Poverty and Education

I have read and listened to comments from people who seem to believe that poverty plays no role in a child's learning. That poor, middle class and rich kids all have the same opportunities etc. Is that what most people believe or just a few bloggers? I have to ask a few questions for those who actually do believe that poverty makes no difference.

1. Why does the Federal Government give Title I funds to schools with high poverty rates?
2. Why does NCLB look at the gap between economically disadvantaged and non-economically disadvantaged?
3. Why was SAGE created?
4. Why do schools with high poverty rates almost always have low test scores?
5. Why was Head Start created?
6. Why have a "War on Poverty" if poverty has NO effect on children?

Why do people want to deny that poverty does affect children and their learning? I am not saying that every child in poverty will be affected the same way or that if you are poor you will not succeed. But to deny that teaching and learning is more difficult in high poverty schools just has no basis in reality.

It was asked on OshKonversation, "Is it fair that only some of our children benefit from SAGE classes and not others; what happened to equitable?"

The poster is confusing EQUAL with EQUITABLE.. SAGE is the very definition of equitable... equal means everyone gets the same thing, equitable means giving everyone an equal opportunity, which is what SAGE does.

It just baffles me that some continue to argue that poverty has no effect... or like the speaker at the last board meeting... those whose children qualify for free or reduced lunch aren't poor --- they just need someone to show them how to spend their money more wisely. Yeah, you go on believing that the families who make $6 and hour don't have it any harder than those that make $20. I guess it makes one feel better to believe poverty really doesn't matter, because then we are not required to address a problem that doesn't exist.

Just wondering

I've put off posting for awhile because I've been so frustrated, I've refrained from posting on the OshKonversation for awhile but couldn't stay away for long. I just can't really figure out why I keep bothering. I can't seem to stop operating under the misguided notion that people want the facts --- they don't! A poster says Smith's enrollment is increasing because a family with children moved in down the street. Well the WINNS data from DPI shows that the only significant increase in enrollment at Smith is due to Pre-K programs being put there. In the 2000-2001 school year there were 265 K-5 students last year (2006-2007) there were 181 K-5 students... how is that increasing enrollment? The response on OshKonversation? I was asked why I didn't send my children to Traeger when Jefferson was in disrepair? I had several reasons the primary one being Traeger did not/ does not have the diversity in its student body that Jefferson does, that diversity was very important to me as a mother. It is important to me that my children experience children of other cultures and economic situations so they understand that "everyone is not like them" which is not just OK but a good thing! Not that the posters really care about the answers to any of the questions they post, they just use it as another reason to bash someone. The question I keep coming back to is WHY do I keep posting???? Anyone out there have an answer???

One more irritation today --- I was perusing the blog of a former school board candidate and she had posted some questions on the state budget stalemate, the first one just had me shaking my head... it asked the governor (who has ties to education - she posts) why the education funds are being held up? Budgeting/State Government 101 --- The governor can only provide a budget to the legislature (which he did many months ago ---probably in April) then he must WAIT for a budget to be passed by BOTH houses (Senate and Assembly) this has NOT happened and the governor has no power to make it happen so why ask the governor why the hold up when HE is NOT the one holding it up!! I know I'm sure I misunderstood something ... just drives me crazy that people don't even get the basic functioning of our government.

I'm waiting for the Sept. 12th Board meeting to see if there is more delaying, yet another boundary option or if they will actually make a decison. I predict either more delays or they move the poor kids whose parents won't complain. Hope I'm wrong on both counts.

Will the Oshkosh BOE Cave or Stand Firm?

Well as those affected by Option E put on the pressure, will the school board cave to the pressure and find yet another area to move, one this time that doesn't have such active parents? I sure hope not, but I certainly can't predict which way it will go.

I'm so tired of hearing about "driving clear across town". Let's look at what Mapquest has to say:

from 1220 Sheboygan Street to Oakwood it is .35 miles and est. 1 min
from 1220 Sheboygan Street to Roosevelt it is 2.02 miles and est. 7 min.

from 1220 Sheboygan Street to Traeger Middle it is 3.12 miles and est. 9 min.
from 1220 Sheboygan Street to Merrill Middle it is 3.10 miles and est 10 min .02 miles closer than Traeger and a whopping MINUTE longer to drive to Merrill vs. Traeger

from 1220 Sheboygan Street to West High it is 2.27 miles and an est. 7 min. drive
from 1220 Sheboygan St. to North High it is 3.05 miles and 10 min.

Yes, Oakwood is closer than Roosevelt BUT, Roosevelt is closer than Traeger and Merrill is closer than Traeger too (though by a mere .02 mi.). The difference in the distance to the high schools is less than a mile.

Are you still going to argue that North is "clear across town and West is right in our neighborhood? Less than a mile difference and THREE minutes difference in drive times, sorry the facts just don't bear out the rhetoric.

With the K-3 configuration many families will live farther than 1/3 of a mile (as many do already). This is NOT sending kids clear across town.

Then there is the whole "friend" issue. First of all what does being in a school with your friend have to do with educational quality? In my childrens schools often the teachers have to decide that "friends" can't be in the same class together because it is too disruptive for others. Are these same people going to make sure their children go to college with their "friends" too, we wouldn't want them to be damaged by being separated from their friends.

I can't even believe people live so far under rocks they "had NO idea this was going on". Please we are going on 2 years since PMP was hired, and for 10 years the district has been looking at balancing enrollments. School newsletters discussed it, it is on the HOME page of the website, right in the middle of the page, the Northwestern, WOSH, Eye on Oshkosh, the Oshkosh Common Council have ALL discussed the facilities issues. If people choose not to pay attention that is their choice but don't turn around and say it was under the radar, being sneaked through in the summer or not communicated to people. What do you want? A door to door campaign? It is NOT that people didn't know facilities were being discussed, they just didn't pay attention, didn't really care what was being discussed because they were not being affected. Once they are involved everyone is all interested and NOW the process is moving too fast. I've been paying attention all along because I'm interested in what happens. Then there are the "perfect plans" put forth that have no numbers, no bussing costs, no construction costs just a lot of "I'm sure" it will cost less than Scenario 7. It all hinges on a NEW K-8 for Oakwood (apparently refurbishing isn't good enough for that school) and sending half that school to North (which of course would require an addition to North) and then build a new school for Green Meadow (I'm sure the costs will be low to build a school for 500+ on a septic system) and then just leave all the rest of the schools in the disrepair they are in. Just LOVE that idea. I guess if you are wealthy enough to build a new house your kids need to go to a brand new school, if you can't afford to, or choose not to live in a "new" house well then, your children don't deserve their school refurbished. You think I'm making this up... Check out OshKonversation

I really see no point in trying to educate people on the blogs about why the choices being made are necessary. Most posting don't "listen" to what is said... as they so quickly criticize others of not listening... yet I know and can repeat for you the "arguments" they give. I just happen to know that many posters miss the whole point of efficiencies of staffing and why some schools must close.

Back to my original question. I think this is the closest we have come to a board with a majority that understands action must be taken. Whether there is a majority to do so or not, we will have to wait and see. Clearly it has become impossible to continue to have all the schools we have and one of the lowest tax rates and per pupil spending amount of the 25 largest school districts in the state. In the end what will the tradeoffs be?

I really wish those who WANT the board to take action and those who do support the plan would come out and speak in favor of it but I understand the audience is rather hostile and it is an effort to come and speak. I just don't want to hear anyone tell me (as they have in the past) "the board needs to; close Green Meadow, get rid of all those little schools, stop putting this off etc... If the board caves once again, those who chose not to speak in favor will be partly to blame.

New Idea for the District Facilities Plan

Today at the ASC/CRT meeting someone suggested that to save money, perhaps East High should be put into Emmeline Cook Elementary and that school could become a smaller Elementary school than it currently is and the left-over classrooms could be used for East High.

I wonder what people's thoughts are on that suggestion?

Let's Play Ostrich, Shall We?

Do you subscribe to the "if we don't say it, it must not be true"? Do you think that pretending something isn't real makes it go away? OK, enough of the mystery.

Oshkosh is a divided community; certainly the school district community is divided by sides of town.

One poster on OshKonversation posted this:

"...particularly those who clearly choose to use the west-side/north-side language in describing our community and clearly favor certain schools or sides of town. I also question having administrators who act in the same manor (sic)."

So if we don't "talk about it" it makes it go away, I don't know if that is naïveté, ignorance, or politics, but I just don't think that if you sweep the dirt under the rug it means the dirt is gone.

For me, this post, from a different poster, also from OshKonversation proves my point:

...Perhaps we just need to hire a spot-on marketing team to promote Merrill and North? The question is what can you do to persuade people on the west side who seem to be afraid to send their children there. and from the same poster- ... When you look at the proximity of all the child sexual offenders living in the area around Merrill it's incredibly concerning. The test scores at Merrill are of course disappointing but the district won't even consider that as a problem since each school is supposed to provide the same quality of education.

I would tell parents who are worried about test scores, rest assured, your children's test scores will follow them to Merrill. My children went to Jefferson, not a school with the highest of test scores but my children got a WONDERFUL education and their personal test scores would rival those of any Oakwood student. I say this not to brag about my children but to point out that the major predictor of a student's standardized test score is their parent's education level and income. My children have two college educated parents and a middle class home. That is not the case with many Jefferson families and unfortunately that is reflected in test scores, it is NOT a reflection of the quality of education children receive. Does anyone really believe that if the entire staff at a Jefferson or Merrill were switched with the entire staff at Oakwood that the test scores at Oakwood would go down and those at Jefferson or Merrill would be the top in the district?

I would say there are definitely "sides of town" namely the West and the North, it is sad, it is divisive and it is not to any one's benefit to support a divided town. However, to criticize people for stating what is obvious and instead pretending no such divisions exist does absolutely nothing to fix a serious issue. Burying one's head in the sand like the ostrich does not bring people together. The first step to fixing a problem is ADMITTING there is one.

I have lived in this town for about 16 years and what struck me right away when I moved here was the constant talk about the "West Side" and the "North Side". I grew up in Milwaukee and there, there were 4 sides of town --- just like the 4 compass points East Side, North Side, West Side and South Side. I think a big part of there being only 2 sides is the fact that we have 2 high school --- is it really coincidence they are called North and West? (Note: I do know we now have 3 high schools but since East is an Alternative High School it doesn't really factor in the same way).

I remember the year Oshkosh North High was on their way to the state tournament for football and some West students were actually cheering for North's opponent to win the game so North would be eliminated, as West had already been. If that is not divisiveness I don't know what you'd call it. I have heard North students and their parents say West students are snobs with silver spoons in their mouth and West students and parents say North students are losers, etc. It is sad, it is wrong and it is time it stops. But I also believe it is wrong to criticize those who have brought it out in the open and spoken about it whether they be board members, administrators or average citizens. Let's admit the problem, face it and take steps to correct it. Perhaps the first step is to implement the selected boundary changes and give people a chance to see that the world goes on and life isn't so bad, even if you go to school with someone from the "other" side of town.

Is it appropriate for school board members to deny children an education?

I was talking to someone about the last school board meeting and this person made a comment that really got me thinking. The comment "Why would you want to be on the school board if you are going to deny children an education?" The person was referencing the "no" vote by 2 board members to provide 4K education to Oshkosh children. For almost 10 years the Oshkosh district has had a 4K program for English Language Learners (ELL) students and the state informed Oshkosh that in order to receive state aide for that program the district needed to have a "universal access" 4K program. Meaning that 4K had to be available for all district children, not just targeted to certain groups. If the district did not move to universal access 4K they would not be able to have a 4K ELL program either because there is no money in the budget to fully fund such a program. I hadn't really thought about the fact that voting against 4K was denying children an education but that is what would have happened. Those same board members then voted against providing summer school programs for students because they believe that the pay for summer school teachers is too high, but that is something that is bargained with the union and cannot be changed unilaterally. It does seem strange that school board members would vote against providing programs that are not only needed by students but, in the case of 4K ,wanted by 85% of parents surveyed.

There is a multitude of research by not just educators but also economists that show that 4K is not only beneficial for children (with univeral 4K considered more beneficial for children in need than targeted programs) it has a huge return on investment for governmental units. Yet these board members still voted against 4K basically denying children an education. I just don't see how it can be justified that the best interest of the children were served by those "NO" votes.

Oshkosh School District and the Council

Well I just finished watching the Common Council workshop on the School District's facilities plan. Some thoughts.

Could McHugh be any more rude (well of course he could and has been but nonetheless I don't think that is how you treat people who have come to provide you with information).

As a parent I'm a little insulted to think that people actually believe the only consideration a parent would have about a school is how close it is to my home... really if that were the only consideration shouldn't we have a school located within a mile of every home? What about the condition of the building... you really think people looking to buy homes in our city check out some of these schools and say oh, yeah, I'll buy there because the school is close, mind you the school floods when it rains, they have plastic gutters screwed to the walls to hold books because there is no storage but that is exactly what I'm looking for in a school for my child.

Some of the schools that will be closed are less than a mile from the school students will be sent to. I don't think you can use the "we are losing our neighborhood school" argument when, say, Smith school is a mere .6 of a mile from Jefferson. If you look at all the schools that are slated to be closed, for schools in the city limits, the school that students would be sent to is located no more than 1.9 miles away and as close as .6 miles. People looking to move into our community have no "ties" to a school so are unlikely to care if their child goes to Smith or Jefferson though I would imagine if a prospective family toured each building and made a decision on the building alone, they would choose the newest school.

The fact is, what is referred to as "growth on the West side" it was pointed out tonight is really just a shifting of people from other parts of the city to the West side. Is that in the best interest of our city. Will keeping substandard school buildings in the "central city" really encourage people to buy homes there, or would closing a substandard school and upgrading the school those children would go to be more appealing to prospective home buyers?

Pretty sad that some council members failed to understand the economics of keeping "failing" buildings open so "everyone" is happy. Doing that off the top throws out the $1.5M per year saved in operating costs... it also means spending dollars on buildings that an architect said he wouldn't recommend spending more money on. If you take out completely the $29M in functional issues and just address deferred maintenance you are looking at $10M in a referendum and all you've done is put a bandage on a gaping wound that needs surgery.

Let's go back to the $29M on functional issues, supposedly the community won't spend the money on this, how sad that supposedly the community doesn't believe our children all deserve to have similar experiences in school that it is OK for some to learn with constant distractions from other classes due to an open concept, or that some students never get to do a "clay" unit in Art because there is no kiln in the gym where Art class is held, or students wear coats in class because it is too cold without them, and I could go on about more inequities but I won't.

Everyone wants to know about Plan B --- while there is no specific Plan, I can tell you whatever it might be it will be ugly. Given the declining enrollment and the unlikelihood that the state will change the school funding formula, the cuts will be deep and they will affect students. Keeping all our schools and spending money to maintain them, will mean cutting millions each year. I predict class sizes will rise and the non-core subjects like Art, Music and Phy-Ed will be scaled back and cut in some instances. If things go on long enough, probably even the "sacred cow" athletics will be affected.

I just don't see any "Plan B" being something that will attract a lot of families to Oshkosh... why is it only Oshkosh and Neenah are declining enrollment districts in the Fox Valley? Perhaps in Oshkosh's case simply having an abundance of elementary schools isn't enough to draw families in. Let's face it, they weren't coming to the district in the 5 years prior to discussions of these scenarios. Our enrollment has been declining for a number of years. Could it be because other districts have more to offer people? Maybe it is because those districts don't operate on the "we're getting by" philosophy. Maybe the other Fox Valley school districts believe in providing quality facilities. My daughter played high school basketball this year and I attended games in every high school in our conference and every one of the facilities was superior to West's main gym. I'd be willing to bet none of those schools had bleachers built in 1960.

As time goes by I fear that once again this district will do little to nothing to address the inequities that exist. Sadly, the only place I find solace is in the fact that in 5 years I will no longer have children in the district.