Ho Hum...
Same old story: http://www.sacbee.com/101/story/72151.html
(Step 1) Regulating agency requests information.
(Step 2) VAPAC fails to comply.
(Step 3) Regulating agency gets angry.
(Step 4)VAPAC swears they have done what was required.
(Step 5) Agency grants VAPAC more time to gather information.
(Step 6) Go back to step 1.
It's hard to maintain any faith in the charter school movement if what we have witnessed in the past few years qualifies as oversight.
How many chances should a school get? The county yanked Sacramento Polytechnical's charter after a matter of months for unauthorized revisions to its charter; the SCUSD egregiously allows VAPAC to operate, under the administration of one of its employees, after countless number of changes, charges, and sound accusations as to the quality of learning and administration of the school.
Yikes...
(Step 1) Regulating agency requests information.
(Step 2) VAPAC fails to comply.
(Step 3) Regulating agency gets angry.
(Step 4)VAPAC swears they have done what was required.
(Step 5) Agency grants VAPAC more time to gather information.
(Step 6) Go back to step 1.
It's hard to maintain any faith in the charter school movement if what we have witnessed in the past few years qualifies as oversight.
How many chances should a school get? The county yanked Sacramento Polytechnical's charter after a matter of months for unauthorized revisions to its charter; the SCUSD egregiously allows VAPAC to operate, under the administration of one of its employees, after countless number of changes, charges, and sound accusations as to the quality of learning and administration of the school.
Yikes...
posted by All of Us at
6:01 AM
296 Comments:
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Did Carter say Wang!? Let's add Choad to the list! Any others out there?
I see the extent and quality of the readers on this blog. Instead of intellectual comments, it has degraded to name calling and immature bathroom references. And last but not least, try using spellcheck.
You know, the plight of VAPAC is familiar to many charters that are run by those other than professional educators. There are organizations that will assist charters to avoid the exact issues that are challenging VAPAC. It is indicative of the quality of professionalism of the VAPAC leadership that they didn't take advantage of these organizations. An organization like VAPAC, including its board, that refuses to acknowledge its own shortcomings does not deserve the honor of serving the children of Sacramento.
You know, I'm tired of these anonymus contributions. Stand up and take credit or blame for your input.
Yea,yea!
we stand to act as "anonymous' because we are either parents, students or district or county employees that have no trust to put our name out there on the net. Most of us have been the folks who have filed the complaints at the state, district and county level. OR, we work for the state, county or district. OR we are students waiting for our parents or guardians to pull their head out of their ass and look around..and get us out of there.
We are dealing with this dlc cult thing that represents a bunch of folks who are not really very bright, and are so narrow minded and self absorbed and out of touch with education and reality, that we do not want them knowing who we are. They are sick folks. We have either been their students, parents of students who at one time went there, or staff that had exposure to them. I know that I do not want Mentally ill folks knowing who I am or where I am.
Students there are starting to complain that"the SON" is spending some major time with students in his "private office". The kids are wondering what is really going on behind closed doors. The kids that Arbi is spending time with(both male and female)are refusing to talk with their peers about their"meetings". A distance in peer relationships are obvious. Kids state that Arbi and Mom are using the term "secret" when they meet with kids.
So there we go! What the hell is that? I think there is something going on beyond what we even imagine!
Arbi and Mommie must realize that things are about to go into a rather "touchy" investigation mode.
Much more that just the basic ed stuff.
This is why we remain as amonomus. We have and will continue to be involved in what has, is, and will be investigated. It's a safety thing.
Well, that's all for now.
That last comment was a bunch of BULLSHIT!!!!! Name smearing and false allegations are not necessary.
I have been at VAPAC everyday. There are no meetings with closed doors, especially with students. And Arbatel does not even meet with students.
If you are going to make statements like the one above, bring some proof and come forward with. Don't be a chicken-shit and hide behind an anonymous name.
Touchy, aren't we.
TOUCHY ABOUT TRUTH.
Let the chips fall where they may. The county will work its magic-give it a few more days.
Just relax a bit...we must kep a cool head.
Besides SCUSD will have a new board with a fresh perspective. Someone has been using my name-I'm not sure what a "choad" is. Many folks that speak on this blog are SCUSD employees with much to protect. Can't change the system if you are out of the game.
Hug your families and know that change will come.
Interesting how it was an anonymous post that complained about other anonymous posts....can anyone say hypocrite?
At this point, it doesn't matter if you're a die-hard supporter of VAPAC, the de la Cuestas, old Sac High, or Sac Charter High; the facts are that these charter schools are not being properly supervised in any way, be it academic, fiscal, or legal. And since taxpayers contribute to these schools, they have a right to say what they feel, and if they choose to remain anonymous, that's their right as a US citizen.
Whether or not Arbatel and Joanna are meeting secretly with students isn't the issue; the fact that a man with only a biology degree and no backgound in education or finance is anywhere near students should have raised the red flags a long time ago. With NCLB and HQT requirements going into full effect next year, Arbatel can't remain in his position, and shouldn't have been allowed in a school for the last three.
Ultimately, it's time for a lot of VAPAC & de la Cuesta supporters to face facts; no one wants to sponsor the charter. Shouldn't that be cause for massive alarm?!?!?!?!?!? Why would you want your student attending a place that no educational agency will even consider sponsoring? Plus, the temporary WASC accreditation is going to be quickly lost once WASC is alerted to the fact VAPAC no longer has a sponsor other than SCUSD, who has already found them in severe violation and will probably pull their charter in 2008 (if not before then). All of that equals one thing: the current students at VAPAC will not be accepted into college, nor will any accredited high school accept transfer credits from VAPAC students.
It's time to wake up and realize that the students deserve more than uncredentialed teachers,
pseudo-administrators, and a lack of quality education.
And let's remember to spread the blame around...
The DLCs for getting drunk with power...
The SCUSD for chartering a school they refused to oversee appropriately and reign in much earlier than they did...
All the state agencies alerted to chicanery at the site and did nothing...
Many parents who hid their head in the sand and ostracized others instead of agreeing that changes needed to be made...
I was there the first two years and we saw these problems forming and tried to work on them then. However, the DLCs decided to alienate anybody who felt their "grand vision" needed a bit of revision, and the worst thing that happened was they gathered supporters, and those supporters backed mommy and son and her meglomania, ultimately dooming the school, selling the students short, and ruining a very good program.
At least they got the money they wanted...
SCUSD made seismic errors approving the charter and MOU without considering potential governance issues, management qualifications, and/or potential (and very real) conflicts of interest. Although none of these items are mentioned specifically in charter law, clearly SCUSD was ill-prepared, or unwilling to do their due diligence. Remember, Laura Bruno, et al were responsible for the task at the time. LB’s greatest ambition was to turn CASA into a charter school service provider. More charters meant more money for CASA and a larger RV and an expanded moccasin collection for the Brunonator, so due diligence became less important. The net outcome: unqualified leadership and conflicted governance. What other board has the lover of the chief executive, employees, the son of the chief executive, and family friends on its board? Talk about a recipe for under-serving our students. Where the education leaders? It is not about the individuals; it is about their qualifications and incestuous relationships between the decision makers, and it is about general apathy among parents, staff, and advocates for this program. Want evidence? Just attend a VAPAC Board meeting.
How to Save VAPAC in 7 easy steps:
1. Revisit the articles of incorporation of VAPAC. Keep in mind the intent of the Public Corp is to provide a competitive, art-based program. Consider the composition of the board members. Governance and management must be restructured. Parents and Michael Boltonesque lovers of top Management may have the best intentions, but are they qualified to successfully govern a school?
2. Restructure management. Hold management accountable for inadequacies, up to and including dismissal. What further evidence of mismanagement is needed? Clearly, the problem is not the big-bad district when it comes to day-to-day operations. Why is the CFO hiring a consultant to close his books?
3. Adopt a curriculum that meets (or exceeds) state standards, and comply with Title I requirements. This is not Beverley Hills: the need is real, so abide by the rules and get additional resources. (Teachers, wonder why you do not have adequate resources? Title I would increase your resources by 15-20%).
4. Take time to understand school finance, including what audit findings really mean, and budget development. Thing are not as rosy as you have been lead to believe. Your assets could not be less liquid; your financial situation more precarious.
5. Parents: attend board meetings and ask questions!!!
6. Invest in the school’s relationship with SCUSD and the County. They have resources that will be indispensable. (Let’s finally put to rest the notion that the boogie-men are out to get VAPAC; nothing could be further from reality).
7. Involve staff, the district, students, the county, and parents during every step of this restructuring. Getting the stakeholders (not family and friends) involved is the only way to make this work. Buy-in is critical.
VAPAC is worth saving, but it will take effort. Running to the State for salvation, fighting in court, abdicating responsibility, concealing inadequacies, lying to public agencies, and perpetrating self-interests at the expense of educational interests does not some how evolve into a successful program.
There was a principal who was hired in March for the job. Why hasn't he been put in place.
Folks are right-JoAnna doesn't know how to run a school. Too bad Alan Young is at the Met.
Did anyone hear about a shooting at Sacramento Charter High School on Tuesday? My daughter heard about it at McClatchy Tuesday afternoon. Just wondering.
If there was a shooting it would never make big news. KJ practically owns the Bee, etc.
There was a gun fired in a crowded classroom but the story was buried. At CKM this was not so. Same with sex scandles with minors-or with KJ for that matter. Heidi-you of all people know that KJ and crew are teflon when it comes to bad news.
howz the school been recently? any change?
On Tuesday there was a shooting, but it was not on the grounds of Sacramento Charter High School. The school was locked down for awhile. I heard this from a student who attends Sac Charter High School.
Anyone have any more info about the survey that was sent home to VAPAC parents? It was asking if anyone was interested in VAPAC becoming a private school charging $5000+ a year tuition.
The mediation agreed upon by VAPAC and the district has Joanna out at the end of the year. They thought this was a good deal when they were going to be a county charter. Now that that's off they're considering going private. Not with all the assets purchased with public money!
Happy Holidays! Whiskey anyone?
The Summer of '95;A teenage girl tells police Kevin Johnson won her confidence, then took advantage of her. While her allegations are open to question, there are many questions about KJ's behavior. Phoenix New Times (Arizona) May 8, 1997, Thursday
Copyright 1997 New Times, Inc.
Phoenix New Times (Arizona)
May 8, 1997, Thursday
SECTION: Features
LENGTH: 6037 words
HEADLINE: The Summer of '95;
A teenage girl tells police Kevin Johnson won her confidence, then took advantage of her. While her allegations are open to question, there are many questions about KJ's behavior.
BYLINE: By Paul Rubin
BODY:
Phoenix Suns fans who were puzzled by the inconsistent play of Kevin Johnson during the playoff series against Seattle should consider this:
Days before the series began, an attorney for a 17-year-old Phoenix girl delivered a letter to Johnson. It demanded $750,000 before 5 p.m. on April 28.
If Johnson failed to cut a check, the attorney warned, a lawsuit would be filed promptly.
"Despite your current, very positive image and persona," civil attorney Kent Turley wrote, " the girl's experience with you will cause us to use the theme in any litigation that you were in fact a wolf in sheep's clothing."
Turley described the prospective case against the 31-year-old Johnson in graphic detail. It involved, in his words, "sexual assault and battery" against his client, whom we'll call Kim Adams.
The alleged sexual contacts, Turley wrote, had occurred in the summer of '95, when Kim was 16 and Johnson was 29. He quoted Kim Adams extensively in his demand letter, including this account:
"He Johnson said I could sleep in his room or the guesthouse and I chose the guesthouse. . . . We got into the bed and he took all of my clothes off and all of his but his shirt. He was on top of me touching me all over--my breasts, butt, in between my legs, and stomach. Then he took off his shirt. I didn't really know what to do--I was very confused because I thought we were friends, but I didn't know what else to do than to go along with it. . . . He told me to pinky-promise not to say anything and when I asked why, he said I knew why."
In an understatement, Turley concluded that public disclosure of the alleged revelations would be scandalous. The comment was an attorney's attempt to maneuver--some would say strong-arm--Johnson into agreeing to a rapid and secret disposition to the case.
Neither Turley nor Kim Adams claims Johnson and the girl had sexual intercourse; she claims Johnson fondled her genitals on several occasions. If it was done without her consent, such acts could be considered felonies and can call for a prison term upon conviction.
Last January, however, the Maricopa County Attorney's Office reviewed a Phoenix police investigation of the girl's claims and declined to prosecute Johnson, saying the case did not meet the agency's threshold of "reasonable likelihood of conviction."
Could Kent Turley possibly be referring to Kevin Johnson?
This wasn't Magic Johnson, who is said to have bedded more than 2,000 women en route to contracting the virus that causes AIDS.
This was the beloved "KJ," who would rather go to church than to a casino. He is said to curse about as often as it snows in Phoenix.
This was Kevin Johnson, a renaissance man who has been the antithesis of the stereotypical self-centered modern professional athlete.
This was KJ, whose efforts on behalf of children have earned him awards as one of America's "most caring" people. This was KJ, the all-star against whom the fans' biggest complaints were that he was injury-prone and was too nice a guy.
New Times' repeated requests to interview Johnson were not fulfilled. Fred Hiestand of Sacramento, California, one of Johnson's attorneys, says he is advising Johnson not to talk about the allegations.
Hiestand says the only person at fault in this case is Kim Adams, whom he characterized as mentally unstable and a liar. He rigorously denies any wrongdoing by his client, and says Johnson will never agree to settle any civil claim the girl might make.
But Hiestand concedes that "discussions" with Kim Adams' lawyer have occurred. (Kent Turley extended the April 28 deadline, and said on Monday afternoon that he was scheduled to meet that day with Johnson's attorneys.)
"Kevin doesn't deny that he knows this girl and that he tried to help this girl," Hiestand tells New Times. "I suppose after dealing with hundreds of kids, you're going to run into someone who's going to bite the hand . . . But there's no truth to the stuff she's saying . . .
"He has no repressed side. He's no Jekyll-and-Hyde guy."
Adds Hiestand: "He probably never should have dealt directly to help this girl at all. . . . He didn't know that this girl was loony."
Hiestand insists Kim was swayed by a zealous therapist into making exaggerated and spurious claims after, in the girl's twisted mind, Johnson rejected her.
Like the Phoenix police and Maricopa County Attorney's Office investigations that preceded it, a New Times query into Kim Adams' allegations elicited no definitive proof that Kevin Johnson committed a crime.
The most damning evidence against Johnson--indeed, the only evidence against him other than Kim Adams' statements--came from Johnson himself. In July 1996, the Phoenix police sex-crimes unit secretly taped a phone call placed by Kim to Johnson.
Johnson made no overt admissions of sexual wrongdoing in the so-called "confrontation call." A transcript of that call indicates Johnson was wary from the start.
Even then, despite numerous signals that his relationship with Kim had soured, Johnson corroborated parts of her story--including that they'd been alone in bedrooms and that when he hugged her he had been too physically intimate.
Though his attorneys concur that some of Johnson's comments during the confrontation call sound suspicious, they claim he didn't strenuously deny her claims because he was being gentle with a troubled teenage girl.
It may be plausible that Johnson is naive enough to believe that being alone--dressed or undressed--in a bedroom with a teenage girl is appropriate.
But Johnson comes across at times in a transcript of the confrontation call as a man-child with confusion in his soul.
"Can I say something off the record?" Johnson asks at the start of the July 23, 1996, ambush call.
"Sure," Kim replies.
"I miss you bad. I don't like not being able to talk to you. 'Cuz when I was calling, you didn't call me back."
Kim broaches one incident she alleges occurred inside the guesthouse at Johnson's sprawling home on the side of Camelback Mountain.
"Well, I was naked and you were naked, and it wasn't a hug," Kim says.
"Well, I felt that it was, you know, a hug, and you know, I didn't, to be honest, remember if we were both naked at that time. That is the night at the guesthouse?"
"Yeah. . . ," the girl says. "Why would I be upset if it was just a hug?"
"Well, I said the hug was more intimate than it should have been. . . . But I don't believe I touched your private parts in those areas. And you did feel bad the next day and that's why we talked about it."
"Well, if it was just a hug, why were either one of us naked?"
"Again, I didn't recall us being a hundred percent naked."
Kim reminds Johnson of other alleged fondlings during the summer of '95, including a claim that she took a shower with Johnson that night in the guesthouse--an event which, during the call, Johnson never denies.
Johnson's attorneys provided New Times with the results of a polygraph test he passed last August 9, which included the question, "Did you ever engage in any sexual contact with Kim ?" Such tests are not admissible in most courts, but the results lend credence to Johnson's denials.
Also in Johnson's favor are comments made by one of Kim's former friends--we'll call him Scott--who says she's lying and wants to ruin Johnson because he didn't spend much time with her after the summer of '95.
"She isn't a very truthful person," says Scott, a high school student who says he was one of Kim's best friends until a falling-out last year. "I've been friends with both of these people-- Kim for a long time and Kevin for a few years. I can't say he's ever lied to me. She has."
Phoenix police sex crimes detective Art Smith asked Kim in July 1996 why she had decided to come forward.
"Because I'm concerned that I may not be the only one," Kim replies.
"Not the only one what?" Smith asks.
"Girl he's abused."
And what did she believe should happen to Kevin Johnson?
"I just want him to learn a lesson," she answers. "I'm not out to get revenge, or like I want him to spend a hundred nights in jail or anything. It's really hard for me, because I still want to think he was the good guy. . . . I could ruin his whole life, everything that he's worked for and I know that. I don't feel good about doing that."
In some ways, Kim Adams is like the many other adolescents Kevin Johnson has taken on as personal projects.
Years ago, he founded the St. Hope Academy in his native Sacramento, a program to help disadvantaged kids. Without fanfare, he started a similar, smaller program a few years ago in Phoenix.
"Nobody's perfect in this world," Johnson's longtime confidant, Fred Hiestand, says, "but I can't think of anybody who has sincerely tried to do good things more than KJ."
Hiestand says Kim's allegations have "hung over him Johnson like the Sword of Damocles" and that Johnson and his advisers knew her story would someday be made public.
"We figured that it was just a matter of time before some publication took the police report and said, 'Let's tear him Johnson down and show him to be a Svengali . . .' We knew it would be someone. We just didn't know who."
Johnson is renowned for his efforts to counsel troubled teens and encourage clean living. In some cases, he's taken teenage boys into his own home to help them turn around their lives.
Kim Adams was never a resident of Johnson's home, although, unquestionably, she spent time there in the summer of '95.
Kim is an only child whose father deserted her mother when Kim was 2. She's a slight, pretty girl with dark, piercing eyes and a friendly but wary manner. She's a few weeks shy of her 18th birthday, but looks younger than her age.
Although she and her mother are moderately well-to-do, Kim is staying at a Valley group home with other troubled girls. She's a senior at a Valley high school.
In the past two years, Kim has had to cope with what appears to be an uninterested mother, bouts of depression that forced her into three hospitalizations, a serious eating disorder, and, if she's telling the truth, a relationship with Kevin Johnson that could be described as bizarre.
Despite this, she says she's an excellent student who wants to pursue a career in medicine, and plans to attend an out-of-state university next fall.
In his demand letter, Kim's attorney claims Johnson was "grooming" a potential victim almost from the start. His nickname for her was "Whiskey," and, Kim told police, Johnson would leave messages saying he "needed a shot of Whiskey . . . referring to me, not the drink."
Johnson's attorneys tell New Times he was just being KJ--guileless and caring, with Kim's welfare his sole concern.
The pair met in March 1995, during a videotaping session arranged by the City of Phoenix. The video's theme was to remind teens about the horrors of handgun violence.
Johnson was the project's celebrity star and, as usual, he welcomed the opportunity to meet youngsters. He and Kim met and chatted.
On May 29, 1995, the day before Kim's 16th birthday, she and a group of friends went to Coffee Plantation in Biltmore Fashion Park.
Johnson was also there. He recognized Kim from the video shoot, she says, and invited her and her friends to his table. The friends told Johnson of Kim's imminent birthday, and he responded by handing her a business card and telling her to call.
Kim says she called and that a woman who answered asked for her address and phone number. Kim soon received a bouquet of flowers at her home, with birthday greetings signed by Johnson.
Within days, Kim says, Johnson introduced himself to her mother. Mrs. Adams told police last July that Johnson told her Kim was teeming with potential. He described his youth programs, and assured her Kim would be in safe hands with him.
Mrs. Adams told police that later that summer, when Kim and Johnson began spending large amounts of time together, she told her daughter that Johnson could be her friend, not her boyfriend.
Mrs. Adams also admitted she didn't know where her daughter was much of that summer, and that Kim never had confided any improprieties on Johnson's part.
According to Kim, she and Johnson began to see each other almost daily as the summer of '95 wore on. They would eat dinner together, go to movies--sometimes with other young people, sometimes alone--and work out at the Q health club.
Attorney Fred Hiestand says the girl is exaggerating the amount of time the pair spent together.
Detective Art Smith asked Kim to characterize the relationship during an August 28, 1996, interview.
"Were you dating?" Smith asked.
"I wasn't dating him. I didn't think of it as dating."
"But were you going out with him and things?"
"Like going to dinner and to movies?"
"Yeah. Would you consider that dating in a sense?"
"If he was my age. I didn't think of it as dating."
Johnson bought Kim many presents, including bookstore gift certificates, a flute, a Swiss Army knife with his jersey number, "7," engraved on it. He also introduced her to great works of literature, including 100 Years of Solitude and I, Claudius.
He sent her numerous cards and notes. They swapped e-mail messages. By Kim's account, she and Johnson spent hours together at the Q, working out, swimming, sitting in the Jacuzzi, talking about life. Kim's mother told police that Johnson called her daughter almost every day during the summer of '95.
"We did a lot of talking about school and my friends," Kim later told police, "'cuz I was going through a hard time with my friends. And he was really building me up to feel really special. . . . My father hasn't been in my life and I don't have any male figure. Just somebody outside of my family took interest in me and he told me how special I was and how I could do so many great things, and it was really encouraging." Kim says Johnson told her he wished she was 30 years old, and that Johnson also fantasized that he was nearer her age.
The subject of premarital sex also arose.
"I was against it before marriage, and he was, too," Kim recalled in her interview with police.
That comports with Johnson's public stance on the topic.
"Sex can be treasured as a sacred act," he told a St. Louis newspaper columnist in 1991. "But maybe abstinence is the safest way. There's much virtue in abstinence and I think that's something that we as role models and parents and extended others really need to be preaching to the young people."
Kim says she confided in Johnson that she wasn't a virgin, though records and interviews indicate she probably understated the extent of her sexual experiences.
"She definitely was wild in that area," says her certified therapist, Kristan Larson, "and she viewed Kevin as giving her an opportunity to get away from that kind of life. That's what makes what I believe he did to her so damaging."
Fred Hiestand sees it differently, telling New Times that Johnson bore the brunt of Kim's preexisting emotional and sexual problems after Johnson--in her mind--jilted her.
"He had hugged her one time, and she wanted a kiss," Hiestand says. "And he broke off and realized that she had a misimpression of the hug. . . . And he talked to her about that. He's an expressive guy. He hugs people."
In their conversations, Kim says, Johnson in turn claimed to have dated only one woman since his days at the University of California at Berkeley.
Then, as now, Johnson had several people living with him at his big home, including his teenage half-brother--an exceptional athlete and scholar in his own right. Also in residence were at-risk boys.
Kim says Johnson occasionally invited her to his place, and agrees that most of her experiences there--indeed, the vast majority of her time with KJ--were benign. But her tale takes a momentous turn in describing the alleged event that now has become a powder keg.
And her story raises a troubling question: If Kim Adams is lying and bent on punishing Johnson, why doesn't she simply allege they had intercourse?
"That is a little weird," Fred Hiestand says. "She's screwed up."
Last summer, Kim Adams told detective Art Smith about the night in Johnson's guesthouse--how Johnson undressed her, then himself, and how they touched for more than an hour.
"What happened after the fondling?" asked Smith, a veteran cop.
"We didn't have intercourse. It was just a lot of . . ."
"Did he have all his clothes off?"
"Mm hmm. Yes. "
"Could you see his penis?"
"I felt it . . . it was dark."
"Okay. Did you have all your clothes off?"
"I may have had socks on."
"Okay. Did he ejaculate or anything like that?"
"Not that I know of."
"Where did you feel his penis at?"
"Um, my leg and my hand."
"So you just brushed up against it?"
"Yeah, I wasn't . . ."
"Being a man," Smith continued, "I can only reflect from a man's point of view, what would have caused this to stop?"
"I don't know. He went to the bathroom and started a shower . . . and then he came and got me."
Kim claimed Johnson washed her body with a bar of soap during the five- to 10-minute shower.
But she told the detective she never saw or felt an erection during the encounter.
After the shower, Kim said, Johnson made her "pinky-promise" not to reveal to anyone what had just happened. (Fred Hiestand says Johnson says he doesn't know what she means by "pinky promise.") Then, he drove her back to her car, which she'd parked, as usual, at a supermarket at 44th Street and Camelback.
In a narrative she composed for her attorney a few weeks ago, Kim described her state of mind that evening:
"I was very confused because I thought we were friends, but I didn't know what else to do than to go along with it. I tried to remove myself from what was happening. I thought that Kevin knew what was right and would never do something to hurt me."
The next day, Kim and Johnson drove to a remote spot to discuss what had happened.
"He didn't kiss me," she told detective Smith last year, "and I knew that he had told me before that kissing was more intimate than sex. So I just felt really cheap and used. . . . We talk, and he says that he feels really bad about that, 'I feel so horrible,' and he says we both need to pray for God's forgiveness, and he just wanted to know if there was anything that he could do to make me feel better, and I said, 'No, not really.' He just told me he wasn't using me or whatever. Then we were outside the car 'cuz he wanted to give me a hug, and he tried to kiss me and I wouldn't let him, because I didn't want it to be like that . . ."
A few weeks after the shower incident, Kim Adams says she again spent the night at Johnson's home.
"We were sitting on his bed just talking," Kim wrote in her narrative, "when he started touching me. He put his hands under my shirt and touched my stomach and then pulled away. He touched me a little more and then said he had to stop because it was bad and he couldn't get carried away. I spent the night in the guesthouse and he came in to tuck me in and fell asleep in there. Nothing happened except for after the alarm went off the first time he rolled over and put his hand on my breast and then quickly removed it and rolled back over like he had touched a hot stove."
Kim described two other alleged sexual incidents--one while she and Johnson were parked in the lot of a church, and the other behind a building near 40th Street and Camelback.
She says the latter incident occurred after Johnson called her as she prepared to go to bed, and asked her to meet him. She said she complied with his request that she put on a long sweat shirt. They drove to the former site of Johnson's office and stopped.
"He was on top of me and touching me. . . . Mostly my stomach and my breasts," she told the detective. "I kind of turned myself off and I was kind of just laying there."
As the relationship deepened, Kim said, Johnson's influence on her grew:
"Like one night, I had on a black slip dress, simple, and I had a khaki shirt over it, and he said, 'Oh, I can't look at you. . . . You're hurting me.' He made me feel like I was a slut, and I didn't understand what was wrong with what I had on. . . . He told me that he liked me better with short hair, he told me that he preferred me with less makeup on. Now I think it was kind of weird that he was spending every night of his summer with a 16-year-old girl."
Finally, the summer of '95 ended. Johnson went off to training camp, and he saw Kim rarely after the NBA season began.
"Things got kind of weird . . . ," Kim said of their infrequent meetings during the 1995-96 season. "Before, he would always be kind of touchy-feely, not like sexual, but kind of hug me or whatever. Afterwards, he just seemed really distant."
By early 1996, Kim Adams' psychological problems--which predated her introduction to Kevin Johnson--overwhelmed her.
Kevin Johnson's attorneys claim he was the one who suggested she seek professional help. What molester do you know, Fred Hiestand asks rhetorically, who would insist that his victim get counseling?
Kim was hospitalized at a behavioral health center for two weeks that April with severe depression and anorexia, an eating disorder. She contemplated suicide. It was during this time, Kim told detective Smith a few months later, that Johnson "started becoming really interested in me again. He went over to my house a couple of times and talked to my mom and he'd call my mom to see how I'm doing."
After Kim was released from the hospital in mid-April 1996, she told police, she returned to Johnson's home for the first time in months:
"He came and picked me up . . . and he helped me to figure out what I would take for one of my classes."
Nothing untoward happened during those tutoring sessions, the girl stated. During that time, Kim said, she and Johnson drove to a park for a heart-to-heart:
"He wanted to challenge me, like we wanted to challenge each other with each thing that was the hardest for us. For me, it would be eating . . . he said the thing he was having the most problems with was sex, because he said that he didn't want to have sex. We didn't really get into it because I said that I wasn't ready at the time to make an honest challenge of anybody."
Kim started counseling around this time with therapist Kristan Larson.
"I first met an extremely guarded, very suspicious young woman whose anxiety was sky-high," Larson says of Kim. "It was obvious from the start that KJ was extremely important to her. He was the one person, she said, who knew everything about her. He was a guy who was going to put her through school and always be there for her, a supportive relationship. Everything I had heard about him was he was a great guy.
"Then I found out she had a secret, a pinky promise--his thing to bond them together. He was her mentor, and there was something wrong. But I don't believe in forcing confessions from people, so I let her talk at her own speed. She had lost friends, was distant from her family. I didn't suspect sex at first."
Larson's case notes indicate she did suspect sex as early as last July 1:
"Patient reports that Johnson is calling her and her family asking her about what she is doing in treatment. She has spoken with him--he told her she has his permission to share whatever she needs to in treatment. Patient hinting that relationship is more than platonic--afraid of repercussions."
Arizona law requires therapists and other personnel with "reasonable grounds to believe that a minor is or has been the victim of . . . sexual abuse" to "immediately report or cause reports to be made" to police or to the state's Child Protective Services agency.
But Larson says Kim had only hinted that there had been sexual acts, so Larson didn't feel compelled to report until she learned more.
Instead, according to police reports, Larson spoke twice to Johnson before notifying authorities about Kim's allegations.
Larson told detective Smith last July 19 that during the first conversation, " Johnson basically said, 'Oh, yeah, I care for Kim , what's best for her, give her anything she needs. I'll do anything for her.' It was superficial and there was not a lot to it."
According to police reports, Larson again spoke with Johnson a few days later:
"I said, 'You know, you wanted to be a part of her treatment, and you said you'd be willing to do anything. She's got something that she said has occurred between you and her and she is uncomfortable talking to me about the details, and I'd be wondering if you would be willing to do that.' And he said, 'Well, what do you know?' I said, 'I don't know a lot. There was some kind of interaction between you two which she found very distressing, and she described as sexual in nature . . .'
"He said, 'Well, yeah, there was an incident that occurred numerous months ago, and it was one incident and I apologized to her and I was just trying to comfort her when she was distressed about something.' . . . I said, 'Well, her perception was that it was a sexual contact.' He said, 'Well, define "sexual,"' and he said it was along the lines of a hug."
Adds Larson in an interview last week with New Times: "It sounded so bizarre. I tried to get him to be more specific, and he kept changing the subject. He said he'd be praying for us."
Larson says she told Kim Adams about the substance of her second and final conversation with Kevin Johnson.
"She was furious," Larson recalls. "It kind of broke her concept of his honesty and everything. I still didn't know much at all, but I knew there had been sexual contact. The reason she never wanted to tell me was that she thought nobody would believe her; she knew he was Mr. Wonder Boy, and she knew she'd lose her friendship with him. She was very much aware of the ramifications, that she'd be ostracized---but she did it anyway."
In Larson's mind, it was time to report her findings to authorities.
Police use "confrontation calls" as investigative tools in trying to elicit confessions in one-on-one crimes. The element of surprise in the call from an alleged victim to the perpetrator is seen as paramount.
But detectives wouldn't have that advantage as they investigated allegations against Kevin Johnson, because Kristan Larson had unintentionally tipped him off. (Johnson's attorneys say that, even after Larson's somewhat contentious call, Johnson didn't suspect he was being set up.)
However, a transcript of the July 23, 1996, call from Kim Adams to Johnson has Johnson blurting early in the call, "Whiskey, I miss you. That's all I can say."
The remainder of the transcript depicts a stilted dialogue in which Johnson did his own share of confronting. He asks Kim several questions about Kristan Larson's motivations, noting, "What have you told her happened?"
"I haven't told her anything, 'cuz I pinky-promised I wouldn't."
"I mean, what side are you on," Johnson continues, "my side or her side?"
"I'm on my side."
"Good answer."
Johnson seems torn between lingering affection for Kim and his own interests.
"Do you think us being naked together or taking a shower was normal, or healthy?" Kim asks him.
"I told you the judgment was not in the best," Johnson responds. "And I'm sorry about that, and, again, I felt we talked about that and you're looking at it different than I'm looking at it, and what you're saying happened, I'm not entirely agreeing happened. I'm sorry about that."
The call ends with Kim promising Johnson that she'll call him soon. The pair apparently hasn't spoken since then.
Fred Hiestand admits that, viewed alone, some of Johnson's statements could be cause for concern. But Johnson's lukewarm denials should not be considered an admission of wrongdoing, he says.
"He knew she was very emotionally precarious and he was afraid . . . if he said something to her that was too diametrically opposed to what she's saying that it would push her off the deep end," Hiestand says.
But he also conceded that someone reading that part of the transcript might conclude that in not strenuously objecting, Johnson might be seen as confirming some of the girl's claims. "Yeah, I'm not going to deny that, if you just excerpt that one statement," Hiestand says. "But there's much more to it . . ."
Despite Johnson's telltale responses in the confrontation call, the call failed to garner enough solid data for detective Smith to recommend prosecution.
"At this point in the investigation," Smith noted in a report last July, "there is not enough evidence to proceed with a criminal complaint, lacking the physical evidence and a successful confrontation call . . ."
Interestingly, in his April 17 letter demanding $750,000, attorney Kent Turley employs detective Smith as leverage in his attempt to expedite an out-of-court settlement.
"As recently as three weeks ago," Turley wrote to Johnson, "detective Art Smith told me . . . he had no doubt that sexual contact occurred and believed that a civil claim with a lower burden of persuasion than the criminal court burden of reasonable doubt would have merit."
Smith was unavailable for comment, but his sergeant, Russ Wilson, said he "very seriously doubts" Smith made such a statement. Turley tells New Times that he stands by his avowals.
The case seemed to be dead, and police hadn't even tried to interview Johnson. It's uncertain why the Phoenix police reopened the case in January. But reports show detectives tried unsuccessfully to contact Johnson for an interview.
In response, the police heard from vaunted Phoenix attorney Mike Kimerer, who proclaimed Johnson's innocence while declining to make him available for an interview.
The police also tried to interview Kim's teenage friend, Scott. (Scott was willing to be identified in this story, but his name has been changed to protect Kim's true identity.) Kim had told detective Smith in July 1996 that Scott knew details of her alleged entanglement with Johnson:
"He just knows something happened, and that we didn't have intercourse."
A detective contacted Scott last January 22, but, according to her police report, he was uncooperative. The detective tried to recontact Scott that day, but the teenager didn't return her call.
Instead, Scott tells New Times, he phoned Kevin Johnson.
"I didn't call him to ask him what I should do," Scott says, "but I thought it was the right thing to do because I don't believe what Kim is saying happened. He didn't put any pressure on me at all. I'm not going to lie for anybody."
Scott met on February 25 with two of Kevin Johnson's attorneys--Mike Kimerer and Kevin Hiestand (Fred Hiestand's son)--for a taped interview.
Scott told the attorneys that he, too, had become friendly with Johnson--"We would go out and play basketball a few times, and then we started getting together and having breakfast . . . just Kevin and I."
He said his friendship with Kim had ended months earlier for unspecified reasons. Scott said Kim hadn't told him of any sexual activity between her and Johnson until just before he went, at Kim's request, to meet with her therapist Kristan Larson.
That session occurred in late August 1996, shortly after the Phoenix police case had stalled.
"I don't even remember how Kim put it," Scott told Johnson's attorneys, "but they had sex, something sexually happened between them and he really screwed her up. . . . And so we Scott and Larson went in there and we talked. I mean, Kristan talked most of the time for Kim , just talking about how Kevin and Kim had some sexual contact, you know, oral sex . . . and that Kim had a lot of problems that came out from that and that's why I was there, to give support for her."
The mention of "oral sex" is puzzling: Neither Larson nor Kim ever mentions it--not to the police, not in case notes, not to attorneys and not to New Times. If this were a conspiracy to falsely accuse someone, wouldn't Larson have noted the mention of oral sex somewhere, anywhere?
"I follow the thinking on that," Scott says. "I'm just saying I heard that."
Kimerer asked Scott, "Now, you didn't feel you were being sent there to meet with Larson to try to get Kevin Johnson or anything. Did you get that impression?"
"Once I got there."
Scott said that some time before the meeting with Larson, Kim had told him she and Johnson had engaged in sexual intercourse.
"Would you say that Kim is a person that you believe has a reputation for kind of stretching the truth a lot?" Kimerer asked him.
"Yes, oh yes. Very."
Larson tells New Times she's disappointed by Scott's view of Kim's veracity and of his account of the therapy session: "It's not how it happened, and I feel badly for Kim that he is betraying her."
In late January, the Phoenix police finally sent the case to the Maricopa County Attorney's Office for evaluation. The prosecutor assigned was Bill Amato, a member of that agency's felony sex-crimes unit. Within a few weeks, according to office spokesman Bill FitzGerald, Amato and his supervisors concluded the case against Johnson didn't cut it as a felony.
In the demand letter, Kim Adams' attorney wrote to Johnson:
" Amato told me that the county wanted more independent corroboration of sexual misconduct before prosecution. He simply did not think they had sufficient evidence to convict you of a felony, although he did think there was sufficient evidence to convict you of a misdemeanor for contributing to the delinquency of a minor."
However, FitzGerald says that appraisal is wrong.
"Bill Amato did talk to the girl's attorney," he says, "but that comment about a misdemeanor conviction is not accurate. Bill did not say whether the case was good, bad or indifferent. He didn't put a quality to it. We sent the case back to the police department, and whatever they did with it is their business."
Phoenix sex-crimes sergeant Russ Wilson says his agency did send the case to the City of Phoenix Prosecutor's Office for consideration as a misdemeanor. Wilson says city prosecutors also decided not to file charges.
If Kevin Johnson sticks to his pledge and retires from the NBA, he'll have left behind a ton of memories for Phoenix Suns fans--nearly all of them pleasant.
In the not-too-distant future, his number 7 certainly will join other luminaries hanging from the rafters at America West Arena.
Long after the recent Seattle series is forgotten, true-blue fans will recall KJ's gravity-defying dunk over Hakeem Olajuwon, the hundreds of Houdinilike assists to Tom Chambers, Charles Barkley, Dan Majerle and dozens of other teammates, his 21 consecutive free throws in the heartbreaking Game 7 loss in 1994-95 to Houston, his herculean effort in the famed triple-overtime game against the Chicago Bulls in the 1993 NBA Finals.
Now, Johnson faces another huge challenge--in the court of public opinion.
Fred Hiestand wants the public to know that his client is a normal guy who hasn't done anything wrong:
"I can say that he's a healthy, red-blooded, American male, and he hopes to find the right wife and settle down," Hiestand says. "There are lots of women who are adults who are sending him their photos, tape recordings and letters. . . . If he was interested in any kind of sexual action, he had a lot more attractive offers than Kim ."
Hiestand says Kim's allegations "put a damper on" all the good things Johnson has done. "Up to now, everything had worked out well for Kevin," he says. "Now, everybody's going to be looking with a jaundiced eye. He's going to have to make changes in his lifestyle.
". . . In the future, what he should probably do is have every kid screened by a psychologist, and if they look like they're deeply disturbed, he shouldn't help them," Hiestand concludes.
New Times spoke briefly with Kim Adams last week--she came to the office with her therapist, Kristan Larson.
"All you have to do is to tell me the truth," a reporter told her.
"I am telling the truth," she replied. "Even if it hurts."
LOAD-DATE: May 7, 1997
Is this for real!? Did The Bee ever cover this? Doesn't he work with kids?
$5000 a year for a substandard education?? They've got to be kidding!
Here's the kicker, you can't educate a child for $5,000 per year. The state pays roughly $7,500 per ADA and it's tough enough with that.
SO,WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IS THAT THESE GUYS REALLY,REALLY DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING!
HELLO people!
KJ + Underaged Girl = Bad News!
What the hell!? You people couldn't find fault in this I am truly talking to the wrong people.
You all deserve each other and the school(s) that slipped thru your hands.
Dissapointing.
The people who should be reading the story about Kevin Johnson and investigating, or following up on it, are the SCUSD administrators who are supposed to oversee the school, the Calif. Department of Education, as well as the Sacramento City Council. Sacramento City Council members invited St. HOPE to come to their Dec. 5 meeting and talk about the celebration of Sacramento High School being open for 150 years. Sacramento High School closed in June of 2003. It no longer exists. St. HOPE operates Sacramento Charter High School, not Sacramento High School. The City Council doesn't understand that, so why should anyone expect them to investigate a story like the one from Arizona. The Calif. Dept of Education doesn't care. Who knows if SCUSD cares or not. Maybe you should go on Oprah like Kevin Johnson did....
Heidi Help! Now that Ms. Bell is on the SCUSD will this get looked in to?
Sac Charter High is at less than 1,000 for Xmas it looks like lay offs. Its legal because they are no longer on year long contracts-they are all at-will.
What's in store next? The School of Arts, Law, Heath, Business, Etc!?
SCTA where are you?
PS St. HYPE employees have been forbidden to be on this very BLOG. Wonder why?
I don't get it-why?
Do they monitor what they do at home?
Yes KJ has an intricate system to reach all his employees...a shock will get you if you step out of line...aaahhhhh! He found me nooooooo!!!
What's the latest on VAPAC?
The want to turn the school private. Actually charge for the crap they've been peddling!? No really.
The last of their program when to McClatchy-Stratton and Aguliar.
What's left at VAPAC? The De La Questa twins. No thanks.
So I take it no one reads or updates this blog...
I guess not.
Well, does anyone know what is going on at vapac?
Several of the students said that they were given flyers stating that they would be a private school next year.That should be interesting.
They posted for a new principal. But I beliebe that that person would work under Joanna DelaQuesta...no thanks.
I also heard that district staff are starting to move VAPAC's stuff. Maybe they could go to St. Hope. Don't they need students?
No one reads this blog, and no one knows what's going on at VAPAC.
No one knows what is happening at Sac Charter either.
Like SCUSD it appears that everyone is content to let VAPAC and Sac Charter HS die a quiet death. I don't know much about VAPAC but do know that Sac Charter is dying. Enrollment continues to decline, probably less than a 1000. They laid off a few people over the Christmas break, ho, ho, ho. The principal, for one of the 4 remaining schools, quit over the break and Kevin Johnson has taken over as principal. That makes him Chairman of the Board, CEO, principal and teacher. Sounds like total accountability when the experiment fails. Given what I have read here you have to wonder if he has been fingerprinted, had a tb test, gone through sexual harrassment training etc. Heck, does he even have a degree? If test scores continue to decline it will be difficult to point the finger any where but at the top of the organization.
It's only the two of us, you know.
today many vapac students started the new semester at ckm, probably many other high schools as well. Students were told next year vapac will be a private school and they have financial aid available, but no one wants to pay for a substandard education and are getting their kids out now.
Okay, three of us.
The state issues private ed licenses. Do they really think that is a reality? Well, never mind, these people are really stupid and full of themselves.
YEP!
Jay Schenirer's wife is running for the CKM School Site Council. Are there any other CKM parents out there that could run, too? Her name is Bina Lefkovitz. Most of the parents at CKM don't even know that there is an opening on the school site council. It is an important position.
Ms. Lekovitz is a good person. Spite is not a reason for democratic action.
Hasn't CKM just become Sac Charter's continuation school?
Nope. Stan Echols and Alan Young-while CKM has him-is leading the fight to make sure that does not happen by challenging the hearing office to make sound decisions regarding who they are letting in our schools.
Ckm is in a nice grove. Stratton is moving the drama program and Agular is doing likewise with the band.
If this is the Laural that spent so much time promoting Sac Charter, not much credibility.
No one said there was anything wrong with Bina Lefkovitz. The comment was that there was an opening on the CKM School Site Council, she is the only one running, and are there any other parents out there who would run. Since the parents were not notified in a meaningful manner her election would not be based on her being the best candidate, but rather on her being the only candidate. She might be the best candidate, but without an election and some competition how would anyone know? The school site council is an important part of the budget process. It would be good for McClatchy if there was some competition for a seat on the SSC.
international accounting jobs
It has become so quiet one must assume that the world of VAPAC, Sac Charter and SCUSD have reached a state of Nirvana. Or is it the quiet before the storm?
Well, if you are interested, on Thursday, March 8, at 6:30 PM SCUSD is having a special board meeting workshop to discuss facilities. Facilities concerns Sac Charter, the Consent Decree high school, the other charters, and any other new small high school.
Thanks for the information. That should be an interesting meeting. Hopefully the board deals with real #'s and not St. Hope manufactured data. Sac Charters attendance is around 800. That's half the # from when they opened. I would think the consent decree HS has a home called Sacramento High School.
District staff proposed at the workshop that American Legion High School be closed and the students put at Genesis High School. They then propose that American Legion be turned into the Consent Decree High School. What a terrible idea.
What did they propose for VAPAC, Sac Charter and the other small HS's?
I don't believe there was any mention of VAPAC or Sac Charter. They are continuing to look at what to do for a site for the "Waldorf/Social Justice" high school, and are looking at other possibilities besides building on the Sojourner Truth parcel for the Science and Engineering High School. The proposal is to close small elementary schools and re-purpose them, send the students to other elementary schools so that the size of elementary schools is a minimum of 500 students. That is the break-even point. Some of the board members thought that there was a lack of consistency regarding enrollment if the district is going to have small high schools with enrollment below 500. There was no discussion about the possibility of having break even elementary schools of less than 500 if more money stayed at the site and less went to the Serna Center.
FYI. Tomorrow Charter Schools take up a large portion of the SCUSD Board Agenda. There is one new charter proposal, Walden Charter School and 4 renewals, St Hope/PS7, New Tech, MET, Genesis renewals listed under information items. America's Choice renewal is an action item.
WHAT IS CIALIS?!
BUY LOW-COST CIALIS.HALF-PRICE VIAGRA.CHEAP LEVITRA...
WOMAN VIAGRA
BUY HALF-PRICE VIAGRA.DYSFUNCTION ERECTILE NEW MEDS
what was the status of the SCUSD board?
Women can take Viagra!? Who knew!
Who cares about schools-let's take Viagra...
Are y'all asleep at the wheel? This blog seems to have screeched to a halt. Is it run by St. Hope and/or Sac City!?
Here is something to ponder and naybe write about-as I see there have been no new Posts since November.
ONE Sac High Charter is at 613 API. Crappy. Just about as crappy as Sac High the Original in 2003.
TWO St. Hope mule Mr. Pegany is looking for new work. With Pegany gone that leaves only seeds and stems for KJ and crew.
THREE Looks like next year hold another reorg...two principals (got to because of the charter)to cover four schools (in name only)PK Diffenbaugh covering, who has little teaching experience and even less educational leadership experience will lead the School of Math, Engineering, Science, Law and Public Service while Ed Manansala covers the School of Media, Communication and the Arts.
Laura Knight moves to testing for the district and KJ goes back to doing any thing with a pulse.
Where did all the St. Hope talent go?
David Hunt Asst Sup in Natomas
Tom Rutten Principal of a school of Law in Natomas
Chris Manero Asst Sup in Natomas
Dave Vujovich ?
Alan Young Principal of the Met and still at CKM too.
Mary Harris ?
Margaret Fortune working in the capital.
What's next? SCUSD closes an elementary. Their small charter schools doing well except Genesis and VAPAC. Maybe they should borrow a page from ST. Hope and combine the schools. Do the De La Questas really think parents would pay for that crap!?
That's what is known for now. Good night and good luck...
Dear Mr. Rection,
It is this kind of incoherent dribble that is killing this blog. Your rants do nothing to help the progress of education in Sacramento. Thanks to the couragous leadership of St HOPE there is a bright spot in Sacramento Education. Despite the lack of support from SCUSD (recent Sac Bee Editorial) enrollment is solid. They have made great progress even with a shaky start in leadership. Mr. Rection you speak of the original St Hope leadership as if it were something special. Give me a break. If not for the consistent prescence of Kevin Johnson and his vision it would have failed. M. Fortune had no ed backgroud and served her purpose in a political battle. She had no business running schools. D. Hunt ran a school of hand picked kids at West Campus, there's a tough job. Minero once opened a school for white kids in the burbs and was unprepared for the Oak Park world. Rutten was a chain smoking, Vince Lombardi want a be, sure that really qualifies him to run a school. Young was a ex VAPAC kid who can't sing or dance, teach and had no Admin experience. That's really someone you want running a school for the Arts. Harris was an elementary principal from a failing school and Pegany was a salesman for an after school tutorial program, wow. These people were nothing special and did not meet the HIGH EXPECTATIONS of a quality organization like St. HOPE. Read the Bee, watch Oprah, get some real and honest information before you pollute this blog with more dribble. St. HOPE public schools continues to thrive and is in great demand around the country to open other charters. This is happening because of their proven track record and outstanding leadership in the charter movement. They are creating educational leaders that fit their mold and expectations. When there is a better option in Sacramento let me know.
The day I look to the Bee and Oprah for the facts slap me upside the head.
Speaking of heads you have yours stuck firmly up KJ's, et al.
You actually reponded to someone named Hugh G. Rection!? That's rich.
Quick facts: How many kids are enrolled at Sac Charter? Now how many actually attend? 800? 900? Tops 1,000 for a school that once served 2,000+.
Other options? I'd pick just about any school in Sac County before I sent then to Sac Charter. Look at Sac Charter's API, their dropping school rank, etc. Hey I wonder what the suspension rates, are at Sac Charter? We wouldn't know because they're not posted on thier "results" site. St Hope also doesn't report that information to SCUSD as they are mandated.
Take a Kool Aid break and have Dana Gonzalez and crew write you some more talking points you ignorant fuck.
How can any of their educational leaders fit KJ's mold (yuck) if the players keep on changing!?
Well, well, well... Thank you mr. Johnson and or various blonde secretary. you have once again shown us how to construct a semi articulate and completely outlandish piece of propaganda. you must be very close with the sac bee crew. first, it is very easy to make claims about the "success" of sac high. those of us who experienced the circus act up close know the truth: you can't employ the musical chairs technique when attempting to corral a decent group of administrators. furthermore, the idea that the st hope schools are thriving is almost too rediculous to read without becoming so disgusted at the bold faced lie that you actually turn you computer off. last i checked no educated person turns to the oprah show for any type of useful information, unless of course one is interested in seeing the outcome of botched boob jobs (although i'm sure KJ dosent have to turn on the Oprah show to see that). the bottom line is that st hope is failing miserably and no amount of bought press can save its pathetic test scores or incompetent, power hungry, team of young yuppies. if KJ and his lackies actually cared about the welfare of their students (however few there are) they would put the bloated egos aside and listen to people who have extensive educational experience rather than those who are fresh out of "white burb" colleges. i've seen the inner workings of sac high and it aint pretty. on any given day you can walk into the right bathroom in arts and find girls administering tongue peircings. if thats not enough, skip school with a few of the regulars and get high. if those are the hallmarks of a successul school, i think i'll start researching alternative forms of education.
Finally some action on this blog. I was beginning to think I was talking to myself.
Folks, it's easy. Look at Sac Charter's stats, look at student turn over, staff turn over, etc.
Next year they will have two schools in name only.
Look at the product. Happy? Great.
Carter, you have to back up your garbage with facts. I have gone back through past entries and you make lots of claims but provide no facts. If you are going to make statements provide the proof. Sac High is headed toward charter renewal and it's going to sail through it because of their work in closing the achievement gap. Your vague and misleading comments do not carry weight.
i love charter schools
if sac high gets their charter renewed it will be a sad day for charter schools everywhere. sac high has failed in providing quality education for it's students and has attempted to cover this fact up through manipulating the media. as for closing the achievement gap, well i think sac would actually have to have some valid, honest achievements under their belt before they could make that claim!
To the above doubters of Carter. Do your own research. My job is to get the brain in motion-not give you all the pieces.
Do you think that all at Sac Charter is as it seems? Do you love it? Do you believe all the hype from the Bee and Oprah? Well then there's nothing I can say that could possibly change that. Everything that I have discussed is just a Google away. API questions? Rapid turn over of Sstaff and students? Arizona bathing habits? It"s all there. You do the work-I already have.
This just in...the big Sac(charter) High School 150 year celebration held by St. Hype has only sold 25 tickets.
Don't fret. In the nxt week there will be several Sac Bee stories on how great things are and that will boost sales.
Guess no one told KJ that Sac High closed in 2003...
The CFO of St. Hype has updated his resume and is looking to move on.
I'm glad the five of us that read this are on the case.
Maybe we should get jobs?
Just more Carter garbage, a waste.
OK I'll bite...what do you need to know to believe in me? Give me a topic and I'll put my team on it. We are everywhere...we're at St. Hype, we're St. Hype parents, we're St. Hype staff, we work in surrounding districts, we read the news, etc.
The G word really gets us.
This just in... St. Hype staff lost another today.
Produce facts that can be documented. Site your sources so that it can be verified or go away.
Who's gone now?
this stuff is fun to read... but that's about it...
it makes so little sense i'm surprised the carters and the rections out there even know how to access the internet...
i mean let me get this straight:
KEVIN JOHNSON
so give me a multi-millionaire, famous person that wants to live in a modest house in a modest community (and don't give me the curtis park crap, how many Sacramento Kings players live in Curtis Park,,, please a 1500 sq foot, 50 year old, victorian A frames that sell for 750k) and works 12 hours a day, trying to reform public education and provide low-income and minority kids a better opportunity and has somehow convinced these "white people fresh out of burb colleges" to turn down all the private sector jobs in which they can be making tons of money to commit their lives to helping some poor, minorities to get a good education... i can see where that gets interpreted as greedy, selfish and power hungry..
explain to me how there's a hidden agenda here... explain to me the BENEFITs to mr. johnson for choosing this life for himself... except that he must by crazy and stupid to not be living a life of luxury and traveling and etc, etc
"power hungry young yuppies" explain to me the benefit for choosing this career path... how is that power hungry and how is that even fit with the defintion of YUPPIE which is young urban professional (i.e. makes lot of money and lives the fast life)...
it just makes no sense...
and can any single one of you even try to make the case (with a straight face) that Oak Park isn't a better place than it was 10 years ago? and St. HOPE has been an integral part of that... (read Sac Bee profile Sunday of Oak Park Activist)... 100s of jobs, millions in redevelopment projects, organized volunteer projects (any of you activists come on out to the second saturday neighborhood cleanups and put your money where your mouth is), fund an art gallery that is providing arts enrichment for the community.
ENROLLMENT
as for enrollment... all enrollment is down across the district (thats a fact that SCUSD staff members presented at a recent board meeting)... also Sac High still has more students than all of the other district "charters" which are running in the 300-450 range... also SAC HIGH gets no help in recruiting students from the district and has to use monies (that could going to the classroom) to get kids there and does not benefit like McClatchey and Johnson from direct feeders... Actually, who even knows if Sac High wants to be 2000 students big... Expectations are high and students are expected to put in more time and are put through a rigorous curriculum and might not be up for the challenge... Sac High can get any student, regardless of ability level, accepted to a four year school if they'll put in the time.
TIMEFRAME FOR CHANGE
thanks to SCUSD asst. super Arturo Flores this weekend saying in the Bee (Flores addressed criticism that the small high schools so far have failed to draw as many students as initially predicted. "Remember: They are only 4 years old. It takes time to market them, secure facilities and build a reputation," he said.)... exactly!
RESULTS/SCORES
check the CDE site, Sac High's API is up from 2003 when St. HOPE took over... 568-610... subgroups African-American, Hispanics, low-income are way past State numbers for those groups.... AYP has improved to 21of22 categories being met...CAHSEE results are in this year and Sac High made gains in 10th grade passage in both Math and English and both percentages will most likely be above SCUSD average... more than 70% of its seniors have been accepted to FOUR-year colleges (nationally african-americans and Hispanics are barely even graduating high school at 50% rate, see DOE site)... including full-ride scholarships to Stanford and Merced... A-G requirements met are at a staggering 79% of seniors.... (check even West Campuses numbers for that one, not even 50%)...
NAME
last time i checked they are sac high, if not who is?... i mean what's your qualification requirements... i mean Sac High was 146 years old in 2003 and had been in four different locations, operated by multiple governing bodies... whats the common thread need to be.. open to the public... because there wasnt one for the first 146 years so what changed... Are they the Sacramento (KC) Kings... different cities, different owners, different players, same franchise...
St. HOPE has carried forward the spirit of the school and is on the same campus... how can it not be Sac High...
OTHER SCUSD SCHOOLS
guess SCUSD should close Hiram Johnson and Luther Burbank schools as well... i mean 586 and 594 API scores which are lower than Sac High... actually those two schools are lower in just about every measurable out there... and of course you could talk about a-g eligibility and ask West Campus how they can't get that number to 50%, being the hand picked best and brightest.
oh and by the way (previous poster here)..
let's be comprehensive about St. HOPE public schools and talk about their elementary school as well
PS7
currently up for charter renewal... has been referred to as a "diamond program operating out of a tent" by SCUSD board members that have toured facility... has a waiting list of 65 kids...
API is currently 746,,, that is a 120 point gain since 2004.. .It is also the HIGHEST API score of surrounding schools including Brett Harte (721), Marian Anderson (687), Ethel Philips (678), Fruit Ridge (650).
has met all AYP requirements each year of operation...
95% of its students are either african american or hispanic and the API scores from those sub groups are higher than that of the schools (i.e. closed the achievement gap in essence)... and more than 70% are free/reduced lunch..
So obviously St. HOPE is capable and has proven success..
and lest you be reminded, St. HOPE had a year to plan for PS7s opening and was able to build and implement its model the way it wanted to... At Sac High they took over as school was opening, inherited teachers and staff and walked into a chaotic mess...
Speaking of hand-picked...Sac Hi has hand-pciked its students too. Kids who have been asked to leave show up at district schools all the time. Distric enrollment is down, but at the elementary level. Fall 2002 Sac Hi had 1800 students. Now it has less than a 1000!? That's almost a 50% drop in enroolment! How many of those seniors who went on to college were in the MESL Honors Academy? As printed in the Bee, the Sac Hi student who received a prestigious scholarship last year gave credit to MESL not Sac HI.
hand picked,, LOL... Sac High gets the whatever comes its way.. they are the epitome of open enrollment... no entrance requirements at all... they have more than 65% african american and hispanic students and close to 85% free and reduced lunch....
secondly enrollment was closer to 1600 than 1800 and currently around 1200... DO THE MATH.. no where near 50%... again, pretty hard to GROW you student size when the SCUSD illegally blocks you from access to "their" students... love the fact that SCUSD is so aligned with its own Goals/principles, putting the child first, yet have to debate whether or not "these (sac High) are our kids"... laughable...
the 70% 4-year college acceptance rate is from this YEARS class... the first four-year class of St. HOPE produced graduates...
no carryovers in this class, these were freshman that were a part of the first class run by St. HOPE...
oh and of course, fitting the mold of a stereotypical community activist, you respond to the one point that you think you have a comeback to..
you obviously didnt pick PS7 API scores to question...
i'm sure that will be the next post...
or Sac Highs A-G percentages...
i'm sure that will be the next post...
actually you are right on Kate Lennox...
Sac High does hand pick.. .
they hand pick the kids that no one else wants... the kids that have been "left behind".... the kids that are on the wrong side of the achievement gap...
thats who comes to Sac High... the traditionally underserved student that is now heading off to college at significantly high rates, MANY of whom are breaking the family cylce and becoming FIRST generation college attendees...
Anonymous said...
Quick facts: How many kids are enrolled at Sac Charter? Now how many actually attend? 800? 900? Tops 1,000 for a school that once served 2,000+.
can you define "served 2,000"... first of all it was closer to 1600.. secondly they served them so well and things weren't deteriorating at an alarming rate that they KEPT sac high open... oops,, sorry... they SHUT it down cuz they couldnt get it right...
your concept of "serving" kids in our educational system must be an interesting one...
Carter Gentry said...
Finally some action on this blog. I was beginning to think I was talking to myself.
Folks, it's easy. Look at Sac Charter's stats, look at student turn over, staff turn over, etc.
Next year they will have two schools in name only.
OK CARTER (rhymes with charter) lets see:
Sac High stats: A-G 79%... API 42 points higher than when district ran Sac High and higher than two other HS in district... 70% 4-year college acceptance rate...
students turnover: high expectations, more time in extended days and weekends, yeah Sac High is rigorous and not everyone wants to work hard at their education... amazingly, more than 200 students are still enrolling per year with not only no help from the District, but opposition from the District by allowing no access to 8th graders... word of mouth is the most powerful recruitment tool out there... and the number of siblings of existing students that are enrolling each year is growing also... wonder why those families keep sending their kids there.
staff turnover: well i guess when a teacher doesnt want to put in the extra time and work to catch these kids up who have been tradionally underserved and come to Sac High behind grade level, then its not always a great fit... i guess the alternative would be to have teachers whose accountability and performance are "protected" against and who can hide behind certain allies if they are called on their poor performance... if they don't want to stay past 3:15 or whatever, they just leave... that's not the culture at Sac High anymore... students and teachers alike have to commit to more time and accountability measures...
now they will only have two schools: well two small learning communities to help maintain the personalized learning environments where (like SCUSD says on its website) everyone knows the students name... i'm sure they ADJUSTED their situation.. you know the concept is considered a benchmark for greatness when leaders can ADAPT to their situation and make changes (ewwww, changes are scary)... 1600 students/four schools= 400students per.... 1000 students/two schools= 500 students per.... HMMMMMMMMMMMM!
My work is done. Y'all are talking about SCUSD schools again. For awhile things seemed just stagnant.
My work is done...for now.
Like Mulder said in the X-Files...The Truth is Out There.
Are you kidding?! KJ owns most of Oak Park. He's a notorious slum lord! He also has a big ass house in Arizona and several other properties there as well.
You can't compare API scores really. Sac High isn't serving the same kids but we know they are serving less than 1000.
Staff turn over. St Hope rule #1:keep you staff young and hungry so youn pay them very little an dthey won't know any better. As for admin experience...Next year it will be PK Diffenbaugh with two years teaching experience and no admin training other than reading John Wooden's book enough times to quote from it when needed. As for Manusala-nice guy but he never even taught a day in his life! Those are next years leaders.
As for teaching staff I'm not suggesting that older means better bu these teachers are a green as can be. Getting an average is impossible since they keep on leaving or as of today they get released!
Whoever is writing in support of St. Hope under anonymous needs to stop guzzlin' the Kool-Aid and tell us who are so we may mock you by name. For now we shall call you JACK ASS!
Yeah I know it's former shut up.
What about Vapac? I thought that this what this Blog was about.
thank you!
Please look into the API scores of Sac High since 2005. Have they continued to improve, or haver they stagnated? My own guess is that you'll find little or no progress.
wow what a great point...you are so clever... nice comeback...
bottom line trend is up.. improvement have been made.. any data person know when you look at a graph there might be little variances, or spikes, but what you look at is the overall trend, direction...
nice try...
another traction-less point...
Sac High is moving in right direction and thats undeniable...
go interview a random sampling of students that have been there four years and listen to stories..
OR do the kids not matter...
The data reflects the quality of service being provided to the students, so don't give me your holier than though trip. Show us the data. Substantiate your statements, please. I don't mean a random sample. There aren't enough students taking the CST and CAHSEE for a statistically random sample, oh high and mighty one. For the API, first look at the base API, and then compare to the growth API. The first year or two look good, then it looks flat. Put the data on this blog. Let folks see the data. How much in base ADA funding did you lose to poor attendance accounting in the last couple of years? It's on the CDE web site under funding. Look at the P2 figures. Put that data on the blog. Put an honest accounting of the staff turnover on the blog, a percentage will do, actual figures would be nice, but oh so ugly. The truth as evidenced by the data can be difficult to swallow as the old Sac High staff had to learn. But if you don't look at the data you are only fooling yourself and those you purport to serve.
Don't compare the new Sac High with the old Sac High, it has to be better. Compare the new Sac High with the vision expressed to the Board in the summer of 2003. Is it anywhere close to that expression of faith and determination? How would you know if YOU DON"T LOOK AT THE DATA?
Oh, by the way, what's happening with VAPAC?
I find all of this vague arguing very disappointing. I would also like to see facts. What exactly do you mean by 79% A-G, or 70% 4 year college acceptance rate rate.
amen.. exactly...
that's my point... you reinforced my point.. which was my goal... to get you to argue FOR us...
the carters and other previous posters just throw stuff out, never substantiated...
ADA is higher than ever... (stop talking about enrollment, its the only point you try to focus on... you cant block people from getting info about the school and then COMPLAIN enrollment is down)... staff turnover, already addressed... it happens and its more a positive sign than anything... MEDIOCRITY is not accepted anymore... no more blind protection and lack of accountability.. be high-performing and want to commit MORE TIME that students needs, or maybe you should just move on... why should someone staying 10, 20 ,30 years at a place be a desirable objective if the person is NOT competent or doesnt want to work hard...
look at staff turnover as part of high school reform... students and teachers being accountable together...
and JUST for a moment, please reflect on the ludicrousness (not really a word) of the statement, DONT COMPARE NEW SAC HIGH with OLD SAC HIGH... this, again is laughable... gosh forbid we talk about how we are better than before and the DATA shows that....
it's moving in the right direction... period... and again just check out Flores, Arturos quote in sundays paper about "four years isnt enough time. it takes longer"..
thats district helping Sac High with its propaganda...
If you know so much about data why don't you put it on the blog?
Don't tell me about ADA being higher than ever, show me the data.
Those who held stock in Worldcom were told that the world was great. None were ever shown the data.
Not my job
Is Sac High where you wanted it to be when you worked so hard for the charter in 2003? That's all I am asking.
Bogus inflated grades can get anybody in to College. What are the SAT scores. Average Daily Attendance is lower than the other HS in Sac City. And if HS reform means killing off rookie teachers something is really out of wack. New teachers leave because there is no one at Sac Charter to provide quality instructional leadership. So rookies with potential simply are overwhelmed and leave.
One more time folks. SHOW US THE DATA! WE WANT DATA!
data
API is currently 746,,, that is a 120 point gain since 2004.. .It is also the HIGHEST API score of surrounding schools including Brett Harte (721), Marian Anderson (687), Ethel Philips (678), Fruit Ridge (650).
has met all AYP requirements each year of operation...
95% of its students are either african american or hispanic and the API scores from those sub groups are higher than that of the schools (i.e. closed the achievement gap in essence)... and more than 70% are free/reduced lunch..
data
OK CARTER (rhymes with charter) lets see:
Sac High stats: A-G 79%... API 42 points higher than when district ran Sac High and higher than two other HS in district... 70% 4-year college acceptance rate...
Good data for PS7 but Sac Charter has failed to meet it's AYP and is one year away from being Program Improvement school, which is what lead to it being converted to a charter in the 1st place. Anyone can check the data on the CDE web-site and see that Sac Charter has had to refund money to the state for over stating ADA the last 2 years.
But what exactly does that 79% and 70% mean? I'm still confused. Is the 742 API for Sac High?
Checked and true. That's data.
Are the 42 points a one year or four year gain? I'm trying to get clearer picture so that I can make up mind. Please help.
Sac High has an API of 742? Wow!
746 is PS7. Sac Charter is 613. Check the CDE website for the facts. Don't trust the St Hype version.
I just did. Base 2005= 615
Growth 2006= 612
Base 2006= 613
Growth 2006= Yet to be determined
That means an overall loss over the last couple of years.
Why didn't someone who knows these things just tell me?
Wow! a $408,708 funding gap for the current year!The CDE web site sure has lots of good information. I wonder what previous years were like?
Okay, let's spoon feed it to you. Did not make AYP. Did not meet % proficient for English Language Learners. API dropped 3 points to 612. The median API for similar schools in the state is 651. They only tested 866 kids. The graduation rate for the class of 2005 was 96.3% and for 2006 it was 89.7%.
DATA!
what does funding gap have to do with anything... fiscal responsibility is your new ISSUE... your big gripe... laughable..
just let SCUSD take over then... oh year, Bear Flag was running at such a deficit, as are many of their campuses, that they had to cosolidate with another school...
anyway, Sac High fundraiess outside the government provided dollars, to be able to provide small class sizes (avg 22)(DATA ALERT) and other expensive features that SCUSD could provide...
all in an effort to level the playing field and make sure that inner-city, low-income, minority kids have same opportunities as those in "white burbs"...
fortunately, great civic and social leaders like Bill Gates, Walton, Broad, have set up foundations that provide millions of dollars to help affect this change...
don't worry, the inner city, forgotten kids of Oak Park are getting a level playing field without your taxes going up...
cuz St. hope has a leader that is out there raising money to help carry this cause forward, instead of ignoring the social issues/injustices of our time...
API up by over 40 points since St. hope took over sac high...
79% a-g eligible... west campus below 50%...
AYP has improved to 21 of 22 categories met... from just 16...
4 year college acceptance rate over 70% including acceptance to schools like Stanford (full ride), Berkeley, UCLA,, and over 40 kids to UC Davis...
that's real DATA
and significant DATA, affecting lasting social change...
oh yeah
Data please on Hiram Johnson and Luther Burbank?
SCUSD schools..
ADA please
API please
#of AYP categories missed
Sac Charter CAHSEE results for all students:Math 42% passed, ELA 55% passed. And only 55% NCLB compliant. More real data. Looking at the spelling and grammar the above post must come from a Sac Charter Grad.
I thought this was about real accountability, which doesn't include pointing the finger at others, but accepting responsibility.
Sac Charter at the mid 700's API? Not in KJ's best wet dream! You are more than 100 points off. It's been said before but it here goes:Sac Charter API is 612 for 2006.
THAT'S DATA JACK ASS! Celebrate that when KJ and crew start giving Sac High 150 year celebration tickets...
Look at the above posting it's all about NCLB baby! and Sac Charter's bold new staff that is loved by some fuck stick is only 55% compliant. Sorry but...I mean really.
I'm through with all of you. Rude, unprofessional,condescending. I feel for all of you.
Those 40 API points must have come in the first couple of years. What happened?
arturo flores quote in sac bee
it takes time...
its better off than before...thats the relevance of comparing to other SCUSD HS... thats the alternative...
CAHSEE... up 11 points in math this year... 71% english
only the haters are using the foul language
cuz they run out of DATA and are left with only making it personal...
jealous that the multi millionaire CARES enough to try and do something about it...
committed his life to trying to change and improve OAK PARK and its public education..
make it personal... theres no other story...
and keep swearing so we can further view your ignorance and lower your already low credibility
What does that mean CAHSEE up 11 points...71% English?
Those #'s are not reflected in the data on the CDE website. For the anonymous poster that gave up for being treated rudely, are you not sure it wasn't that you could not take the heat and the truth of real data.
To the poster asking what happened, look at the turnover and lack of instructional leadership. KJ is running a school. Doesn't that answer your question.
I am surprised that someone would laugh off fiscal responsiblity. A lack of it is the fastest way to close a charter. Check the renewal process.
$458,000 in the hole at the end of p2 last year? Oh my word!
Sac Charter should think about taking the VAPAC route and go private. Because, unless the SCUSD Board is really dumb, they sure aren't going to survive charter renewal.
I LOVE DATA! Oh, it's after 4pm. BYE
fiscal responsibility wasnt laughed off,, what was laughed off was your continued focus on it and your presentation of it.
the school is still open.. there's obviously money to keep it open. surprised you are not thankful that they're taking less government money, leaving more for SCUSD's schools including their dependent charters, they're getting the money from the private sector.
it's 4pm and i have wasted enough of my employers time playing on this board. i don't feel any guilt about it. because I'm a hater and my employer wants me to hate and i don't like accountability that's why I can't understand the concept of staff turnover.
i mean you should be able to keep your job forever, even if you don't deliver RESULTS.
the irony of AnonYmous (notice spelling, haha) trying to make issues with staff turnover is that on the one hand he's saying there hasnt been results, but on the other hand they should keep those staff that aren't producing the results. you know like the District schools whose employees are "protected" and untouchable and not accountable.
That's dangerous to say go private like Vapac...are you saying Vapac is a model school? Would it be a model private school?
No wonder you think Sac Charter is cutting the mustard.
Data? Look at the county website-check out the true facts.
Carter
I don't get the anonymous bit?
Really, I want to know what happened during those first couple of years to cause such a leap in student achievement. What followed so that those gains were never again repeated? It is important that the community build on your successes and learn from all of the failures you have experienced. Failures are learning experiences. What caused the flat or declining test scores over the last couple of years?
Quite simply, Leadership
Okay, one more time with real data from CDE.
05-06 enrollment = 1318
API = 612 (did not meet growth target)
AYP = not met
Statewide rank = 2 (10 being highest, 1 lowest)
Similar school rank = 3
Average Class size = 26
79% minority students with Hispanic's students the largest population at 31.2
Free and Reduce Lunch population = 80.6%
Eng Lang Learner Population = 13%
Only 36.5 % of students were proficient or above in ELA
Only 27.1% were prof of above in Math
Grad rate 89.7%
2004-05 CAHSEE pass rates were
62% math
66% ELA
2005-06 CAHSEe pass rates fell to 42% math
55% ELA
With the CAHSEE results and STAR test results so dismal you have to question the College admission data.
Facts, nothing but the facts.
Finally, someone heard me, thank you. Doesn't look very promising. I have a feeling that the college acceptance rate reflects the percentage who applied for four year schools. That can be very deceiving the way it was reported. If only 100 of 400 apply 79% isn't very good. And many schools eliminate the all courses that are not a-g compliant. The facts are what they seem. Sac High is not even approaching the vision expressed in the summer of 03. Sad, but true.
Okay, now that we've established that Sac High isn't what it pretends to be, where next? VAPC?
them stats are good, thanks... they speak volumes on how well sac high is doing
Not even St Hype can overcome the facts.
For Sac Charter 2005-06, 101 students took the SAT (30%) with a Aver. score of 1327. Again this doesn't seem to match the St Hype data.
VAPAC Data:
2005-06 API invalid. Failed to test a significant proportion of students.
Did not meet AYP
Enrollment- 9th = 100
10th = 51
11th = 28
12th = 45
Aver clas size = 26
68% minority enrollment
21% white
English Language Learners = 13%
54% NCLB compliant
45% prof or above in ELA
33% prof or above in Math
Only 7 students took the SAT with no scores reported.
No info on grad rate or dropout rates.
Looks very similar to Sac Charter
With Laura Knight in charge of data the results will be endlessly realistic. I wonder how Arts did under her leadership anyone?
I heard she works well under KJ!
That was too easy-just like Laura. Just ask KJ's brother/Head of Something at Sac Charter Ronnie West.
The name of the school is Sacramento Charter High School. Sacramento High School closed in 2003. Why can't whoever is in charge of public relations, printing, billboards, etc. just use the real name of this school? The person in charge of these matters is sending the message to students and community alike that it is alright to lie. Regardless of what anyone who reads this blog thinks about the quality of the education at Sacramento Charter High School, couldn't we all agree that it's wrong to lie. What is wrong with calling the school by the name used in its charter?
Arturo Flores said that it takes time for schools to build up their enrollment, so why isn't he advocating for small elementary schools to be given more time to build enrollment, too? Where is the data to support the proposal that "small" schools are good for high school students and bad for elementary students?
high school reform and elementary school reform are two drastically different issues
not even same discussion
as for the name, its Sac High. and it happens to be operated, for now, as a charter school by St. Hope public schools,under the governance of SCUSD. that is about the most factual way to put it.
i don't see how the entity, SCUSD or st hope public schools or OTHER, has any relevance to what it's called.
i mean we could start and give about 1000 examples:
let's see, if Robert Mondavi sold his winery and the new owner/operator came in and changed all the staff around and used grapes from a vineyard down the street, could he still call it Robert Mondavi Wine?
if a sports team moved to a new city, changed owners, changed staff, changed players, changed coaches, could they still keep the name and would it still be considered the same franchise? the Kings, the Raiders, etc.
could a newspaper celebrate a 150th anniversary if it had been changed ownership, changed editors, changed publisher, changed printing press location, changed office locations, but kept the same name, Would they still be the same Paper. (that might apply to the Sac Bee)
could a school start on the second floor of a shared building in downtown, allow only girls, serve different grades, then move four blocks away, allow boys and girls, change its name for the second time, move again and change its name again, move again, have its building completely redone, be administered by different organizations, have different teachers and staff, have different demographics and still be called the same thing for 146 years but then undergo one more change and all of sudden not be the same school. like SAC HIGH.
it just makes no sense on any level nor does it make any sense why it would bother you so much.
The name of the school is Sacramento Charter High School. To call it anything else is a lie. Period. Sacramento High School was closed and remains closed. Adults who are supposed to be role models for children and teenagers should tell the truth. There is a document called a charter which created this school. The school it created was Sacramento Charter High School.
Sacramento Charter High School does not have an assigned attendance area. In California, charter schools are open to any student in the state. Sacramento High School had an assigned attendance area. They are not the same school.
The SCUSD Board of Education is not the governing board of Sacramento Charter High School. Sacramento Charter High School has its own governing board. The SCUSD Board of Education is the oversight entity. SCUSD staff are not responsible for running Sacramento Charter High School.
Being accurate and truthful is important. Those who run Sacramento Charter High School have chosen to lie by calling it Sacramento High School. They can also choose to tell the truth.
i said governance, which is true, not operating entity--fact...
So your big criteria, your number one ARGUMENT that defines a school is attendance area being consistent. Are you kidding me. That is so funny. You keep making utterly weak points like that, and you would be laughed off the debate team.
come on, are you ready to show that during the first 146 years, Sac High never didnt have an "assigned attendance area".
Thats your argument.
Wow. I gave specific examples of how entities can go through almost complete changes and still remain identifiable with its history.
and you come back with a nondefined attendance area.
so are you saying if SCUSD or state charter law began to define areas for charter schools then your argument would go away.
OK, good one.
The name is really of little concern, although CDE recognizes the school as "Sacramento Charter High". I assume this is to make sure that no one confuses it's data with the original Sacramento High School. The real issue is St. Hope accountability and results for the children of Sacramento. This is where the failed Sacramento Charter experiment falls short. The results just aren't there. The data shows that after 2 years of improvement the school has regressed while serving fewer students. St Hope preaches accountability, don't be hypocrites and own up to the results and mistakes. Don't make excuses and say look at Burbank or Johnson. A similar school rank of 3 is just poor and unacceptable, own it. You preach High Expectations, results, accountability etc. own up to the fact that through mismanagement, a lack of expertise and a currently inept instructional leadership you have not lived up to either.
The St Hope lies are a pattern. Lie to SCUSD, Gates, Walton, and partners. Lie to the Bee, Oprah and the Sacramento Community. Lie to parents, students, teachers and employees.
liar, i know you are but what am I
Test scores don't tell the entire story people. Sac High's class of 2007 is going off to schools like Stanford, UCLA, Berkeley, and UCD. Culture at Sac High has changed completely and kids are receiving the education they want and deserve. Again, focus your anger towards the SCUSD board of education, not St.HOPE.
-Proud SHS Parent
little kids get over it
Given the data from CDE it has to be very few students going off to the schools listed. Nothing is more unkind then setting kids up to fail, pushing them in to schools for which they are not prepared. With only 27% of the students proficient or above in math and only 36.5% prof or above in ELA there just can't be many qualified students.
only about 70%. doesnt seem like many. just a couple of hundred. half probably will be first generation collegians, changing their families and their communities forever. next steps are to even get them more prepared for guaranteed success in college. (you know Rome wasnt built in a day)
that is something you should be against. that makes sense. all this anger and resentment is so counterproductive.
why don't you volunteer your time to go tutor some students at Sac High and PS7 so that test scores go up.
or is the resentment for one man so strong that 100s of kids dont deserve to be inspired and instructed in manner that suburban kids and wealthy kids are guaranteed to receive.
be a part of the solution.
ok now respond with your CST data and declining enrollment and staff turnover stuff, same song.
non productive energy.
activists who are against solutions, just love to gripe and complain on the hot topic of the day.
it's just so sad.
Non-productive - That's what happens when you are blind to the facts and data. Must be a theme.
I happen to agree with our former parent post. i am a former student myself. you can quote, bend, and twist stats 'til the cows come home, but that doesnt change the quality of education that the sac high kids are getting. it is a disaster there! you cannot learn in a class where students throw desks at their teachers (i have seen it happen)!! you cannot learn in an environment where teachers come and go so quickly that kids cant establish any lasting relationships. you cannot learn in an environment kids dont respect the administration and where they feel that the administration does not respect them. i was sucessful at sac becuase my principal, and my counselor, and my teachers did their jobs in spite of every thing going on around them. they continued to do their jobs untill kj made that impossible. when that happened they left and since then, things have spiraled downward at an alarming rate. i cannot tell you how much more secure i feel now that i only have to watch the turmoil at sac from a distance. my heart goes out to those who have no choice but to remain.
facts and data, facts and data, facts and data,
i am a robot, i am a robot.
i never took a statistics and research class in college.
stats are not the whole story.
the kids, the kids, the kids, the parents, the parents, the parents, the kids.
No NO
data data data date will robinson. i need data data for datas sake data please
kids going to college as first generation. does not compute
whats his cst for math
that is all that matters
"spiraling downward" just say words that mean nothing. and have no perspective.
API increased since the disaster that was Sac High as run by SCUSD. THAT IS A FACT.
Yearly graduation rate up since the disaster that was Sac High as run by SCUSD. THAT IS A FACT.
State closed school, not KJ. THAT IS A FACT
KJ asked to take it over AFTER decision to close it was made. THAT IS A FACT.
So deteriorated was it that something needed to change. THAT IS A FACT.
Now uniforms on campus, order, cleanliness, longer days, more structure, 40 students voluntarily signed up for Leadership class that meets five days per week from 6:40am to 8:05AM. EVERYDAY. EVERYDAY. That's commitment.
School Spirit at highest levels in years.
"my heart goes out to those who have no choice but to remain"
WRONG.
everyone has a choice to leave and go to a SCUSD school that is in their attendance area.
open enrollment school.
no one is SENT there.
they can go anywhere they want.
nice unfactual statement though, nice try
"and my teachers did their jobs in spite of every thing going on around them. they continued to do their jobs untill kj made that impossible. when that happened they left,"
yeah things like UNACCOUNTABILITY weren't going to be tolerated anymore.
things like "i leave at 3:15, if you don't like it talk to the union rep" weren't going to be tolerated anymore
things like "i am not giving that student my cell phone number so they can call me at night if they need help with their homework" weren't acceptable
things like "i am not coming in on Saturday to teach a CAHSEE prep course" weren't acceptable
yeah doesnt sound like the kids are benefitting from that.
nice try again.
things like "i am not giving that student my cell phone number so they can call me at night if they need help with their homework" weren't acceptable
WRONG! i have always had my teachers cells! i texted them or called them when i got into college. who are you to accuse my teachers of not doing their jobs? they work harder than anyone i know.
everyone has a choice to leave and go to a SCUSD school that is in their attendance area.
WRONG! students who have no form of trans or cannot take the bus for whatever reason have to be there! having talked to students who go there, i can say that not even half of them actually want to be there.
you are full of excuses.
fortunately at Sac High, along with high expectations and a committment of more time, there are NO EXCUSES.
DID students even have cell phones in 2002 at the rate they do now to be able to TEXT their teachers. of course not. Accountablility. those that didnt want to be held accountable moved on. No problem. there are plenty of SCUSD or other district jobs if you just want your 8-3, no weekend, teacher job. Sac High just isn't a good fit for you.
Sac High is an open enrollment school. the CHOICE is yours to make. Period.
A lot of kids attend Sac High and are driven by their parents or they take a bus OR they just figure out a way.
None of the other SCUSD are that far that kids living in Oak Park couldnt get there if they chose.
If they live in Mcclatchey or johnson or burbank, just go where you are supposed to go, no problem.
I dont hear the kids that live in south Lincoln complain that they have to go all the way to Lincoln high, maybe five miles away.
They just get it done.
I said its a CHOICE to go to Sac High. THATS A FACT.
what you gave were EXCUSES on why they are going there and not going a mere 2 miles or less away.
pleny of city buses.
maybe the teachers from the other schools could come and get them.
LIKE SAC HIGH TEACHERS that go the extra mile and provide rides all the time.
Sorry this didn't format well but this is the latest reorg from KJ and crew. Did someone say broken charter? Can you say comprehensive high school?
This was today's S. Hope memo...
Sacramento High School Restructuring
Talking Points
Main Messages 1.One Sac High
2. Four (4) Themes
3. Two Wings (East and West)
4. All Principals to Stay at Sac High
5. Personalization and Advisory to Remain a Focus
Overview One Sac High
Beginning next year (August 2007) we will operate as ONE Sac High – one school, one vision. We believe that operating as one school can ensure that we have a high level of consistency and quality of education for all of our students.
Four (4) Themes
We will continue to have our four themes:
• Arts
• Business and Communications
• Law and Public Service
• Math, Engineering and Health Sciences
Structure: Two Wings (East and West)
Arts and Business & Communications will continue to be “housed” in the East Wing and MEHS and LPS will continue be housed in the West Wing. Each wing will have approximately 500 students and a principal overseeing it:
All Principals to Stay at Sac High
All four of the current principals will be at Sac High next year.
• Mr. Johnson will be the “Head of Schools” and lead all of Sac High. This means he’ll be overseeing discipline, educational services, facility and operations and parent communication and engagement.
• Mr. Manansala will be the principal of the East Wing, which houses Arts and Business & Communications
• Mr. Diffenbaugh will be the principal of the West Wing, which houses MEHS and LPS
• Ms. Knight will be the “Director of Data and Assessment” for all the entire campus. She’ll be in charge of benchmark assessment, data analysis, testing, PowerSchool and attendance.
Personalization and Advisory to Remain a Focus
We strongly believe in the importance of building strong relationships with students and individualizing education. As we shift to one Sac High, maintaining personalization is a priority. This means that we plan to keep the current advisories moving into next year (in some cases we may consider modifications to advisories that may benefit from restructuring).
Reasons The change is based on a number of factors:
• One vision and one school that offers a high quality educational program for all students (core curriculum, more effective course assignment and scheduling)
• Consistency across the campus (discipline, attendance, teaching and learning protocols)
• Efficient and effective utilization of resources and space
• Financial sustainability (2 communities with 500 students each)
Timeline Weeks of 4/9 , 4/16, 4/23 Present general concept to teachers, staff students and parents for input. Conduct teacher, parent and students workshops (4/19 and 4/23)
Week of 4/23 CST Testing
Week of 4/30 Presentation to faculty and staff of official Sac High School Design Plan
Week of 5/7 Hold small group meetings to lay out expectations for next year.
Students declare intention to re-enroll for the 2007-08 school year.
August, 2007 New structure in place for 2007-08 school year
Interesting new structure for Sacramento Charter High School. Does this mean the Gates money has run out, or did the Gates Foundation give up on the other model?
Gates gave up on the model. http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/04/01/a_new_pilot_model_for_turning_around_schools/
There is a piece missing in all this teacher slamming. Who hired them. All the teachers that were at Sac in 2003 left except for 2 or 3. Those leaving are those that bought in to the vision and were hired by St Hope. Commited, dedicated young teachers excited about the opportunity to change education. They left, not because of being unwilling to work incredibly hard, but because of broken promises and shattered dreams. The responsibility for that rests at the top.
Sure looks like a comprehensive high school. So much for HS reform.
Thanks so much for the link to the article. That is great stuff. It is so promising that we have organizations and individuals with the Leadership skills to continue to push change and reform forward- its been broken too long.
And Thankfully we have the privilege of having one such organization, that has taken the leadership role in social change, including education reform and high school reform and specifically addressing the Academic Achievement Gap with minorities and low-income families--right here in St. Hope and and St. Hope public schools.
i mean did you see that plan for Sac High for next year posted above. If that is actually true (meaning some current employee has such low ethics and morals that they would post an internal document like that, well that's for a different post) then Sac High students really are going to be at the forefront of the latest research in high school reform
From the article posted above- it reads- "Regulations passed by the Board of Education in the fall will promote the needed changes. By increasing time spent on academics, allowing administrators to select and assign staff on the basis of merit rather than just seniority, strengthening faculty evaluation, and tying it to improvements in student performance, new regulations give troubled schools flexibility to get out from under restrictive collective bargaining agreements where appropriate -- and truly focus on student needs. After-school tutoring and homework help, together with check-up assessments to make sure benchmarks are being achieved, ensure that students in these schools won't continue to fall behind."
Let's see: "increasing time spent on academics". Check. Sac High's main tenet is more time including longer days and Saturdays and after school tutoring and study hall for all students.
Let's see: "allowing administrators to select and assign staff on the basis of merit rather than just seniority" and "new regulations give troubled schools flexibility to get out from under restrictive collective bargaining agreements where appropriate". Check. Performance accountability (oh the unions hate this one)
Let's see: "together with check-up assessments to make sure benchmarks are being achieved, ensure that students in these schools won't continue to fall behind.". Check. Sac High committing one of their administrators to (and this is right from the plan listed above) -- Ms. Knight will be the “Director of Data and Assessment” for all the entire campus. She’ll be in charge of benchmark assessment, data analysis, testing, PowerSchool and attendance.
Looks like Sac High is right on track, incoporating the latest research on high school reform, in a timely matter.
High Schools looked the same for the last 100 years.
Now the best and brightest minds in education on a National Level, along with funding from the national government and private charitable foundations, are tackling the High School Education problem, especially in inner city ocmmunities where the largest levels of neglect have taken place
comprehensive high school.
who made that ridiculous comment above.
500 students with their own pricipal and counselor.
whats comprehensive about that?
let's see, McClatchey and Johnson, how many students per? oh ok, that's comprehensive.
thank you to st. hope for continuing to try and affect social change and education and bringing the latest research in the national high school reform movement right here to sacramento.
it's good to have leadership like that, leadership that just doesnt COMPLAIN about how things are.
leadership whose idea of affecting change isnt to fill out a public comment card at an SCUSD board meeting and make the same complaint every single week and never offer any real solutions and invest time and energy into the potential solution.
thanks to Social Change and innovative business leaders in the past that didn't listen to one or two negative critics and pushed forward with their agendas. who didn't let a few challenges and hurdles along the way impede their passion to finding an answer, to finding a solution.
to MLK for not being afraid to push forward for what you knew was right.
to Susan B. Anthony and many great women that fought for womens rights and womens equality, despite facing many challenges and hurdles and making some mistakes along the way.
to Thomas Edison for letting a few mistakes and unsuccessful light bulbs deter you from meaningful change
to Henry Ford, thanks for pushing forward
To the Wright brothers for getting back up when you fell down the first 50 times and people said you didnt know what you were doing.
Ms. Knight being in charge of data is the wrong move for St. Hope. She was my principal/teacher and taught me nothing.
ummm. are you listening to yourself.
if she was your principal and teacher, and you Claim she taught you nothing, then as a critic and someone that cares about kids education,
wouldn't you be glad to see her in a Data/administrative role and not as a principal/teacher.
seems like you are obviously contradicting yourself.
Somebody went to the George Bush school of logic, don't confuse the issues with facts or data. And what's wrong with a St Hope employee publishing the plan. Is there something to hide. It's was written about in this blog about a month ago. And are you listening to yourself, you talk about accountability, not keeping incompetent staff, but you think moving Ms. Knight into Data/administrative role is a good thing. Ummm, obviously you are contradicting yourself.
the post claimed incompetence specifically to two capacities-principal/teacher.
so that person would be happy to see a shift of responsibility.
thats not a contradiction--its a reassurance. (debate 101)
as for the publishing of the plan, certainly somebody with little understanding of ethics, of right and wrong, would not be able to understand or see that the actions of another which are unethical.
but i guess you could ask any educated person that has worked in an organization about the protocol of release internal planning memos to the general pubic, a memo that obviously specifically laid out a timeline for such release.
but hey, i wouldnt expect a burglar to judge a fellow burglar too harshly
Incompetent as a teacher, principal so now let's try data and testing. Sorry, I don't see that as a reassurance. Ethics, it is St Hope Public Schools, emphasis on the PUBLIC. It should be a transparent orginazition not operating in secret. This org is worse than SCUSD. Obviously there is an employee that thinks the people who pay the bills have a right to know.
well time to move on. some people just dont get some things.
both of your points have been so weak its as though a nineyear old came up with them
but i'll take one last try.
so let me get this straight, you are saying a person in any industry might not be able to excel at one function means they WILL NEVER IN THEIR LIFE FIND ONE THEY CAN BE GOOD AT.
well enough said, that is such a ridiculous point this is like arguing with a nineyearold.
secondly, public company or not, if you aren't understanding the lack of professionalism (unethical misconduct) in an employee taking 'public' a working document, which that appears to be based on its contents and the timeline, prior to the time it will be made public, again like arguing with a nineyearold.
obviously it was going to be public, just look at the timeline.
within a few weeks as a amatter of fact, so its not that big of a deal. it will be presented to students/parents/new students/teachers/etc.
but again, Judas was just doing his job as well.
and again, in keeping with the protesters handbook, your last two points have been about a very narrow and selective portions of the post.
you picked out the knight transfer and the ethical debate of an employee taking a working document public.
u touched on none of the other points, probably because they are so true you couldnt even fabricate a weak argument.
typical 'protester' mis direction.
can we talk about the rest of the post by the 'protester' that pasted the link to the reform article.
Forget the George Bush school of logic it has graduated to the Richard Nixon school of operations.
How about backing up to the post about putting the blame on teachers and who hired them and why they have left.
The Boston Globe piece didn't exactly say that Gates had given up on the model. Is there another source which states the Gates Foundation's position more clearly?
The NY Times also had a article on the same subject, about three weeks ago. It's not that they have given up on the model, it's that they will cease funding models that clearly have not worked, and have no basis in research. Try the Times article it was very informative. I Love New York!
Do you have a link to the NY Times article?
wish I did.
they haven't given up on the model, they've just continue to refine it, as is the case with all reform movements. it's a state of flux, throwing out the bad ideas that don't move the reform forward, and continual tweaking.
which is exactly what the above (if its a real memo) st. hope memo talks about. continual improvement. taking pieces of old, with new and coming up with the right mix.
specifically the Boston article said: "Regulations passed by the Board of Education in the fall will promote the needed changes. By increasing time spent on academics, allowing administrators to select and assign staff on the basis of merit rather than just seniority, strengthening faculty evaluation, and tying it to improvements in student performance, new regulations give troubled schools flexibility to get out from under restrictive collective bargaining agreements where appropriate -- and truly focus on student needs. After-school tutoring and homework help, together with check-up assessments to make sure benchmarks are being achieved, ensure that students in these schools won't continue to fall behind."
"Focused on student needs and assessments to make sure benchmarks are being achieved", this is where Sac Charter is failing. Many charters across the state are having real results but not Sac charter. It isn't the org structure that is the problem, it's the leadership. SCUSD bailed on it's responsiblity and now must face up to it when facing charter renewal.
Tweak this!
API bettter than in 2003, by about 40 point improvement.
API better than other HSchools in district. (how are those schools underperforming the one with the "worst" leadership in history)
a-g eligibility higher than all other high schools in district, approaching 79% this year
70% seniors have been accepted to four-year colleges, including Stanford, Berkeley, UCLA and over 40 to UC Davis.
number accepted to 4 year colleges in 2003, around 30%, with 4 getting into UC Davis
improvement in AYP, now 21 of 22 categories
graduation rates up near 95%, way up from 2003.
cleaner, neater, more organized, more well behaved, students, who wear uniforms with pride and have helped make the campus as safe as any around.
100s of students that volunteer every second saturday of the month for community service, many times cleaning up the very neighborhood they go to school in. learning the value of community service and become whole students.
real change going on at Sac High.
inner city population, traditionally the most underserved, 80%free/reduced lunch, 64% african american and hispanic, receiving a top college prep education for free.
opportunity being presented to these students that wouldnt be if st. hope wasnt involved.
you should definitely resent the leadership for working tirelessly on this. why should these kids get this type of opportunity. Darn it st. hope. stop it and leave these kids to having no hope. shame on you for caring. you should fill out your little public speech card at the next board meeting of SCUSD and complain about something.
You go Ronnie West! Earn that money...you might be good at something yet!
The above post is almost word for word of one posted a week ago. After all the intervening posts refuting those claims, the same inaccurate data is posted again. This is called the Big Lie. Repeat it often enough and people will start believing it.
The Big Lie was used to close Sac High in the first place. The state was never going to take over the school. Sac High volunteered to take the IIUSP money. It wasn't forced to because it was a failing school. Its test scores were better than Burbank or Johnson. However it failed to bring test scores up the requisite amount for IIUSP. Kids failed the tests on purpose because the principal told then she could lose her job if the test scores didn't go up. Many kids didn't like the principal so they failed the test. The principal should have told the kids they could get money for doing well on the test, which my daughter did.
Now the Big Lie will be used to keep the charter open. My only hope is the Amari Watkins will access all the data and forgo the hype. If former St. HOPE parents and students would tell their stories about their experiences there to her. It would make a big difference about the decision that will be made on recharting Not Sac HIgh.
SCUSD has the data, the question is will they have the backbone?
i didn't leave st. hope because i didn't want to work hard. i left st. hope because their high expectations consisted of overriding my grades for student athletes to keep them on the court-showing that as long as someone was a baller they could ditch class, disrespect teachers and fail to do assignments yet still be given an A. How is that kid going to do now that they're playing for a big university? Not so well I'd expect.
I didn't give that grade that's on the transcript but someone did.
That's not the kind of school I'd want to work at. I worked with the hardest working people I had ever met and we were continually beat down by st. hope for still not ever being "good enough"
I still work hard, now I get appreciation and better than that I get respect.
Well that eplains the increased graduation rate.
to the anonymous person who says that i am full of excuses, i did not even go to sac in 2002. what are you talking about? who are you? have you been on campus lately or what? if anyone is full of excuses it is you! nothing can excuse thye crappy education that sac students are receiving now that all the good teachers and administrators have gone on to bigger and better things. step into the light you ignorant sheep.
Who left?
I am a student in the school of the arts and ms. knight said she would change my grade in her class if I left school at 5.
"Who left". Too many to count. If you consider just leadership alone it is significant. Call it President, Superintentdent, Head of School, whatever but that has seen 5 changes in less than 4 years. As far as principals, those positions have seen 15 different people spread across the original 6 and now 2 schools. It would take way too much research to calculate the teacher and staff turnover.
Wow, who's on first?
Why the turnover?
well because teachers go to sac thinking that they are entering into a supportive, well-structured environment where the administration respects and appreciates them only to find that school itself is in disarray and that the administration thrives on nepatism and greed.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home