D65 Ignores Parental Concerns to Support Parental Choice

A majority of the D65 School Board (4-to-2) voiced support for the Administration's proposal to offer the option for students in one or two Middle Schools to take Honors Geometry at their school and not at ETHS. The Board members who favored the option stated that they couldn't understand the opposition to the proposal, which did not change the current successful Honors Geometry program offered by the teachers at the high school, but which offered parents an opportunity to choose where their students took the course.

In spite of the objections of twenty speakers, each of whom supported the high school program and pointed out many flaws with the Administration's proposal, Board President Mary Erickson stated that she "could see no downside to the proposal." Keith Terry dismissed the concerns expressed as merely, "fear of change."

The Board's views were summed up by Katie Bailey's affirmation: "I am a believer in choice" for parents. The choice being offered is a section of Honors Geometry in either Nichols or Haven or both, (the proposal does not make it clear) to as many students as want to take it there, (as long as that number is more than eight or nine). The Administration did not specify how many students would be required to choose that option for the class to be run. Dr. Murphy said that the class size would have to be "not atypical" of other math classes, so probably somewhere between 8-32 students. No new teachers would be hired because current teachers could be reallocated, although this may necessitate some other classes in the school being larger.

The approved plan calls for some amount of D65 teachers (it is not clear how many) to be provided with professional development, including a summer insttute on teaching Geometry (even though 3 teachers in the District have experience teaching Geometry, according to the Administration) at a cost of $10,000.

Quick recap: The Board approved a proposal for a pilot program to teach Geometry to as few as 10 students in a Middle School classroom at a cost of $10,000, in order to "provide rigor" in the Middle Schools and a choice for parents who didn't want their child to attend the high school.

No speaker favored the choice option. No one in the room raised a hand when asked if they favored the choice option.

The speakers raised a number of valid questions, none of which were addressed by the Board or passed as directives to the Administration. In addition to the many parents who spoke of the tremendous impact the ETHS program has had on their kids, several parents questioned how simply moving a program into a school would increase rigor within the school. One speaker called it "cargo cult pedagogy," implying that excellence would somehow be magically carried to all the students merely by the presence of a higher level class in the building.

Several called for the Administration to turn their attention to the need for rigor in other disciplines besides math, which Board member Keith Terry also supported. Dr. Murphy agreed that it was "Absolutely" possible to offer options for rigor in other curricula, although he stated that it should "come out of the strategic planning process." (For those of you who missed a meeting, the strategic planning process, which may start this spring, will be making goals for school year 2009-2010. So don't expect to see any proposals for extra rigor in other disciplines for next year.)

Many speakers objected to the process, including a flawed and misleading survey, insufficient information for parents to make a meaningful choice, and the need for a public meeting to inform parents about the options available.

There were many suggestions on how to strengthen the proposal, including more specifics on how many students would have to opt in for the course to be run, how large or small the class sizes could be as a result, how long the pilot program would last, how it would be evaluated, and what would constitute success or failure.

No timelines or evaluation criteria were asked of the Administration when the Board voted. No mention of additional information for parents was suggested, although two Board members did support a meeting for parents. No direction was given to the Administration beyond, "OK, offer the course."