Wednesday, March 21, 2012

This and That

The Times is reporting that Hamilton's 6th grade field trip to see The Hunger Games has been canceled.  I'm not really surprised - I think an adult should see the film before a decision is made to show it to students.  (And if you want a version of it, check out the Japanese film, Battle Royale, with the same theme of kids being forced to kill each other to stay alive.) 

I am getting a press pass to go and hear Diane Ravitch tomorrow morning at the National Association of Elementary School Principals convention being held this week at the Convention Center.  I have never heard her speak and I am looking forward to it.  I also hope to speak to some principals from other states about their challenges and successes.   The Association includes elementary and middle school principals.  They are also sponsoring a day of service today for Hawthorne Elementary School in support of their new playground.  (I attended an event at Hawthorne this week and there are a couple of threads to come out of that.)

The Snow Days waiver to OSPI has been added to tonight's School Board agenda as an Intro item.   This had been brought up at the Audit & Finance Committee meeting and was only passed onto the full Board as the Board members had some different thoughts on this than staff.  At issue is money and use of time.

The Board members at the committee meeting were not happy at trimming back yet more days from the SPS school year.  The item notes that high school/middle school students would have 175 days and the elementary/K-8 students would have 172 days.  The state law on this subject requires 180 days. 

The district would have to spend about $500k to have those two days of school plus there is the issue of end of the school year days not being as productive.   Most of that money would be transportation and utilities.  But you could argue the money has already been allotted for those days in the budget so school should be held. 

Coming threads:
  • PTA - what does it mean to SPS and to you?  Do parents need to look beyond PTA for empowerment?  Is the fundraising burden getting to be too much?
  • Communication issues - what if you were trying to save a program and no one gave you clear information or answered your questions?
  • Capacity management and BEX IV (and Advanced Learning)

53 comments:

Anonymous said...

This might not be the right thread for this question, but I heard there was a hazing incident this week at Roosevelt HS that caused the JV team to have to forfeit their game against Garfield. Any more information about this? I have not heard of many hazing incidents at the schools, so this is surprising - it is unusual, isn't it?

- Concerned parent

Charlie Mas said...

Not just Battle Royale. There are a ton of anime with this theme, starting with the classic Mi Hime.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Kelsey Creek Critters said...

Anonymous said...
See the movie before taking students to see it? How about read the book which all of these kids have? This is a faithful adaptation and the kids won't be unprepared when they see the movie (unlike some of their parents, apparently). What a slippery slope! Does this mean we shouldn't take students to see Midsummer's Night Dream (Titania wakes up with a man/donkey hybrid after a presumed night of lovin'!) because they might be "disturbed" by what they see? More well-meaning liberal Seattle parents who wish to impose their values on the everyone, but insist they're not for censorship and are dismayed to find themselves in allegiance with the cuckoos who want to ban Harry Potter because it promotes witchcraft. If you don't want your kids to see the movie, excuse them from the field trip. Kids are on fire to see this movie BECAUSE THEY HAVE READ AND LOVE THE BOOK!

- SPS Mom and Teacher Against Censorship

Po3 said...

I think this was the right call for a couple of reasons. It is a PG-13 movie and 6th graders are not 13 years old. And second, it was not a field trip related to school curriculum, but a community builder and I don't think movies are the best way to build community among students. Skate parties, ice cream socials are much better events for community building.

Good call on the parents behalf speaking up on this issue!

Anonymous said...

Not all of the 6th graders have read and loved the book, though. Some have chosen not to read it yet, due to its intense subject. I think that is the issue here, that some of the kids themselves do not want to see it yet, and are feeling pressured.

It is a far more appropriate movie for older teens, but not for younger ones. We are talking 11 and 12 year olds here. Since this field trip was to be a bonding experience for the entire grade, why choose a divisive movie that is rated PG-13? Why not choose a movie that is indisputably age appropriate, or why not bring an older grade where nearly every kid is developmentally ready for the intense subject matter?

-not feeling the love

Anonymous said...

Kelsey said: This is a faithful adaptation and the kids won't be unprepared when they see the movie

And you know this how? Have you seen the movie? Read the book? I have not seen the movie, but have read the book and there are certainly a number of incidents that could be disturbing to anyone depending upon how graphic the film portrayal is.

I'm 57 and don't like watching gory violence at all—missed a lot of good movies because of the graphic violence—so no, I don't think a film that has this potential should be used for a field trip for 6th graders. This is especially since the kids in question are below the recommended age range for the film (PG 13) as noted by a few other posters.

The violence in the book was handled in a very sensitive way, but it was such that at least a few 11-yr-olds—especially girls who might not be playing violent video games—could get quite upset.

I think the call to cancel was a good one.
Solvay

Anonymous said...

It's amazing that venom is being spewed at parents for wanting a trip that all students could enjoy. I really don't think it's about censorship. It's about teachers and leadership needing to model inclusiveness as well as being sensitive to the varying emotional maturity levels of students.

It is saddening to see such divisiveness and such disregard for differences among fellow students.

Had they followed district guidelines, the trip probably wouldn't have been approved in the first place. If the trip was considered educational, then Board Policy 2023, Classroom Use of Electronically Accessible Material, should apply:

When using films, video and
television for classroom instruction, care shall be taken that the content is appropriate for the intended audience.


This incident has been more illuminating for what is has brought out in people than for whatever the film contains.

name unimportant

Melissa Westbrook said...

Concerned, hazing is not allowed and frankly, I am surprised to hear this. To my knowledge, yes, it is unusual.

I will point out that no one knows how many students read Hunger Games so to say they are going because they loved the book is something no one knows.

Anonymous, making judgments much? No one has said anything about Harry Potter or witches. But parents have the right to know what the subject matter of any film shown at school is.

I don't think parents mishandled this; I think the school did.

Anonymous said...

Okay "SPS Mom and Teacher Against Censorship" - a couple of questions:

1. Do you teach at Hamilton?
2. What is the intended purpose of the field trip?
3. Is viewing a movie the most effective way to achieve the purpose of the field trip?
4. Have "all of these kids" actually read the book?
5. What is your evidence that the movie is a "faithful adaptation" of the book? Have you been to a pre-release screening?
6. What do you mean by "slippery slope"?
7. Um, it's "Midsummer Night's Dream" not "Midsummer's Night Dream". You would probably know that if you had taught it to your class, seen the play or read it.
8. "...well-meaning liberal Seattle parents who wish to impose their values on the everyone" - speak in broad abstract accusatory rhetoric often? Are you sure it's not the well-meaning conservative parents? the well-meaning middle of the road parents? Did you consider that maybe it's parents advocating for an activity which is a better match for their child?

After that, for me, you go a bit off the rails. I'm not quite sure how you get to the allegiance with those who wish to ban Harry Potter - I haven't heard anyone advocate the banning of the movie. Questions about whether a movie is an appropriate choice for the field trip, and if so whether this particular movie is the right choice for the kids, that's what I've heard.

Take it down a notch. And by the way, I thought Kelsey Creek was in Bellevue.

Oompah

Laurie said...

I am surprised at the vitriol too. I'm the mother of a sixth grade boy who hasn't read the book because he was uncomfortable with the premise. Then when this came along he felt like he didn't want to be left out if most everyone was going--it was a sixth grade social event, after all. He was in an awkward position, and I'm glad they cancelled it. I think it was a questionable decision in the first place, for any of the number of reasons that have already been brought up. If your kids want to see the movie, there's nothing to stop you taking them to it. What's the problem?

Patrick said...

I wouldn't take young children to see Shakespeare. He wrote for grown-ups; there's lots of bawdy language and situations. If that's excused because middle schoolers probably won't get the jokes, then they'll be bored because they're not getting the jokes. If presented in full, they're also too long for young children.

Greg said...

I'm most interested in how much of the reaction to the Hunger Games field trip is built on fear. Middle school is the time when adults should be starting to be less protective and give their kids more freedom and support them in the decisions they make (such as whether or not to see a particular movie). As such, I'd much rather hear about whether the 6th graders at Hamilton, as a whole, wanted to see the movie. I'm particularly not interested in the abstract opinions of adults as to what makes a good field trip.

These are not second graders. This seems like the kind of decision that could have safely been left to the kids to work out, with some help from the school's teachers and administration.

suep. said...

Greg, before you judge the reactions of families to this matter, and in order to fully grasp why this became such a controversial issue, I think you would need to know more about the greater context of this decision and the other issues that have come up at HIMS this past year.

This is not the only time that potentially or explicitly inappropriate material has been assigned to HIMS kids this year, and without parental notification or approval.

So some parents are justifiably questioning some of the judgment calls at HIMS and have likely lost some trust in this area.

Anonymous said...

Ok, want to know what an 11 year old think about "the Hunger Games". My daughter was invited to go see it. She declined. She knew all about the book from friends and classmates, but wanted to read the book first and maybe see the movie later (IF she liked the book enough). She has not read the book yet because she felt it may be too "scary". I left it up to her. She started reading the Harry Potter series at 7, but refused to see the 1st movie until she was almost 9. She found them "scary" at first, but now ok with them.

I am clueless parent and had no idea what "the Hunger Game" was about until recently. What can I say? Recently, I pulled out my old copy of "A Tree Grows in Brooklyn" and thought wow, I love, love this book and thought my daughter would too. UNTIL I re-read the book. Oops, forgot all about the grim and pretty scary near rape scene by a serial child rapist/murderer. Will put this one ON HOLD for a while longer. You can call it censorship, but I figure it's more good common sense.

There is a time and a place for things.

-in no rush

Greg said...

As a Hamilton parent, I know much of what happened this year. And you will note that I used the word 'adults' and not 'parents' here. Parents weren't the only adults acting fearfully (much like with the Finding Kind incident earlier in the year).

But again, my point is that I'm kind of tired of adults talking to adults about this. What do the kids think? Is there any reason to believe the kids could not have worked this out better than we adults seem to be doing? I suspect so, and given the rather low stakes (a social field trip), I would like to have seen them given the shot.

ShakesNazi said...

@patrick. It sounds like you had a bad Shakespeare intro. But please don't call Shakespeare too long, or decide who he supposedly wrote for. Most modern scholars agree he wrote for an incredibly wide audience, age wise and class wise- (ex: kids love puck and dogberry despite the bawdy & puns) your judgments are offthemark and offensive to teacher/parents like me. I've taught Shakespeare to plenty of 8 - 12 year olds - the edit , and skill of the educator, shockingly, make all the difference.
Also: @oompa: It's actually : "A midsummer night's dream"

Anonymous said...

Having read the books, my child wanted to see the movie, but thought it was an unusual choice of field trips. Having read the books, my child also understood why some classmates would not want to read the books or go to the movie. My child was willing to opt out of the trip so friends wouldn't feel pressured to go.

My child also is pretty good at deciding what is and isn't appropriate, and can mostly make those choices independently.

But what do you do when a teacher or school puts something in front of you that you would not choose to read or watch? Do you assume that's part of middle school, or do you speak up? What happens when you speak up and the teacher dismisses your concerns? What happens when you can't look to the teachers for help?

I would like to trust the teachers to make sound choices. Unfortunately, our experience this year has us talking with our children about how to handle situations when the adults make bad choices.

Hamilton parent

Patrick said...

Actually, I like Shakespeare a lot, and I had a good introduction to it, in the sophomore year of high school. You are maybe talking about cut down or edited versions of the plays, maybe put into modern English? If not, how much time did you spend on Elizabethan English before you exposed the 8-12-year-olds to the play? Did you see it performed, or read it aloud with the book with notes alongside?

Running time is an issue. Young kids start to get restless after an hour to an hour and a half, no matter how good the material is.

Anonymous said...

I am not going to get into the age question, but, why spend all that money to see the movie? Couldn't they wait for the movie to come out on dvd?!

Ingraham Parent

Anonymous said...

What were the other instances of "potentially or explicitly inappropriate material that has been assigned to HIMS kids this year, and without parental notification or approval." ?

Anonymous said...

What were the other instances of "potentially or explicitly inappropriate material that has been assigned to HIMS kids this year, and without parental notification or approval." ?

-Curious

emeraldkity said...

Movie ratings are given out haphazardly.

Why is Hunger Games rated PG-13?, even though it involves children fighting to the death, while Bully, a documentary looking at the increase of bullying across the country is rated R- for some language.(because the F word appeared 6 times in the film)

TraceyS said...

Good question, Emerald kitty. I think swear words and nudity are more important factors than violence in the rating systems.

There are a couple of good sites out there such as commonsensemedia.org that provide more details of various factors in a movie - sexual situations, bathroom humor, drug use, nudity, swear words, violence, etc etc. i have found them to be far more useful for edge case movies like this than the simple PG/PG-13 ratings.

Anonymous said...

Talk about misunderstanding and consequences. Perhaps just turn on the news and look at Treyvan Martin's death for real life dystopia happening before our eyes. You don't even have to go that far to Florida to find it. Talk about the killing of deaf, American Native wood carver, John T Williams.

You can make learning very relevant without resorting to well marketed, best selling, billion dollar fictional series and movie. Real life stories make a better teaching tool and just as gripping and compelling. Why are some folks more at risk for this sort of death? Why do some families have to talk with their youngsters about how to handle themselves in public when they are in certain places, especially when dealing with potentially armed strangers, law enforcement, and security guards?

-how about it?

suep. said...

@ Curious --

This was assigned to 6th graders in an SS class this year. When students spoke up and voiced their discomfort with the inappropriate material, they were ignored.

(from the Discuss APP Blog):

Start with page 121 and keep going: http://books.google.com/books?id=up4_q8ooKO0C&printsec=frontcover&dq=Nisa&hl=en&ei=efyqTrfGA8mKiALn6ZGdCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CDUQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=marriage%20hut&f=false

It continues on to the content that's on page 124, which Google excludes.

October 28, 2011 12:09 PM


Another comment about it:

Anonymous said...

The "wildly inappropriate" article was a chapter from a college level reader. Part of it described sexual relations of an African tribe. Students read it aloud to partners during a 6th grade class. It was explained as a copy mistake.

Jane

October 26, 2011 1:52 PM

BFDay Mom of two said...

How is it possible that SPS is already at 175/172 days of instruction if state law requires 180? I knew we fell short of the state requirement but I've always wondered how we get away with it.

suep. said...

@-how about it?

Right on.

American popular culture is great at concocting and reveling in fictitious violence, while ignoring or avoiding honest discussion of the real thing and its real consequences.

Both the examples you cite would be incredibly compelling and relevant discussion topics for a middle school classroom.

Anonymous said...

What a strange thread. A middle school decides to organize a community- building trip to see a movie of a book that is a major cultural phenomena for the age group in question, but whose material is off-putting to some significant minority of students of that particular age. Would that have been a decision I would have made? Probably not: there are better activites for bonding than a movie; it is a bit insensitive to the kids who are put off by the material; etc. But is it within the universe of decisions that someone with good judgment and the best interests of the children at heart might make? Sure.

--amsiegel

Anonymous said...

What is the story/movie about (especially what is the part that makes certain parents uncomfortable?) I am really out of the loop on current movies.
NE Seattle Mom
(and HIMS 8th grade parent)

Anonymous said...

To: NE Seattle mom
How about you google it: Hunger games book or movie. You will find plenty of reading for both subjects.

Plus a summary of the recent happenings:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2017800832_hungergames21m.html

Anonymous said...

Once again..to me the issue has much to do with the fact that the film has not yet opened (it will tomorrow) and no adult has seen it—keeping them from making a intelligent judgement.

If the violence is handled the way it was in the book—simply and without dwelling on it—except perhaps for one of the last scenes which was pretty grizzly—then the film may be fine. However, if the violence is amped up and/or very graphically displayed then probably not for all kids.

I believe that prior screening by at least one adult—preferably a seasoned teacher—should be required for any "all-grade" or "all school" showing. This isn't censorship, it's common sense.

Solvay

Anonymous said...

Once again..to me the issue has much to do with the fact that the film has not yet opened (it will tomorrow) and no adult has seen it—keeping them from making a intelligent judgement.

If the violence is handled the way it was in the book—simply and without dwelling on it—except perhaps for one of the last scenes which was pretty grizzly—then the film may be fine. However, if the violence is amped up and/or very graphically displayed then probably not for all kids.

I believe that prior screening by at least one adult—preferably a seasoned teacher—should be required for any "all-grade" or "all school" showing. This isn't censorship, it's common sense.

Solvay

dw said...

Greg said: But again, my point is that I'm kind of tired of adults talking to adults about this. What do the kids think? Is there any reason to believe the kids could not have worked this out better than we adults seem to be doing? I suspect so, and given the rather low stakes (a social field trip), I would like to have seen them given the shot.

I understand the sentiment, but what does this mean? If 75% of the kids say "yeah, let's go see this movie!" and 25% say "no thanks", does a majority rule (mob rule) win the day? I think a lot of the kids did talk about it, and there were quite a few that were uncomfortable with it. At some point the adults really do have to step in and be adults. These are 11 and 12 year olds, not 15 year olds.

Hamilton Parent said: Having read the books, my child wanted to see the movie, but thought it was an unusual choice of field trips. Having read the books, my child also understood why some classmates would not want to read the books or go to the movie. My child was willing to opt out of the trip so friends wouldn't feel pressured to go.

Now there is a mature, thoughtful kid. Kudos.

The odd thing to me, as others have mentioned, is why seeing any movie (let alone a potentially controversial one) would be considered a great grade-level event. Other than the bus rides back and forth to the theater, an event like this consists of a bunch of kids sitting in a dark room expected to (mostly) be paying attention to something on the screen in front of them. What's the matter with a skating party, ice cream social or something where the kids can actually interact? If some kids don't like to skate, at least there's an area where they can hang out and talk or watch their friends, etc. With a movie, the alternative would be to have a gang of kids hanging out in the theater lobby for 2 hours, which would almost certainly be discouraged, or alienate them from their peers by staying back at school. Ouch.

This was not well thought out at all, and sadly (as mentioned already), this building seems prone to stuff like this.

Anonymous said...

Movie review here:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/movies/2017805761_mr23hunger.html

ShakesNazi said...

@film stink: there are plenty of websites that preview these movies. Bootlegs of hunger game advance screenings are for sale online And in subways across the nation, aintitcoolnews carries detailed reviews as do the parent/consumer watch sites. YouTube it, we live in 2012.
commonsensemedia .org has it reviewed already!
And yes a movie is just as wasteful and/or beneficial as an ice cream social or skate king trip. There's no consensus any more than on the subject of video games.


@patrick. Ok. Well everyone's experience is different I suppose . I've done R&J, AMND, Tempest, Caesar, MWW and the Scottish play all under 90 mins, most under 70. MacB and Caesar don't really need too many cuts to do it either.

Yes judicious cuts are required (but good god no "modern" translations!)
Any director who doesn't make cuts to Bill Shakespeare is either a member of the RSC showing off, or an idiot.
And I've taught with the policy that a study of Elizabethean poetry is no more necessary a pre-requisite than Latin is to reading Harry Potter.
Shakes wrote plays not lit, so they must be played. Besides: once rhythm and cadence are observed...

To teach the iambic pentameter
Is no more hard than "Dr" Theodore.

;)

Anonymous said...

It is a great book but I wouldn't let my kid read it until they were 13. I would be really upset if the book were assigned to my 11 year old. The movie is PG-13 for violence, to me that means, my kid needs to be 13 to see it. If it was rated PG-13 for the f word then it would be no big deal but that is my choice as a parent. It isn't a choice the school should be making.
-A Waldorf parent

Anonymous said...

Oh and the book is based on Theasus and the Minotaur, the Iraq war and Reality TV shows. Those were her inspirations.

Battle Royale is similar but at least the movie, is way more violent. Haven't read the book yet.

-a Waldorf parent

Anonymous said...

Dear Anonymous, Thanks for the idea.
I had already googled it, but I was trying to ask what people specifically are objecting to. There has been a lot of talk but I haven't seen specific objections regarding subject matter. I'm sorry I wasn't clear in my question.
NE Seattle Mom

Anonymous said...

This should not be escalated into finger pointing about censorship and helicopter parenting. Really, it's very straightforward if you look at Seattle School Board policies:

a) field trips MUST be tied to curriculum and/or have clear educational objectives (end-of-school year "fun" trips nonwithstanding)

b) instructional materials MUST be age appropriate. PG-13 movies for kids who are not yet 13? Um, no...

The principal and teachers were not aiming high here, just being lazy. Kind of like how a HIMS teacher played 7th graders the "Kony 2012" video last week in homeroom (without parents' permission) because the teacher heard some kids talking about how upsetting it was and thought it would be a good idea. The principal's response to parents' concerns on that decision? Tepid and unapologetic.

--What will it take to change things at Hamilton?

dw said...

What will it take to change things at Hamilton?

Sadly, I think it will take a new principal.

See the most recent HIMS climate survey.

Note in the staff section how much worse the Leadership marks are - across the board. And the Professional Culture marks are nearly all down significantly as well. My guess is this year it will only get worse.

As parents we need to be mindful of these surveys and seek them out when they're available. This is actionable data if it's consistent.

Hamilton parent said...

I agree with the poster who indicates that leadership (principal) needs to change at Hamilton. Too many poor judgement decision in the 2 yrs I've been a parent there. I think Mr. Carter tries his best and raelly cares about the kids, but he is not a good fit for the needs of the current and evolving population. But how can parents help effect this change? We certainly dont want to call attention to ourselves in this sense, so how does one go about letting the "powers that be" (the District??) know that parents (many) are unsatisfied with current principal? FWIW, many teachers seem to be unhappy as well - thats just a sense I get, I have no real evidence other than raised eyebrows and rolling eyes when the subject of Carter's leadership is raised.

Melissa Westbrook said...

Request a meeting with your Executive Director. Go to a community meeting tomorrow and tell a Board member. Document your concerns in writing. Ask your PTA what they have heard.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

I hear a lot about Hamilton and McClure principals not being a "good fit". What does that mean? What's a good fit? For whom?

Curious

Anonymous said...

MANY, many parents have contacted the principal's supervisor, Marni Campbell!

She seems to have his back, or is lazy and ineffectual as well. She tells parents that she's "known Chris Carter for years and trusts him."

--What will it take to change things at Hamilton?

Anonymous said...

A principal needs to support all the students and programs in their school, plain and simple. "Support" includes ensuring teaching staff are doing their jobs and taking action if they aren't.

Isn't this what it comes down to? It's more than being a nice guy or gal.

Anonymous said...

"known Chris Carter for years and trusts him."

This translates to..."I have an ongoing working relationship with this individual and I am not equipped with the skills to ask questions that I feel might make me uncomfortable in the asking, or Chris uncomfortable in the receiving. You are just a parent and probably don't have the full picture."

How can you trust someone if you don't ask them questions?

Oompah

Anonymous said...

How can you trust someone whose decisions / actions show a totally opposite direction than his verbal communication for years now???
Concerned also

Hamilton parent said...

To be clear, I'm sure we dont all have the full picture of Carter's effectiveness as a principal - this blog and others like it are naturally skewed to parents who are v involved in their childrens educational experience and prob know more about SPS in general than many parents do. Perhaps CC is amazing with kids who might fall through the cracks; ESL learners; kids who are emotionally or medically fragile; and other sub-groups.I really dont know, and its a large-ish school with many kinds of kids and learners. I admit I'm limited to my own pt of view, from other invovled parents on the PTA, and parents/teachers mainly in the Spectrum and APP classes. Not saying he's awful, just that there's so much potential to create a truly amazing school and it's hampered by some rather poor teachers who don't seem concerned about improving or changing their behaviour. Most of the "bad" teachers seem to have been there for many many yrs and pre-date Carter, maybe he wants to get rid of them or maybe he doesnt think they are doing a poor job - its hard to know what he thinks.

Anonymous said...

Hamilton parent,

There are always many sides to a story, of course, and Carter seems a nice enough and compassionate fellow. And, to be fair, there are many great things about Hamilton - it is safe, friendly, has a great music program and has some great teachers.

However, in his job as principal he must lead and respond to issues at hand. He has been given ample evidence over the past three years that there are some REALLY horrendous teachers that parents and kids are very upset about. He has not dealt with the problem, or even hinted that he would do so. He has put out fires here and there, shuffled around. As someone else posted here, he has dismal and ever-plummeting ratings by his staff.

Parents AND teachers are giving him poor marks for his performance. No one's saying he's evil, just that he's not doing his job at a satisfactory level.

-HIMS parent

John M said...

So how do you propose exactly that he remove ineffective teachers? Or define them to begin with, when 99% are rated adequate/effective by current evaluation practices? Fire them? Please. At a practical level, firing teachers is above a principal's pay grade, so they work with the hand they're dealt. It ain't right, but we elect school board members who want to protect the incompetency of the few adults rather than the ecucational rights of the many students. It's our own fault.

Charlie Mas said...

John M. asked:
"So how do you propose exactly that he remove ineffective teachers? Or define them to begin with, when 99% are rated adequate/effective by current evaluation practices?"

First, John, it is the principal who awarded the teachers that rating. If he didn't think they deserved it, he should not have granted it to them.

Second, what makes you think that 99% of teachers are not adequate/effective? Do you have an objective basis for that presumption? Do you think you can evaluate them better than their principal? This reminds me of the fan in the stands who thinks they have a better vantage point for calling balls and strikes than the plate umpire.

Third, the school board doesn't have anything to with the teachers' contract so your effort to blame the school board is grossly misplaced.