Friday, December 05, 2014

Friday Open Thread

Fascinating reading on superintendent selection from WSSDA (Washington State School Directors Assn). handbook called Superintendent Search.   Page 12 (Setting a Timeline - they recommend 4 months) and Page 14 (Involvement of Parents, Citizens, Students and Staff) are two sections worth reading.  Bold/italics mine and thanks to reader, Lynn.
The gatekeeper in the selection process and consummation of that procedure is the board of directors. It is up to the board to plan and implement a process, utilizing the consultant, to yield an accurate reflection of what is desired in a new superintendent. There are many tools for accomplishing this task and some are indicated below. It should be underscored once again that there is certainly no single approach that is superior. The pattern that fits a local district should be designed in terms of the time available, the tools that can be utilized and the perceived expectation of the constituents that the board serves.
I'm hearing word that the anti-Interagency placement group in Queen Anne is none too happy that another group - for working with the placement - has formed.  The anti-placement group truly feels dissed by the district (and around communications, they are absolutely right) but now they apparently feel betrayed by the John Hay PTA.  And, there is talk of a lawsuit against the district by the anti-placement group.

Next week's meeting - on Dec. 10th from 6:30-7:30 pm is now BACK in the John Hay Elementary lunchroom/gym.  (That is a change - they had moved it to McClure but it is now back at John Hay.)  From the district:

The meeting is intended to share information, receive comments and answer questions regarding the Interagency Recovery School program, scheduled to be located in the Queen Anne High School gymnasium beginning in February, 2015.”
 
Because of the seeming split within the Queen Anne community and the antics of the anti-placement group at the Board meeting this week, I would expect this to be a fairly tense meeting.  Cooler heads should prevail and I would suggest not taking children.  (This is a meeting for that community and not for the general public.)  
I'm going to take this moment - as former PTA co-president - to remind readers that PTAs have a fine line to walk on what they put in parent newsletters and what causes they can support.  If there does not appear to be unity for a school cause put forth by one group of parents, then PTA support of that cause may undermine relationships with other parents at the school.  

Next Wednesday looks to be a day of some drama - the Interagency meeting - and a pro forma anointment - of Superintendent Nyland (save the number of dissenting votes). 

And I'll be missing it all.  Going on a bit of a hiatus but will, of course, keep up somewhat with open threads and updates as I see them.

What's on your mind?

46 comments:

Eric B said...

There was a semi-creepy guy at Hamilton this week passing out religious tracts to kids getting off the school bus. He was on the sidewalk, so it was probably nominally legal, but my kid also said he sort of blocked people's exit from the bus with his arm as he was handing out the papers. My kid also reported that later buses had a counselor out front telling the kids that they didn't have to take anything from strangers. Good on the school admin for responding.

Melissa Westbrook said...

Eric, that guy makes the rounds every year. Really annoying but legal as long as he is on the sidewalk.

Anonymous said...

Those religious tracts freaked my brother out when he was that age. I would be very upset if someone tried to hand one of those to my kid.

HP

NW mom said...

People handing those out (and yelling about the end of days and how you must repent, etc with bullhorns) are regularly at Ballard HS. It incenses my daughter to no end, so much so that she got a few of her friends in the marching band to go out and stand next to them while loudly playing their instruments.

Anonymous said...

Meeting on testing at Nathan Hale last night:

Agenda:

Introduction - Principal Dr. Jill Hudson

Current State, District & College Board Tests - Melinda Greene (she is in charge of the tests at Hale)

Research on Testing - Dr. Wayne Au (great speaker)

"Mismeasurement of Man" - Joel Jacobson (teacher at Hale)

Instructional Time vs Testing Time - Larry Uhlman (teacher at Hale)

Discussion


The teachers at Hale are pretty upset about the SBAC test for juniors cutting into their classroom time especially since it is not LA/SocStudies testing even.

There was discussion about how much sense it makes to give all 10th graders the PSAT. It freaks out some and discourages many.

There was discussion on the sordid past of the College Board tests (SAT) and of the seeming conflict of interest between them and Common Core.

Very enlightening meeting. I will be refusing the SBAC test for my 11th grader.

HP

Po3 said...

I am also refusing SBAC until it is required for the diploma. High school principals are making it seem like it is a required test - I was even confused after curriculum night.

It was through this blog that I was able to confirm that SBAC testing is in fact not required for graduation until 2017.



Anonymous said...

Invitation to the meeting:

Parents and Guardians,

You are invited to the December 4th Community Conversation, co-sponsored by Nathan Hale High School and the Nathan Hale Community Organization --

Testing: What is New? What Has Changed? How Are Students Affected?
Thursday, December 4th
7PM - 8:30 PM
NHHS Commons

As a school, we have started a conversation about the role and purpose of testing for our students. We consider it essential that parents and guardians be a part of this discussion.

At our Community Conversation this Thursday, we will talk about when students take these exams, which exams are required for specific graduating years, changes in standardized testing and the role of Common Core in testing. Please bring your thoughts, concerns and questions about the exams your students are taking, which include:

--10th Grade English/Language Arts [ELA] exit exam (replacing High School
Proficiency Exam [HSPE])

--11th Grade Smarter Balance Math and Smarter Balance English Language Arts
exams

--Biology and Math 1 & 2 End of Course exams

--The PSAT and SAT

--Advanced Placement exams

Please join us for an evening of presentations and discussion on these important topics.

Melinda Greene
NHHS Assessment Coordinator



Ms. Greene was the only one who said it was federally required but as was pointed out by Mr. Au, they can't require your student to take it. I think Ms. Greene is between a rock and a hard place, she can't really say how she feels.

HP

Eric B said...

I like it, NW Mom! Nothing like a tuba playing in your ear to brighten your day. I was sort of hoping he'd accidentally touch a kid who didn't take the tract and they'd give him a sharp kick in the shins, but that's probably too much to ask.

Watching said...


Knapp states teachers would like more input on Superintendent hiring:

http://kuow.org/post/seattle-school-board-delays-vote-interim-superintendent:


"The president of the teachers union, Jonathan Knapp, told me that he considers Nyland a strong candidate and that a larger search wouldn’t necessarily result in a better superintendent.

But he said teachers would like more input in the selection process, so he has mixed feelings about the board’s move."

Anonymous said...

Related to testing, current middle school students taking high school level math classes will no longer be administered the EOCs, meaning they can no longer bank their passing scores for graduation requirements. Starting with the class of 2019 (this year's 8th graders?), students will have to take the SBAC in high school as part of graduation requirements. It's my understanding that even if they have already passed an Algebra or Geometry EOC in middle school, they will be required to take the SBAC in high school.

-just fyi

Joe Wolf said...

For those that geek out over mapping, data analysis, futurism: UW Campus Planner Jeff Lin's "Islands of Seattle" map/cautionary tale/work of art.

http://www.washington.edu/wholeu/2014/01/15/islands-of-seattle/

Since completion of the Seattle project Jeff has gone on to develop similar maps for Vancouver BC, Portland, Los Angeles, the Coachella Valley (Palm Springs), San Diego and Montreal. You can see them here.

http://spatialities.com/

Watching said...

Be aware: There are various states that have made it impossible for 11th graders to refuse SBA.

We will see what happens during the legislative process, but we may- or may not be able to opt high school students out of SBA

Legislative preview can be viewed here:

http://www.theolympian.com/2014/11/15/3425844_state-schools-chief-no-more-tests.html?rh=1


I am becoming increasingly concerned about SBA in relation to college entrance.

Anonymous said...

The petition to get rid of Interagency on QA had 2x the signatures of the petition welcoming it. The welcome petition is hours old, yes, 600 people and counting want nothing to do with the Recovery Program.

Why has Peters said nothing on this topic? There was time to rally with a bullhorn at high school not in her district, but no leadership at all when a community she represents is tearing itself apart and the administration of the district has failed to provide leadership and communication?

For that matter why did the "super" Super-wanna-be not take the opportunity to provide some leadership at the board meeting this week.

Duck and cover is not leadership.

Friday Incensed

Anonymous said...

http://theflounce.com/demand-justice-norman-ok-three-students-raped-bullied-school/

Here is an excellent summary of the high school protests against sexual assault in Norman High, OK. Quite impressive. Posted on FB Stop Sexual Assault in High School

Aviva

Melissa Westbrook said...

Friday, I can only say that I know Peters is working behind the scenes. She represents everyone, whether or not she agrees with the viewpoint.

I would bet she'll be at the meeting next week.

Anonymous said...

I think the people opposed to Interagency on QA are just much more worked up about it than the "welcomers". People like me, who think, new school on QA, ok, fine, weren't really thinking much about it. We had no incentive to get out our signs and petitions, because we had no problem with the plan. Then out came the torches and pitchforks. Like they say, a lie gets half-way around the world before the truth gets its pants on. The people I talk to are embarrassed and disappointed in our neighbors, but to enter the fray means fighting our neighbors, not a fight to support the school.

It doesn't seem to me that I need to fight to keep the school on track to come here....I think that's going to happen no matter what. And if we get involved in the fight, it's really fighting with our neighbors who feel otherwise, and that just makes a bigger fight with more attention drawn to it. Kind of a lose/lose situation.

I signed the petition, but the thought of going to a meeting and having to witness this behavior and get involved in an internecine war is just not how I want to spend my time.

It's so unfortunate, because the shriekers have garnered the spotlight. I feel worst of all for the students. I understand the first enrollees are QA residents. They (and their families) must be aware of the brouhaha, and are getting the message that they are so toxic a whole neighborhood (their own) will go to extremes to keep them away. I am so disappointed in this reaction to this school.

Anne Onymous

Ed said...

There has been a semi-creepy guy who acts as "gatekeeper" each time the board tries to color outside the lines and allow public input into the process of picking a new superintendent,

Its Don Neilsen.

I'm certain he's somewhere there in the shadows.

RosieReader said...

Fascinating. The anti- interagency school petition started on 11/13 and has 604 signatures. The pro-interagency petition started yesterday, 12/4, and has 414 signatures. I think Anne Onymous is right, they got hte pitchforks out quickly, while those who supported the school didn't feel the need to do anything until the rationales bandied about got completely out of control. In their most recent update, the founders of the anti-position suggest that anyone who isn't actually a John Hay family shouldn't have much of a say in this matter.

I'm going to the meeting on the 10th because I want to make sure that both sides are heard. As a near-neighbor to John Hay and the new school, I feel this meeting is for me, too.

Anonymous said...

Yep. The anti-interagency petition authors are critical of the support for interagency petition being authored by a non-Hay parent, yet in a post today, they state:

"Please share and email our petition with anyone you think will sign it. Please do this as soon as you can. The Seattle School Board once again shut us down last night. We did not get our chance to speak. We would like to see more signers before next Wednesday's community meeting. Please help and forward the petition, not just locally, but to everyone with whom you feel comfortable sharing it-even if you live outside of Seattle."

So...opinions of non-Hay parents/non Queen Anne residents matter...as long as they are opposed to the recovery school being located across from Hay?

Wow.

-reality check

Ebenezer said...

I think the initial fumbling of the Interagency school by the District put off a lot of Queen Anne residents, and gave those in opposition the upper hand. Once more of us have learned about Interagency, and have been embarrassed about the hysteria of some QA residents, then the idea has gained more support. I'm happy the pro-Interagency petition is doing so well.

Reality, I'm not surprised by the Anti's double-standard - the belief that The Chosen shouldn't have to play by the same rules as the rest of us has been an increasing problem in America.

Anonymous said...

Here's the thing that I'm sure is going to happen and tick me off:

The board/district will give QA anti's a hearing...

They won't have to play by the same rules as the rest of us.

Many issues have been shut out of public testimony - it happens all the time. But I don't really doubt that this group will get more attention than it deserves, in a way that other groups don't. Groups like the auditorium at Wilson Pacific - remember them? They played by the rules.

signed - tired

Anonymous said...

as a dues paying SEA member, it is interesting how Knapp speaks for teachers without ever telling anyone or asking anyone!

A quick poll of members would have found ... 95% don't care & 3% want Nyland? 5% do care and 95% want Nyland?

Of course, if you do a quick poll, and, as a ... ha ha ha ... leader you think your members are off track due to your leaderly insight, wouldn't it be your job as leader to persuade members to your leaderly insight ? ... ha ha ha

of course, when Seat-At-The-Bigshot-Table is the point of being a leader, who cares what the little in the trenches rat residents think?

HaHa

Anonymous said...

Well another reason why I supported the Supreme Court when they decided that Municipal employees don't have to join a union as part of their contract. Waste of money that could be spent on any number of things such as getting a Lawyer on the payroll when the district decides to put you into play.

Non union member

Talking Horse said...

Former school board member- Donald Nielsen- remains very active in controversial school politics. He is a multi-millionaire. Remember: Money talks and BS talks.

Dollars fund elections and there are many that take their marching orders from the highest funder.

Anonymous said...

I'm not in Queen Anne, and I know where Anne Anonymous is coming from. It is indeed hard to talk to your neighbors once they've taken up a cause like this one.

But, this issue, access to schooling for vulnerable Seattle students, is coming awfully close to those issues that we have to take a stand on, even at risk of offending. I served on a committee once with a teacher at Interagency, and was struck by how hard so many in the district try to provide an education for everyone. I don't want to make their job harder, even when they fumble. I went to the link to sign the petition.

zb

Anonymous said...

BTW, with my real name, and though I do not live in Queen Anne, I know a lot of people who live there. If they ask, I'll tell them what I know.

zb

Jill G said...

As the author of this petition, I can state for a fact that it was co-authored by a Hay parent.

And we are all sensitive to the fact that we are dealing with our neighbors and want to make it clear that we did not form to go against the anti-IA group but instead to welcome and support IA and show SPS we can work together as a community.

The support is much appreciated!

Anonymous said...

Hi Jill G,

I went over to sign your petition and noticed that this particular petition site requires an address. Since we are signing with our names and we all have children I think many might become reluctant to sign because of the address requirement, for safety reasons. Is there any way to remove that requirement?

Also, this is NOT just a Queen Anne issue. Education is a fundamental right for all because it affects ALL of us. Our society is better served and safer if everyone receive enough education to earn a living wage legally. Just like all of us, and not only the residents of Ferguson, have the right to expect that the police there not blow away kids just because they are black. Bigotry hurts us all.

CCA

RosieReader said...

The names and addresses aren't made public. Or rather, I have tried to find them and been unable to do so. I think they request them to ensure 1 person 1 vote.

Pro-InterAgency said...

I believe addresses are required for to determine if signature is valid.

Ebenezer said...

CCA, I just put "Seattle" in the address line. It came through okay. I do that for all my on-line petition signatures, as I don't think it's anyone's business what my street address is.

Jill G said...

CCA, these responses are indeed correct - they need an address to verify that it's one sig per person, and unfortunately I can't remove that in the petition. but even as the author I can't see anything but the name, city and zip codes of those who have signed. here's what's downloaded when I look at who signed:

(name) Seattle Washington 98199 United States 12/4/14

Anonymous said...

I am reticent to post here because this blog and most of its posters don't seem to want to understand my point of view at all.

But I am going to try this once because I think this is a very important conversation on many levels.

I am one of the parents that has safety concerns locating the IRS across from John Hay Elementary. I am not a pitchfork wielding Nimby bigot as many of you are trying to portray me. Nor am I trying to deny IRS kids a chance to succeed. Nor am I totally AGAINST this school being located on QA. I am simply QUESTIONING this particular location. One thing we seem to all agree on is that SPS really dropped the ball when it came to communicating with the community. And, as others have said, it's one of their stated goals so we are not asking for something they have not offered. From the top down to the JH admin, everyone should have communicated to the community the minute the plan was known so we could have a conversation. Maybe all of this would have been avoided and the QA community would not be so divided.

Everyone also has to understand that people are coming to this issue with their own life context. There are parents who have had a child at Interagency and are supportive of the program, there are parents of small children who have not had teenagers, there are people who have had very negative/positive experiences with addicts, there are people who have had troubled teens, there are people who have had dismal experiences with SPS and their trust level of the district to operate a successful program is low, etc. Everyone has a right to their opinion as long as their opinion is respectful. Yes, there are "pitchfork wielders" and self righteous folks on both sides. I am not going to name names but I could easily prove that. But most people, at least who are questioning this decision, are simply looking for answers and communication. I was not satisfied with the information given on the SPS site so I am hoping to get more answers at the Dec. 10 meeting. Most of you have been very dismissive of those of us with concerns. I don't appreciate having my concerns dismissed without any data or evidence. I have my own anecdotal evidence that fuel my concerns. They are valid concerns from my life experience and point of view.

Am I completely opposed to this school no matter what? Absolutely not. I am VERY open to learning more about it and even volunteering at the school in the future. I have really enjoyed reading posts by people such as "Westside" who have had a child in Interagency. Or people who know/worked with Kaaren Andrews or her team. Stories like that help me to understand and lessons my concerns. And to be clear, I understand these kids need privacy. I am not personally asking for anything specific about the children who will be attending. I am more interested in general Interagency success stories.

It's all about communication. So I am respectfully asking both parties to please STOP the name calling and inflammatory remarks (and maybe tone down the self righteousness as well) and try to come together to listen to each other respectfully. Those of you in the PRO camp are certainly not going to win any of us over by calling us names or dismissing our fears without some respectful communication. Let's not let this tear the community apart.

Thank you - QA Parent

Ebenezer said...

QA Parent, well written response. I am guilty of overgeneralizing about those against Interagency in an earlier comment. I do recognize that the most vocal are not necessarily representative of the whole. However, the language of some of the leaders against the Interagency siting has been inflammatory - that kind of language results in blowback. They would be more effective taking your approach.

Anonymous said...

Ebenezer, Thanks for your thoughtful response. I understand what you said and agree. I will do my best to convince this group to tone down their rhetoric. Unfortunately fear can take people to dark places. And unfortunately blowback begets blowback begets blowback, ad infinitum. It's up to us to stop reacting and start listening to each other.

And everyone with positive stories about Interagency? Please keep them coming! More than anything, those have helped to open my heart and mind.

-QA Parent

Lynn said...

QA Parent,

What kind of questions are you bringing to the meeting? Maybe there are people here with some answers. What are your concerns and what could district staff say to alleviate them?


Anonymous said...

I'm really concerned with students from QA of the parents apposing IRS attending BHS and roaming the streets so close to my house.

Maybe those students should have to wear a special identifier showing their families beliefs?

In turn I will stay clear of QA and it's businesses.

QA invisible

Melissa Westbrook said...

QA Parent, thank you for your thoughtful post. I will say a couple of things:

- the district cannot allow every school community the opportunity to help decide what programs they put where. It's just not possible. I like process but even I think that's not possible.

- I agree - everyone is coming from this from a different viewpoint. But the reality is two-fold - this is program that has shown some success AND we live in a city. Meaning, we live in a large enough place that we will have kids in such that some will need special places to renew their academic careers.

As an aside to all, until you have had teenagers, don't EVER think, "My kid won't do XYZ." You would be surprised what teens do. It's just their way and sometimes it leads then in terrible directions. But you cannot just give up on them.

- that FAQ the district put together? I'm not sure that even the one for school closures was that long. Meaning, it certainly was a lot for one issue. (That said, I didn't think the answers were all that clear.)

- It's fine if readers have stories to add but it's the district's responsibility to explain this, not readers.

Lastly, yes, the name-calling should stop.

But I worry that instead of getting answers, that the meeting will get hijacked with a lot of name-calling and shouting. I hope not.

Libby said...

QA parent, thank you for your brave and thoughtful post. I am guilty of having made some assumptions about the QA residents opposed to the location of Interagency School and I deeply regret that. Of course there are a variety of motivations and emotions involved and it's unfair to generalize.
I also acknowledge that a lot of this stems from poor communication on the part of SPS which has only fed into the fear of the unknown. However, when you say that positive stories about the Interagency School are helping to open your heart, I fear you (and likely others) are also guilty of making some unfounded, negative assumptions about these students and the impact they'll have on the QA community. Look to the facts. To my knowledge, there is no evidence to suggest that Interagency students are disproportionately disruptive or threatening to the communities that surround the current Interagency campuses. Perhaps those QA families with concerns might consider reaching out to people who live in the neighborhoods surrounding current Interagency sites to get their perspective. In any case, in my opinion, all of this energy might be applied in more productive ways.

Fabo said...

Larry Nyland does not oppose charter schools.

Anonymous said...

Libby, good post. I think you are definitely right that many of of us with concerns about IRS knee-jerk reacted. Unfortunately a large part of that I blame on communication (or lack thereof) by SPS. And I agree, Melissa, that they cannot possibly engage the community in every siting. But in a siting like this, where it would seem obvious that the community may have some concerns, it would have been prudent to engage the community sooner. I had never heard of Interagency although I had heard of other alternative high schools. And when I read about it for the first time, I was a little concerned based on the article in the ST and the district's own description of Interagency students.

I also know it's the district's job to address our concerns, but the personal stories of success give it a human spin that the district cannot provide. In addition, my trust of SPS is at an all-time low (for many reasons, not just IRS) so it's hard not to take what they say with a grain of salt.

As I mentioned on the newer thread, it seems from another poster that this is inevitable. If that is the case, then may it be a real success for all.

- QA Parent

Anonymous said...

@ QA parent, you said you agree that SPS "cannot possibly engage the community in every siting. But in a siting like this, where it would seem obvious that the community may have some concerns, it would have been prudent to engage the community sooner."

Please note that in every siting there is a community impacted--sometimes it's the physical neighborhood, like in your case, and sometimes its the kids slated to attend the school. Siting decisions obviously have a huge impact on families who attend the school, as there are often transportation and other challenges that arise--and affect them on a daily (twice daily!) basis. While I understand your sentiment that since this is an alternative school with kids who have some challenges many nearby residents are particularly concerned, I wonder if you think that families of kids whose school program is suddenly relocated for some reason don't have as legitimate a concern and need for engagement? My point is, I don't think the QA community is any more entitled than any other neighborhood or student community to SPS engagement on program siting issues. You're right that it might have been more prudent for SPS to have engaged the QA community earlier, but that's only because the QA community seems to have great capacity to speak up and organize. I'd hate to see a situation where SPS only pursues proactive engagement when they they are dealing with families who they fear have a greater potential to organize and fight back. It would be great it they were transparent in all their program placements (as per policy), but as we've seen, they are not.

Half Full

Anonymous said...

@Half full,

I was responding to Melissa Westbrook's comment:
"- the district cannot allow every school community the opportunity to help decide what programs they put where. It's just not possible. I like process but even I think that's not possible."

I DO agree with her on this. And I agree with you that the QA community is not any more entitled than any other community on having a say in the siting (Again, PLEASE stop making QA people out to be "entitled" just because we are speaking up. We all have the right to speak up as do all other communities!).

But I do feel that when SPS sites any school (in ANY community) that might be, for lack of a better word, controversial, it would be prudent to engage the community so the "fear of the unknown" factor won't come into play by the majority.

- QA Parent

Anonymous said...

QA Parent, while it is true that the parents opposing Interagency placement near their children/in their neighborhood might have various reasons for doing so; it is also true that NONE of these parents/QA residents have taken into consideration the CHILDREN that will be served by this school, or their families/loved ones. Consider how you would feel if you were one of these kids, and read/hear about what is said in the Anti-Interagency Placement petition (particularly the gem about bad effect on property values!), and by the speakers at school board meetings.

These are KIDS, already living through the most confusing and painful period of their lives-their teen years, already vulnerable. Think back to your teen years, what if there were several hundred people saying you were not fit to be in their neighborhood and near their children? How is it okay to treat children as Untouchables, for any reason?

Would these QA parents be as upset with SPS' "lack of community engagement" if these were APP, STEM, LI kids?

CCA

Rufus X said...

@CCA said These are KIDS, already living through the most confusing and painful period of their lives-their teen years, already vulnerable. Think back to your teen years, what if there were several hundred people saying you were not fit to be in their neighborhood and near their children? How is it okay to treat children as Untouchables, for any reason?

This is the thing I'm struggling with the most in this kerfluffle. I get that there's some indignation about what might be perceived as less-than-optimal communication by the district. I get that this can lead to fear of the unknown. I get that these fears of the unknown may need to be allayed by the district (see: point 1). What I DON'T get is the continued lack of empathy for struggling students who, by their enrollment in this school, are showing that they WANT to change direction.

One of my first comments on this issue including me allowing for the possibility that perhaps the parents who are most distressed by this program placement are the ones who don't have children in middle or high school. No one wants to think that their child or his/her friends, in 5-10 years, might be the very students this program will assist. I get that. But to willfully ignore this possibility and then threaten to picket at the school that these students will be attending (yes, that is one of the options the petition organizers are considering) - well, that just sickens me. I don't know if the Hay parents & neighbors who are most vocal about this program's placement have read the most recent HS student surveys (2012) which covered drug/alcohol use, but I'd highly recommend doing so. As Melissa and others have pointed out, It's NOT someone else's kids - it might be mine, yours, your neighbor's, your child's friends, anyone.

Anonymous said...

@CCA & Rufus X,

We ALL want these kids to succeed. Some are simply questioning the placement of this facility right across the street from an elementary school. To say that NONE of us have taken these kids and their families into consideration? That is really unfair and untrue. I AM one of these families.

I have stated in previous posts that my concerns come directly from experience with teens at risk, including one in my own family. In fact it was that formerly troubled teen who had the most concerns about the placement of this school after being involved with kids who have had some of these issues. I not only have empathy, but have lived it.

And as far as being an "Untouchable"? Been there and done that with the teen in my family. That teen has come to understand that sometimes poor choices have long term repercussions with your peers and community and yes, sometimes it's even unfair. And the ultimate irony? One of the parents that judged this particular teen the harshest? I just noticed her name is on the Pro-Petition with a statement about how we need to support these kids. My point? After my personal experience with many of the parents up here on QA, I have a hard time believing many of these people will actually BE supportive when the rubber hits the road.

If this school placement is inevitable, then I will do whatever I can to help make it a success.

-QA Parent