Oshkosh Northwestern Feb 28, 2006

According to the Northwestern online, the School Board is now entertaining the notion of funding block scheduling to the tune of $1.1 Million. Amy Weinsheim is quoted as saying, "It's time to start looking beyond revenue caps." The same article also referenced the possibility of a referendum. Supposedly the Board is thrilled by the plan, though shocked by the price tag.

Shocked? Can you say understatement??? We implemented a calendar change two years ago to create time for collaboration. We were told last year that cutting the calendar would save the district money. Where is the savings? Have you noticed a saved dollar amount related to the calendar has never been mentioned. In addition, Board members like Karen Bowen have repeatedly argued we need the calendar for 3 to 4 years to gauge results. We have had it for two years so far with no results.

Next year we are implementing a $1.25 million dollar restructuring plan. The plan is a middle school concept designed for 11 to 14 year old students that has been used across the country for over 30 years. I asked Dr. Heilmann for information on how it will be applied in the high schools and the research supporting its use at the high school level. All I got was a packet about middle schools. We could save a lot of money by limiting the restructuring to the grades it was intended for and possibly include the ninth grade to see if it would work for older students before spending the money. Then maybe we could keep VIP and the Teen Parenting program.

BUT should we be considering adding restructuring to the mix before knowing if the calendar set up works? After all we need 3 to 4 years to know for sure, right Mrs. Bowen and Mr. Kavanaugh?

Then, the following year we are thinking about changing the high schools to block scheduling with hints at letting juniors and seniors out of school early to save money. Not only will block scheduling cut more instuctional time out of the calendar, so I hear, it will cost an additional $1.1 million dollars. We may also be considering increasing the credit requirements for graduation which will cost more in new teacher hirings. There is also a plan to restructure the at-risk program, which will cost more money. Supposedly, this will increase face to face time.

BUT should we be considering adding yet another program before we are able to gauge whether the calendar structure works and whether the restructuring works?

In addition to compounding variables which prevents any kind of results from being measured and increases the risk of failure, if something should go wrong... get out the checkbook. Why on earth do we need to do all of this at once. When implementing new programs, shouldn't we make sure one works before piling on a second and third? Shouldn't we reduce the possibility of overloading our students as we progress through our goals of improving education? Shouldn't we also keep in mind the burden all of this financial expenditure has on the taxpayers?

The article in the Northwestern hinted at a referendum for the $1.1 million. Is this likely with our current board? Amy Weinsheim has stated in past meetings that she opposes referendums as setting a bad precedent. Apparently letting the people paying the bills have a say sets a bad precedent. She dislikes referendums, so how else do you exceed the revenue caps. This is the same person, who along with Kavanaugh, Sween, and Bowen thinks it was a mistake in the past three years to not tax to the maximum levy. Amy claimed at the last board meeting, that if they had taxed to the max, we might not be in as much financial trouble right now. Kavanaugh seconded that sentiment. I guess those members are going to rectify that over the next few years and then some.

Where is the fiscal responsibility we have been promised? We just blew over $30,000 on two billboards, radio ads, and 100,000 mailers for the charter schools only to get the same number of open enrollment applications as last year where we did no marketing. Where is the dedication to the students? We are cutting two successful programs (VIP and Teen parenting) with flimsy promises the students will get the same attention in the new core program. Right now I see more spending and experimenting where there should be saving and protecting the best interests of our students. I think it is time for a major change to the board dynamics. The public needs to tell Amy Weinsheim and Dennis Kavanaugh that we do have a say in how our tax dollars are spent and how our children are educated. We need to warn Karen Bowen and Don Sween that if they can't remember who signs their checks and put them in their seats, their days are numbered.

People accuse me of being angry. Our school Board is proposing spending $2.35 million over the next two years on top of a potential marketing plan costing $250,000 per year on top of $3 million for roofing. Our school board and district administrators are piling program change after program change on our students without considering the possibility of overload or the cost of repairing any damage that results from the overload and cut programs. Aren't you angry?

Interview With Polly Briley

I recently did an online interview with Polly Briley. Polly has expressed an interest in getting to know the candidates so she can make an informed decision on election day. Polly was kind enough to take me up on my offer to answer any questions she had. I hope the other candidates will contact Polly and participate in an interview for the sake of the voters. Below is the interview. I encourage everyone to check out Polly's blog. She has a lot if interesting dialogue going. Thank you for your interest Polly.

The night before the primary I complained about candidates not campaigning. With the gauntlet thrown, school board candidate Michelle Monte contacted the blog and told me to ask her anything, so I did. Here are her unedited responses.

TPB: Testing
MM: It has its place. Too much testing leads to teaching to the test. NCLB was a good theory but not done right with no funding. Tests are expected and expensive. I think we are starting to take them to an extreme trying to fulfill an unfunded mandate.

TPB: Charter Schools
MM: A few, serve their purpose of reaching kids that cannot be reached within a traditional classroom. Too many, overrun the district and take away from the kids in the traditional classrooms. I am concerned with what happens when the grant money runs out and enrollment declines. Do we cut other programs (VIP) and force those kids into the charter schools (East or Journeys) to boost those numbers?

TPB: Curriculum Budgeting
MM: I am not sure what you mean by that.

TPB: Subjects being cut/added due to cost. Examples would be arts, music, vocational tech.
MM: These are vital programs that give our children a well rounded education and teaches culture and values. In addition, these programs stimulate brain development in ways strict language based learning cannot. These programs are also vital connections to kids who may otherwise give up on school as boring. I understand budget constraints, but cutting these programs is doing a disservice. If anything we should be asking those in the community who often donate to the local museums, if they would be interested in helping our schools keep and expand the art, music, voc ed, etc programs. We should be looking at all possible ways to keep programs that work and show a strong interest among students.

TPB: Athletic Budgeting
MM: Athletics are a necessary outlet for many kids. They should not be the be all and end all, but they are very important in balancing education. I hope booster clubs are contributing as much as possible to help keep these programs alive.

TPB: Vocational Support
MM: Vital to the future of our students and our community. Not everyone is cut out for an office job, but everyone is important to our community.

TPB:Segregation by expectation
MM: Could you give me an example, I am not familiar with those specific terms.

TPB: My words, sorry couldn't think of the real word. I mean segregating kids based on testing, expectations for the future, grades. Honors classes, slow students, college prep, etc.
MM: In European and Asian countries, job track education works wonderfully most of the time. However, we are not any of those countries. Our culture and social expectations are very different. I think integrated (ability) classes have wonderful results. Less abled students have the more abled students to help them as well as the teachers. They also have peers to look up to. More abled students get the experience of helping others and challenging their own abilities. We should not dictate, "you are going to go to college, so you will go to this school and take these classes, end of discussion." Segregation leaves little room for changing your mind. By offering a well rounded base that nurtures interests and varied skills, students are prepared to choose their path to employment, tech school, college, or wherever. If the district administration could come up with a tracked education system that was flexible and would benefit all the students and be cost effective, I may consider it. Right now I see it as too limiting.

TPB: Segregation by gender
MM: I was in the Army for 8 years and served along side men as a heavy wheeled and tank mechanic. I am not sure there is a time when gender segregation is appropriate except in some portions of human development where modesty should prevail to allow for honest Q and A.

TPB: Uniforms
MM: I would rather see the current dress code enforced at the very least with faculty and staff and those in authority setting a good example of professionalism.

TPB: I am very interested in experimental methods. There are several interesting pilot programs around the country. I am interested in your opinion on adding/testing some of these programs locally.
MM: If they are proving successful in other similar communities, I would consider them. I do not think we have the budgetary resources to go out on a limb and start experimenting ourselves. Right now we would better benefit by others paving the way. Once our budget is better under control, we can look at being the innovators. My Grandfather used to say, "Stick with what you know until you do it right." Based on the most recent test scores available, we still have a little work to do with the three R's before we strike out into the unknown. You'll have to forgive me. While I do read about innovative teaching ideas, I am a little leary about spending millions of someone else's money on something that has little study or research about it. However, if I thought an idea would work in our schools with our demographics, and could be phased in to minimize initial cost and maximize the ability to get out of it if it doesn't work, and would benefit the majority of the students, I'm there for ya. I tend to be a cautious person, especially with someone else's money, but I fight like a tiger if a program will help our kids.

I thank Michelle for taking the extra effort to reach out to this voter and answering my questions. Please, candidates follow Michelle's lead. I am not necessarily asking you to contact this blog, but maybe Miles or Babblemur. Any of us would give you a platform to pass along more of your ideas.TPB readers, do you have questions that haven't been answered during this campaign season? I would gladly put together a public question list for all the candidates and head up a running dialogue. My email address is on my profile so either comment here with your questions or email them.

Thanks again, Polly. If anyone else has questions for me, feel free to call, email, or post here. I will always maintain anonymity for anyone who asks.

Thank You

Now that I have (mostly) recovered from the exhaustion and happiness of making it through the primary, I would like to take some time to thank all of you who voted, whether for me or someone else. You are all a very important part of the process.

It is wonderful to have made it this far and I greatly appreciate everyone's support. My work has only just begun. I achieved my first goal of being in the top six, now on to my next goal of making it into the top three. I look forward to meeting more people and talking about what is important to you. Feel free to comment, email, or call me with any concerns or questions in these next few weeks before the general election.

"Discontent is the first step in progress. No one knows what is in him [or her] till he [or she] tries, and many would never try if they were not forced to." -Basil Maturin

School Calendar Forum

I just returned from the forum and tucked my kids into bed. I brought my children to put a face on the issue because it is very easy to dismiss a statistic. Also because my autistic daughter has been having serious behavior problems on early release Wednesdays. One of the teachers she needs to see every day to help her adjust from gym to classroom, is not available on early release Wednesdays. I will not defend my right to protect my child's interests and education.

I also asked each board member if they had come to the forum with an open mind as they will be taking recommendations to the OEA. Four members, including McDermott, Kavanaugh, Bowen, and Sween said they agree with the early Wednesdays. Bowen has been heard to say at Board meetings and in other committee meetings that she is in favor of keeping the current calendar for 2 to 3 more years. McDermott sited the complaints about early release and late starts on the calendar as being one of the motivations for change. Muza piped in about frequency being important and how Fridays interfere with sports and other extracurricular activities. I was surprised Weinsheim was so tight lipped as she was one who said 600 signatures in a district of over 10,000 students wasn't significant enough last spring.

Several times the word "predisposed" came up with several board members. They were predisposed to Wednesdays. McDermott stated that it would take a lot to convince him that Wednesdays should be changed. Bowen reassured me that predisposed did not mean "close-minded." Though she thinks the calendar may need to be "tweaked," changing to Fridays was not tweaking, it is changing and they do not want to "change" anything.

A couple of parents said Wednesdays were not a problem for them, the lack of communication, loss of instruction, and lack of preparation by the district were the problems. No one said the calendar was a good idea. No one spoke and said, "this was great, you guys did wonderfully, atta boy." There were a lot of recommendations for Fridays and less frequency. There were also suggestions of alternative plans. The survey revealed 64 responses: 60% (38) expressed problems with Wednesdays and/or recommended Fridays; 26% (17) had no problem with Wednesdays and had children over the age of 12; 14% (9) had no problems with Wednesdays and had children under 12. One couple, both teachers in this district, expressed issues about picking up their kids early and the cost of care. They aren't the only teachers I have heard form with similar concerns.

One comment from Wayne Traska struck a chord with me. He said he talked to members of OEA and they were willing to negotiate if they were paid for the time. Schneider pointed out that we can't afford to pay more. I wonder, several board members stated in the past that OEA was not interested in alternative plans. Of course none could say tonight what the alternatives were that were presented to OEA. I wonder if OEA is more receptive to ideas for the calendar than the current board has made out. I wonder if a list of detailed alternatives were discussed, could a better received consensus be met? I wonder if it isn't OEA's rigidity that is the problem, but the two members of the Board representing us in negotiations. I hope anyone in OEA who reads this could answer that.

This isn't a matter of to have or not have collaboration. I believe, as do most parents, that collaboration is a great idea. I wonder if there is another day and/or time collaboration can be accomplished. That is all I am asking is if this is the ONLY way. The board claims they took alternative plans to the OEA but were shot down.

Over all I think the "survey" was marketing propaganda to sell collaboration. No one disputes that collaboration is beneficial. It seems that there is this continuing wedge driven between OEA and the parents as though to not like Wednesdays early release is to not like collaboration. That is where better communication comes in, I think. The forum tonight seemed more like a token effort at better communication. "See. See. We're communicating. We are predisposed to our ideas only, but we are communicating." Last spring nearly a dozen people spoke against the calendar and over 500 signatures were presented on a petition. This year nearly a dozen people spoke against the calendar. Last year one person spoke in favor of the calendar, none spoke tonight. 60% of parents on the survey have problems with Wednesdays. Majority seems to have no bearing with current board members. I don't see the survey or this forum as having any weight on the five board members who keep ignoring the concerns of the people who voted for them in the first place. Maybe we just need to shout louder. CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW!!!

LWV Debate

Below are my statements presented at Thursday's debate. The first is my two minute introduction. The second was my two minutes in response to boundary issues. My fellow candidates discussed the issue in terms of the challenges ahead. I interpreted the question as asking for an idea, so here is mine. When asked about what the district should do to improve communication, I had a simple answer: Try.

Introduction
I would like to extend my gratitude to the League of Women Voters, Ms. Propp, Mr. Archibald, Mr. Krause, our audience in attendance, and my co-candidates for making this event possible. I would also like to thank those at home for taking time out of their lives to watch this debate on television or listen to it on the radio. I decided to run for school board because I could not longer watch the actions of the school board from a distance. I feel that parents are not listened to and the word of the public is largely ignored. At a fifth Wednesday Forum the current board acknowledged that they come to the table with opinions in place. A few admitted that the public forum does not impact their already formed opinions. I believe that is wrong. I am a parent, a taxpayer, and a member of this community. I have four children in this district. I have attended school board meetings for the last year taking detailed notes and posting them on various websites in an effort to promote communication. I have gone into a few of our schools and seen what the children are doing. I have spoken to teachers and principals about their goals and concerns. I have spoken to families and community groups about their hopes for our children and our future. I have taken the time to meet the kids in programs that are about to be cut when no one with a deciding vote can find the time. Some would call me a cynic or a skeptic, and I welcome those titles because it means that I not only look before I leap, I look several leaps down the road to estimate the future impact of my decisions. I check into information presented if there is any question of any kind. It only takes a few seconds to ask a question. It takes only a few minutes or hours to find the answers. It takes years to repair the damage of a vote that shortchanges the children of this district and the future of our community. I have shown my dedication and perseverance over the course of the last year without holding office. Imagine what I can do as a member of the Oshkosh School Board.

Boundaries
We already know there is a problem at Oshkosh West. The entire school goes to lunch at the same time. I was at West on Monday. There were girls standing and eating in one of the girls’ bathrooms. There were wall to wall students standing in the halls eating, sitting on the hallway floors eating, battling to get out of the parking lot to get something to eat. The district should restructure the high school schedules to create a minimum of two lunch periods that the students could schedule like their regular classes. Since the schedules are entered into a computer system, it should be relatively simple to make this change. Next the district should look at the number of children requesting to attend a school outside their neighborhood school. Why are they making the requests and what can be done to keep them in their home school. Limits may need to be placed on the number of North students accepted to West, for instance.
The District administration already knows how many children are attending each school. I believe the district has an estimate of future enrollment. The district administration also has estimates of the repairs necessary to bring each building to optimal condition meaning no roof leaks, wiring and plumbing to code, furnaces or boilers in working order, etc. We would need to weigh the populations of the schools against the cost of repairing and maintaining the buildings. This should take no more than one to two months to compile. Next, we need to take this information to the parents with recommendations for boundary changes. The solution could be as simple as asking boundary border families if they would be willing to send their children to the next closest district. At the very least, the district will have communicated population problems and gotten feedback. All of this could be accomplished between now and June with any changes made over the summer.

VIP and Teen Parenting

It would seem, the Board of Education has decided to restructure the VIP and Teen Parenting programs in an effort to save $30,000. The students currently served (and the point was made that there aren't that many), would be absorbed into the new core programs with special needs addressed by 4 core teachers, school social workers, guidance councilors, and community organizations as needed.
I wonder how four teachers with 125+ students and no training in the special needs of at-risk and teen parents are going to be able to keep these kids successful as well as all the others?
I wonder how one social worker at each school, who serves the entire school population will meet the needs of these kids and their babies?
I wonder how a couple of guidance councilors will be able to keep up with the school populations while ensuring these special kids are put in contact with community services?
I wonder what happens when a VIP student starts to have problems and begins to disrupt class because it is not the best environment for him/her? What happens to the rest of the class who was distracted? and the next class? and the next class? possibly an entire day's worth of classes and students. And if this pattern is repeated, times the number of kids affected, how much instructional time is lost and how successful is anyone's school experience?
I wonder if teen moms will be allowed to leave in the middle of class to breast feed? Does an average classroom teacher understand the tremendous stress that involves for a 14 year-old?
I wonder if teen parents will still have their parenting classes?
I wonder if core teachers understand what goes through the mind of a 12 or 13 year-old sitting in class eight months pregnant having Braxton Hicks contractions thinking they are in labor?
I wonder if core teachers can handle a middle school or high school student who is trying to find a way to tell her parents she is pregnant? That's not part of teacher training.

Keep in mind, I do agree with the premise of core houses. I think it maximizes teacher resources and time. I question the methods of funding such a plan and if there are alternatives to the funding and the plan.

While there may be only a few students in need of VIP and Teen Parenting, their future, their babies' futures, and the future of this community are at stake and each child matters. I am not willing to risk even one student for a mere $30,000. Are you?

For anyone who wants to talk dollar signs, there was a very brave young woman who spoke at one of the meetings. She is currently in college, has a CNA, and was pregnant at the age of 12. If she had slipped through the cracks because of there not being a teen parenting program, it would have cost us, the taxpayers, up to 6 years worth of welfare for the mom, up to 18 years worth for the child. If mom had not graduated, chances are really high the child wouldn't and the process continues. How much does that cost? If mom had not gotten the parenting education, the risk of child abuse rises along with the risk of that child becoming an abuser. How much does that cost? Is $30,000 still worth it? Multiply the above example times the number of teen parents. Is $30,000 still worth it? Throw in the VIP students with their unique challenges. Is $30,000 worth it? Now throw in the unemployment of the teachers who will get cut. Still think $30,000 is worth it? We need to find another way and just doing it to see how it works doesn't serve anyone in this community any good.

Unfair Cuts in Budget Process?

Should administrators have to defend their jobs? Should the administration have to defend the amount of support staff at the district offices? Should the upper level administrators (Superintendent, Assistant Superintendents, Business Manager, and Directors of Curriculum) have to sit at the little table justifying their expenditures?

These are the questions I was trying to get answered at the last two school board meetings. Instead of answers, a couple of people turned my questions into a quest to prove my facts inaccurate and incomplete. My facts were just examples to support my questions. My "facts" were not inaccurate; feel free to check them on the DPI website. My "facts" were not incomplete; I tried to keep things simple by using ONLY the upper level administrators most people are familiar with. Coincidentally, they are also the ones who get the most pay and benefits and have the least direct contact with students. I am sure it is because the business of running the district is tremendously time consuming.

However, if someone would like to throw in the other administrators: Eau Claire has 11 with 5 in Upper administration ( Superintendent, Assistant Superintendent, Business Manager, and Director of Curriculum); Oshkosh has 9.5 with 7 in upper administration; Sheboygan has 9 with 4 in upper administration; and Janesville has 8 with 3 in upper administration. That leaves me to wonder exactly what someone asked on the Oshkosh News website this morning: Why is it we need so many upper administrators, drawing major salaries and benefits, and so few of the administrators who deal with issues closer to the students like food service and custodial? Maybe I am wrong in my understanding of district administrative dynamics. I don't know because no one will answer my questions. People would rather misdirect attention to the numbers and use of them in an apparent effort to not have to answer the actual questions. I refer you to the opening list.

To this point, the only answer I have heard came from Teresa Thiel who stated at the last school board meeting that we should look into cutting athletics to pay for other things in the budget. While I do not agree with this and the district has already taken the position of transferring some of the athletic budget to the recreation department, I have to ask, will coaches and gym teachers be the next ones to sit at the little table defending their teams and programs? Again I ask, in the spirit of fairness and equality, why not the administrators? Fair is fair.