The Administration of Education in this State makes Us Sick...
Subtitled: Whatever...
VAPAC's back in the news, seeking a new sponsor for their charter and apparently finding one with SCOE. This, according to the Sacramento Bee, in spite of SCOE staff disapproval of the move citing the following reasons:
• "VAPAC fails to provide an operational budget."
• "VAPAC fails to provide a reasonably comprehensive description of the special education program of the school."
• "VAPAC's petition demonstrates a lack of understanding of its legal obligations."
• "VAPAC presents an unsound educational program for the pupils to be enrolled in the charter school."
And my personal favorite:
"It … appears that these two directors are related, which may create a host of other problems, including conflicts of interest and nepotism," the recommendation says.
We're waiting for the other shoe to drop...
Give us your comments:
http://scusdwatch.proboards100.com/
VAPAC's back in the news, seeking a new sponsor for their charter and apparently finding one with SCOE. This, according to the Sacramento Bee, in spite of SCOE staff disapproval of the move citing the following reasons:
• "VAPAC fails to provide an operational budget."
• "VAPAC fails to provide a reasonably comprehensive description of the special education program of the school."
• "VAPAC's petition demonstrates a lack of understanding of its legal obligations."
• "VAPAC presents an unsound educational program for the pupils to be enrolled in the charter school."
And my personal favorite:
"It … appears that these two directors are related, which may create a host of other problems, including conflicts of interest and nepotism," the recommendation says.
We're waiting for the other shoe to drop...
Give us your comments:
http://scusdwatch.proboards100.com/
posted by All of Us at
7:22 AM
15 Comments:
The Sacramento County Board of Education members who voted to approve VAPAC's charter did not allow their staff to present their findings in public. In other words, even though at least one member of the Board requested that staff be allowed to do their presentation it never took place. It is beyond bizarre that the County Board of Education wants to solve the problems of the poorly written VAPAC charter with a MOU. Didn't the judge in the dispute betweeen SCUSD and VAPAC rule that the MOU cannot take presidence over the charter? Have I misundersood what that dispute is all about? Can anyone clarify this?
I'm left as confused and bewildered by the Sacramento County Board's action as I was by SCUSD's action when they closed Sacramento High School. There is something else going on here. In the case of Sacramento High School it was former Supt. Sweeney trying to break the teachers union and the CASA pension scam that needed more charter schools to keep it afloat. In the case of VAPAC, aside from the job security for the administration, who else benefits from this boondoggle. Is anyone following the money?
It should also be noted that SCOE denied the SCTA/Teachers Charter for Sacramento High in the Charter debacle of '03 and I know it wasn't flawed like the VAPAC nightmare.
So let's think about this: They rubber-stamp a poorly written, poorly governed school while denying a sanely written compromise back in '03.
Oh well...
Get this to all the families...
Sacramento High School
“Why Sac Hi is a Lie”
You have a few weeks to enroll in another high school. Here are some of the reasons why you should:
• Sac High has gone from 6 to 4 small schools and that enrollment is at less then half capacity. 979 as of June 15, 2006.
• The entire East wing will be in portables as the school will be under construction for the entire year for SCUSD’s modernization efforts
• The turn over also applies to staff. Teachers have left and in one case, a whole school including its sponsor has high tailed out from under St. HOPE’s umbrella.
• Currently teachers are now “at will” employees. This means they may be released without cause.
• The original admin team is gone, two superintendents, and a short-lived president are gone. A team of proven and experienced educators has left. In most cases they have been replaced and/or re-orged by well meaning but inexperienced personnel with little or no practical knowledge of how a successful school works. Not a single administrator that opened the school remains working for St. Hope. The entire business office staff has turned over in 3 years, including 3 CFO’s, 3 in house Legal Counsels and 3 HR Directors. Two founding school board members have left their positions and the newly created Chief Academic Officer, which was designed to replace the superintendent position, has changed twice in 6 months. Why all the change? Smart business acumen or is St. HOPE doing the equivalent of rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic?
• The sports teams do well provided they’re Men’s or Women’s Basketball. The Athletic program has withstood 4 AD’s in 3 years despite the fact that one AD earned $108,000 a year. Eligibility rules have been abused and there have been 3 football coaches in 3 years.
• The arts program has also taken a serious hit. Currently there are no band or choir classes being offered. This year, because of construction, the visual arts programs will be greatly limited.
• All English Language (Learners ELL) have been moved to one small school. What happened to choice?
• St. HOPE once served approx 85% of the original Sac High students. That number is now far lower. Many students have been dis-enrolled from the school rather than facing expulsion. Suspensions are not recorded and students are not held accountable for serious violations.
• It’s all about kids right? At Sac High Charter, the CAHSEE scores are declining after 2 years of positive growth and Sac High Charter is now predicted to be a program improvement school, moral is low, and the uniform rule has been bent beyond recognition.
What could have been something so positive is failing. While many still believe the original plan for Sacramento High School as a Charter School housing 6 small schools was an innovative plan the experiment has failed because of the mismanagement and micro-management of CEO and Board President Kevin Johnson. Students in the Sacramento area are feeling the negative effects due to Sac High Charter’s low enrollment. Let St. HOPE continue their experiment elsewhere and return Sac High to SCUSD. Ask questions, review the real results and make a truly informed choice. Sac High Charter may look okay on paper but it is no place to send your child.
Thank you for speaking out on what is really happening at Sac Charter High. I hope that this was also sent to all the board members. You would be able to reach even more people by speaking at public comment at the school board meeting on Aug. 3rd. The public needs to know that the closing of Sac High and it's consequences (Sac Charter High and VAPAC) are a complete fiasco.
The consent decree high school will be a way to redress the wrong that was done to the students of the Sac High attendance area. Concerned readers, please contact the board and tell them the best place for the consent decree high school is the Sac High facility. At the Aug. 3rd meeting, District staff will be proposing that the board authorize a preliminary environmental impact report for three sites: Kit Carson, Sac High and PS7 (John Muir). I don't know what the district is trying to pull here, but PS7 is totally inappropriate as a site given that it's a small elementary school that is located outside the southernmost boundary of the Sac High attendance area. Please tell the board not to include PS7 on the list and put the consent decree high school at Sac High.
(See my post under district issues-Where will the consent decree high school be?-for all the reasons to against this,
and in support of the Sac High site). Thanks.
Please forward .my comments to the board members
This is getting old. ScaCharter High is failing, VAPAC is failing what's next?
I urge you, Carter, to come forward and speak to the board about these issues, or at least send them an email or letter. It will have much more impact coming for you. (If you speak at a meeting it's televised to thousands of people.) Heidi and I have been talking to them for over 3 years and it's been falling on mostly deaf ears. They dont' hear us anymore. We need new blood so to speak. We especially need people who have direct knowledge of what's been going on at Sac Charter to clue them in because they're just getting a snow job from St. HOPE.
I want to invite people to a meeting of the Sacramento Coalition to Save Public Education
Sunday Aug. 6 at 4:30 at the Stockton Boulevard Partnership at the southeast corner of Stockton Blvd. and Fruitridge Rd.
Kate,
I can supply the ammo but not the gun-not yet anyway...
I know more than most but I still have to live in this town and raise a family. I've sent the same info to the Bee and, it proves to me the St. HYPE and KJ are teflon coated.
On Thursday, August 3, at approximately 7:40 pm, the Sacramento City Unified School District's Board of Education will be asked to approve a resolution directing the Superintendent to propose potential sites for the Consent Decree High School. This is agenda item 8.3. The 'Consent Decree High School' is the result of the judgement against SCUSD for the illegal conversion of Sacramento High School into Sacramento Charter High School.
The following is most of what is included in the "Background/Rationale:" that is available to the public in the packet of information which accompanies the agenda (not posted on the district website, however)
"Background/Rationale: Pursuant to the Consent Decree in Rogers v. Sacramento City Unified School District, the District is to establish a new, minimum 500 student small public high school ("The New School") by September 2008 which will be located, if at all possible, within the previous Sacramento High School attendance area, but will definitely be located within two miles of the boundaries of that attendance area.
The Resolution would accomplish the following:
Direct the Supt. to propose not less than three, nor more than five, sites consistent with the Consent Decree, and the State of California site selection criteria as applicable and feasible; Establish a maximum number of students that can attend the New School; Authorize the Superintendent to engage environmental consultants as necessary for a preliminary review of environmental issues presented by each potential site; and Present the sites, with the environmental issues for each, for decision by the Board of a preferred site for a comprehensive environmental review.
A final decision for the New School site will not be made until the site selection criteria is met and environmental conducted for the preferred site."
The meeting will take place at the Serna Center located at 5735 47th Ave., West of Stockton Blvd. This resolution seems to ignore the work done by two committees which came up with suggestions for a location. The simple fact is that the best location for the "New High School" is the Sacramento High School facility. If you cannot give your comments to the board in person then please send them some through the district website: www.scusd.edu
Someone copy what Carter said and read it and have it to hand out at the meeting...it's all true.
Take the bus to Natomas. They have a new school that is the way small schools should actually be. It's called MP3-I don't know why. A bus literally picks you up in front of Sac High and will bring you back when the day is done. It has all but one LPS teacher, the counselor and Tom Rutten. It also has the partnership of McGeorge since KJ screwed that up. 9-12 grades and it's filling up.
Does anyone know if Ruttan's new school has a website? Or a number? Is it too late?
Rome wasn't built in a day but Venice is sinking...VAPAC needed solid leadership. They never got it. Maybe, just maybe, the De La Cuestas started with good intentions. Then the actual work started and Joanna had to do something she has never done-lead. She didn't do it at Sac High, or at Leonardo DaVinci. I know 'cause I was there. Her stepping to the plate had to do with job preservation and little else. And 'lil sonny boy-he never had a chance.
So no school-maybe the art wand is at St. Hope. Ms. Knight is working under both KJ and his brother Ronnie.
Please tell me that that is you Ms. Knight...
Yeah right. God Sakes, you are a dumb ass!
My name is Carter Gentry-a male. I hads a student at Sac High/St. HOPE and know several of the players. Like you I am not on the side lines. I am in the thick of it. I watched Sac High be dismantled and I know that I will see it return.
Many questions Busy Knight but mostly just a cautionary message. Business practices and education do not always mesh. Students are not just merchandise and educators are...you see where I am going.
I'm not sure who Ray Kroc is/was probably the founder of some zillion dollar fast food chain, right? As for vision and mission: educators have been writing those for decades.
I just ask myself, "Would I want my kid in that class? With that teacher? Under that leadership? I talk to my kids? I talk to my students. They are more than ADA or API or any other educational acronym.
Do kids feel good about attending their school? Don't know the answer? Ask.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home