrs. Monte's "solution" to North's declining enrollment as being "send Oshkosh East to North -- as a separate school." Shows such a COMPLETE LACK of understanding of so many issues I don't even know where to begin.
First of all the concern is not with underutilized classrooms, which is ALL sending East High to North as a separate school would do.
Her so-called "solution" shows a lack of understanding how some "At-Risk" students need to be in an ENTIRELY different enviroment than a traditional High School --- and yes Ms. Monte, there are students who live withing walking distance of East.
The suggestion shows a complete lack of understanding of the concerns administrators, staff and parents have of North dropping below current numbers, as the student population decreases the number of single sections of classes increases. North is trying to "ward off" a scenario where students find themselves having to decide between Honors English, Physics 2, AP Psychology and Orchestra where by all 4 classes are scheduled the same hour, resulting in students being unable to take 3 of 4 classes they wanted. If you've never created a "Master Schedule" for a niddle or high school perhaps you should talk to someone who has... the fewer the students, the more difficult it becomes!
The concerns relating to the projected growing disparity between North and West are not about North getting 100 students to fill up some classrooms, it is about maintaining the current equity of opportunity that currently exists at our high schools. After all it is called a "long range facilities plan" that means it is looking to the future. I have not heard any board member say we currently do not have equity, what I have heard is concern that if the gap between the two high schools gets too large and the number of students at North drops too low, it will have an effect on the equity of opportunity for North students.
Finally, all the talk about "social engineering" it seems to me plain common sense that if you have one high school with a 35% poverty rate and one with a 14% poverty rate, the best solution when moving 100 students to the higher poverty school is not to move the students who live in an attendance area that has a 77% poverty rate (the highest rate by far on the West side). You can bury your head in the sand all you want, or call world reknowned Ruby Payne's work "tripe" but after 7 years at Jefferson (not to mention having a mother who volunteered at Head Start for years) I know beyond a shadow of a doubt, poverty has a negative effect on learning.
Here is another take on Ruby Payne:
This link has a very interesting article... the following excerpt begins to explain to me the comments from some that there is no correlation between poverty and learning and the schools should just ignore it:
"The problem here, of course, is that Kipp isn’t unusual. We don’t just ignore the effects of class, we deny them. We bury them, blind ourselves to them, and then act as if they don’t exist. Kipp’s is the kind of experience Payne reports having constantly. It’s the reason schools want her to come. And it explains why her seminars are so dumbed-down: so’s her audience. We are woefully ignorant of class distinctions and the effects of class on education, and we are ignorant despite years of our school systems trying not to be. "
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
You linked a BLOG!!! Boy, that sure shows your level of intelligence. Ruby Payne wouldn't know poverty if it bit her in the ass.
You are the ALWAYS first one to shoot down Monte. At least she is trying for a solution.
As for "some" East high students being within walking distance... that means that they are IN the North attendance area. That also means that they would have access to busses to get there.
Even when you try to make her look bad, she looks good.
So, I will ask you, what is your solution?
And if you use the term "equitable" or "equity" again, I think I will puke.
Has anyone else seen Michelle Monte's latest proposal for solving overcrowding? Honest to God, the way this woman and her husband continually present plans as if they are the "gold-plated" solutions for the school district and city, they must think they are the smartest people on earth. Dozens of people have been involved in this school disrict process for a year or better and Monte comes along with a solution practically oernight that she claims solves the problem and costs little to nothing monetarily and amongst the public at large.
What's next for this woman: the Office of the President of the United States; perhaps ambassador to some 3rd world nation. Surely with her vast knowledge and abilities that are far greater than those of others in the human race she could do greater good elsewhere. Her talents are being wasted here. If she put her mind to it she'd probably win herself a Nobel Peace Prize to add to the dozens of other accolades she must have received in her lifetime. What a gem.
My solution:
As I have stated numerous times, Option E2 (as presented at one of the board meetings) is my preferred solution, or Option E with a little tweaking.
Yes I linked to a blog, your point? The person made a great deal of sense --- it is denial and ignorance that have some saying poverty doesn't matter.
Coming up with so-called solutions that do NOTHING to address the issues are of little use to me.
Where is YOUR evidence that children who go to school without their friends and neighbors suffer? And if it is so bad for children, should we charge those parents who move their children multiple times, across the country and "force" them to go to several different schools with "child abuse"? I think we all know it isn't harmful for children to go to school with those that live outside their neighborhood. It is just uncomfortable for their parents.
If someone who is clueless about the whole purpose of the long range facilities plan and the components there to (after "studying" and participating in the committees) looks good to you, well you enjoy living in your little world of denial. I'd rather live in the real world where people of character make the right decisions despite the wrath of the "powerful", I'll take that to pandering any day.
Mrs. Thiel, you used a blog to support your position. Blog's are mainly the opinions of the blog owner. No research, no qualificiations, nothing of substance to back anything up? How is that better than anything Monte has offered? You decry her and then pull the same garbage you accuse her of. I used to expect more form you as a former member of the Board and an active member of the community. I don't know what turned you into this, but I wish you would take a step back and regroup.
As for Monte's plan, I don't know if it could work. What does impress me is that she tries. How persistance is pandering is beyond me. Unfortunately, Monte has done more for the ongoing discussion by continuing to present ideas than the majority of the Board. I wish I could say otherwise, but I cannot deny the truth.
I have done research on Ruby Payne as I had never heard of her. It seems she was married to a poor Indiana boy who eventually made good. They eventually divorced. She taught in a predominantly white affluent Illinois school before moving to a suburban district outside Houston. Her bringing awareness of poverty issues in schools is commendable. Hoever, I am torn by the fact that she has publically supported NCLB and profits from it. I am disappointed at her stereotyping and preying on schools desperate to help their poorer students. I have read her book and have found no real research to back it up. I have read articles where she dances around questions that ask for research to back up her claims. I am now reading a book by an educational researcher in answer to Payne's work. He agrees with some of her stuff, but clearly shows through research how she misaaplies her theory to damaging results. There are also schools around the country writing articles on how they regret spending money on Payne.
Needless to say, I am torn as to whether to trust anything Payne has to say or anyone who supports her classissism.
Get off Monte and deal with some real issues PLEASE!!!
Anon. 12:44
I did not link to a blog to "support my position" I linked to an article that helped me understand how some can say poverty doesn't matter.
I don't agree with everything that Ruby Payne says or does, but to call it "tripe" as Ms. Monte did
"Monte07
Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 74
Location: Oshkosh
Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2007 8:25 am Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Becker presented his plan almost immediately after the Ruby Payne tripe." Here is the link if you want to read the whole post:
http://forums.thenorthwestern.com/viewtopic.php?t=12703&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=75
to me, shows exactly what the link spoke of, the total denial exercised by some who just want to pretend poverty has no effect.
The board is criticized for "a new plan a week" and I share that criticism... I told people at the beginning that the board would back down every time parents came to complain about their boundaries being changed and their child being required to attend a different school, and so far that has happened. I don't see Mrs. Monte's "plans" as any different. Don't close the schools where parents have come to complain "Roosevelt, Smith, Lakeside, Green Meadow.
She never spoke or wrote against the "Jefferson" plan like she did for Option "E". Her solution, in my opinion (and that's what a blog is as you so aptly described and since it is my blog --- my opinion) to build a K-8 at Oakwood and add on to North to the tune of 300 seats is just pandering to parents who do not want to be moved... If you look at the numbers it is NOT an efficient solution.
She claims to do research on everything yet I've not seen the research on how many children in a school you have to move to be "just right" where it won't supposedly cause harm... could it be there is no such research. Would districts all over the country have fluid (ever moving) boundaries if there was research it was harmful... doubtful.
Now she has moved to yet another
"solution" that is NO solution at all, for reasons I've already explained.
As a former board member and active member of this community, I will not just sit back and let someone who does not have a grasp on the issues, or the facts to present such misinformation without countering with some data or correcting her mis-statements. You don't have to like it but those who accept everything she says hook, line and sinker, may want to do a little research of their own, or maybe facts and data don't matter --- maybe you think, like Ms. Monte,
from OshKonversation: link:
http://forums.thenorthwestern.com/viewtopic.php?p=30333&highlight=#30333
Monte07
Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 12:52 pm Post subject:
{some of the facts certain people cling to, Mrs. Thiel, are really assumptions based on available data and not actual "facts." }
You are entitled to your opinion, just as I am entitled to mine. I'm pretty sure the majority prefer data to "Mrs. Monte's word".
Feel free to stop reading this blog, as I will continue to express my opinion and set the record straight when needed.
Mrs. Thiel, How do you get someone's calling Ruby Payne's viewpoint tripe being the same as saying poverty as a whole is not important? One could equally say that because you support Ruby Payne, you also subscribe to sterotypes and classism as Payne does in her "Framework" book.
You complaints of Monte sound more like sour grapes. Thank you for making my decision for me regarding ever supporting you again. You find it easy to criticize yet bring nothing to the table. It really is sad to see you reduced to this.
While there is not just right number to show lack of harm, there is no just right number showing harm. In poverty research there is much correlation and little causation. You would do better understanding that distinction.
Good Luck Mrs. Thiel.
So you won't support her. Big deal and who said she's running again, anyway? I've heard no such announcement. But just as you don't like her, don't forget there are plenty who feel the same about Mrs. Monte.
I agree that Mrs. Monte has no grasp on things. No one person can have all the answers as she seems to think she has. When her mistakes are pointed out she says she was misunderstood. It's always someone else's fault. I can not and will never support someone as two faced and disenguous as that.
Anon. 4:16 I believe that calling something "tripe" throws out the entire work.
I CLEARLY stated that I do not agree with everything that Ruby Payne has stated but she does make valid points and is writing from actual experiences of spending time with people in generational poverty. Do I think she is the end all be all, no I NEVER said that. Does she fail to address the classism in society, to a great degree yes she does.
Hey, let's look at that, if one were to mention that perhaps Oshkosh is classist... well guess who will be the first to attack you? MRS. MONTE so spare me your supposed caring about classism in Oshkosh or education... your "hero" Monte doesn't think there is any or at least doensn't think anyone should mention it.
You can spare me the "ever supporting you again" as I HIGHLY doubt you ever supported me, if you had you would not be surprised that I like to deal in reality, not my own little version of what happened, putting those I don't like in the worst possible light.
Unlike Mrs. Monte, I don't attack her or her friends, imply her children shouldn't be at meetings or any of the other ugly things Mrs. Monte has done. I have simply pointed out where she has her facts or understanding of an issue wrong or where she has misrepresented what someone said or did (whether intentionally or not I can't say). Also, unlike Mrs. Monte I don't pretend I want to be friendly with her and then make unfounded accusations about her --- all things she has done. So go ahead and cheerlead for her, that is your right, I don't happen to share your opinions.
Well said, Mrs. Thiel. More people than just you can attest to Michelle Monte doing all these things. She pretends to be a nice person on blogs and to people's faces but shows another face on other blogs and behind people's backs. Then she wonders why she gets picked on. Not exactly a brain trust if she can't figure that one out. Nastiness and maliciousness beget the same.
The criticism that anything found on a blog is automatically worthless is itself worthless. Like many other things in life, blanket praise/condemnation is lazy and almost always inaccurate. Some blogs aren't worth the time it takes to read the post titles. Others are fountains of information.
The best blogs have been willing to report what the mainstream media can't be bothered with or to bring to the front crucial articles that newspapers shove on their back pages.
Like anything else, you have to do a little work, not much, to separate the wheat from the chaff. If you can't be bothered, you'll remain, I'm afraid, woefully ignorant since much of the modern MSM can't be trusted.
Good blogs are correction devices. We find and confront the facts, hoping to short-circuit easy acceptance of what can only be accurately called "propaganda". If you're getting your news only from newspapers, magazines, and TV, you're soaking up a lot of lies.
For the record, I wrote the piece Ms Thiel linked to. The starting point was a long article in the Sunday NY Times. Would you consider the NYT a waste of time, too? You apparently didn't bother to read either my post or the article it was based on, which as far as I'm concerned, shows your level of intelligence.
I did some research as well, and wrote my criticism from a 25-yr history working in and with educational systems in a number of predominantly low-income areas. It wasn't coming out of nowhere, and I made that plain. I also made it clear that I have major problems with Ms Payne's approach in a number of different areas. But you didn't read it, so you don't know that.
Ms Thiel deserves credit for using her own judgment and keeping an open mind. You might try it sometime, just for the hell of it. You may be surprised by how much you learn.
Mick,
Thank you for your post. I knew from reading your article that you had a wealth of experience in education. I was going to do a little research and find out more about your background, but you have done that for me.
Unfortunately, I've found that too many blog posters in Oshkosh, don't seem to care much about facts or data, they would rather attack to maintain the status quo. Too often our school board caves to the pressure of parents who do not want their children to experience anything or anyone outside their neighborhood. I would say classism is rampant in Oshkosh but anyone who states that is quickly criticized for being "divisive".
Again, MIck, thanks for your post.
I appreciated the opportunity to read what Mick had to say and was delighted to see him post something on this blog. I must say that I would give more credence to his 25 or so years working in and with school systems than I would to a person who claims to have such extensive knowledge in so many areas, including having worked a whopping "less than a year" in a school. An experienced educator that does not make.
I don't always agree with your approach to solving problems but I commend your interest and willingness to share your opinion.
Your crediblity would be greatly boosted if you would drop the Theil/Monte feud. You are picking apart ideas of one citizen, not the school board, and it is making you look bad, not her.
If you want to provide truth, focus your attention in reality...i.e.: the lakeside plan, the coolidge plan.
Just my 2 cents.
Anonymous 2:29
I have already expressed my concerns (on OshKonversation) about the "Lakeside" plan and how ridiculous I think it is. I am hopeful that the BOE will finally realize that some version of Option E (my choice would be the Option E2 a citizen offered to the board more than a month ago) is the best choice for the children of the district.
However, Mrs. Monte is a member of the CRT committee and is posting her solution as "the answer" and other posters are lining up to support it. I am not in a "feud" with her, I am simply expressing my opinion that she does not have a grasp of the issues related to the whole facilities plan and especially why students need to be moved from West to North. I think people should know there is another side to what she presents as "the solution". That is not, in my opinion feuding, it is presenting the whole range of issues involved vs. pretending it is a matter of filling up 100 seats.
I think moving a portion of the district from west to north is necessary. I think E2 is absurd because E takes almost all of the low-SES population to merrill and north but E2 takes any remaining low-SES children also.
Oakwood would become a seriously non-diverse school...more so than it already is!
I have to imagine that when the Westhaven neighborhood moves out of Traeger we're going to eliminate a large %of low-SES children from Traeger...then when Oakwood and Traeger merge for the k-3, 4-8 it's going to be a completely non-diverse school.
We're just moving around the low-SES families.
Opposite of what we're trying to achieve.
:(
Option E2 does not move the "rest of the low SES" in Oakwood. You can't be serious. It takes the houses along the lake as the first group of people to get added on to increase numbers. And any comment that Oakwood will become less diverse is laughable. Have you looked at the low-SES numbers for Oakwood. It's not like E2 (or E for that matter) makes Oakwood go from 48% to 2%. It makes Oakwood go from barely no low-SES to a little less than barely no low-SES. Option E2 was about taking more of Oakwood as group and taking more than just the "low-SES" in Oakwood.
And, yes, I was the person who presented E2. Personally, I still stand think the plan I discussed on the Northwestern which moved all of Oakwood to North and all of Washington to West was an even better plan, but so be it.
Post a Comment