BiggerPicture4Wake is now officially online.
The group reopened its Web site so a password is no longer needed. The group also issued a press release today.
BiggerPicture4Wake forms, supports year-round conversion of Leesville Middle School
RALEIGH, N.C. – Nov. 17, 2008 – A group of parents from northwest Wake County have launched a grassroots effort to raise awareness about the benefits of year-round education and support a proposed plan from the Wake County Board of Education to convert Leesville Road Middle School to the year-round calendar, effective next year.
“BiggerPicture4Wake is committed to finding the best solutions for all Wake county students and their families,” said Marguerite LeBlanc, spokesperson. “Based on our research we’ve determined that converting Leesville Road Middle School to a year-round calendar is the best option to maximize school capacity, provide a consistent schedule and peer continuity for rising sixth graders, and minimize costs to the taxpayers during this challenging economy.”
The group’s website, www.biggerpicture4wake.com, went live today and offers information about year-round schools, including feedback from the Wake County Public School System’s 2008 Teacher Working Conditions Survey, and results from surveys conducted at Leesville Road Elementary School and the News and Observer.
“This is all about the children,” said Maria Mauriello, spokesperson. “We encourage parents and administrators to visit our site and get the facts about this issue, so that the best possible decision can be made going forward.”
Comments
time off
Thu, 11/20/2008 - 15:59 — louiselee44Hey - no one else can make a fair judgement on how many days family #1 needs off as opposed to family #2. That's a personal preference - or in many cases, a necessity - in which parents should have a choice.
If your family/child is being harmed - for any number of legitimate reasons - by being forced to attend a school against your will, in my opinion that is wrong. And many "opt out" options are ridiculously unreasonable.
My 2 cents worth...
I understand YR is not for everyone
Thu, 11/20/2008 - 10:20 — Eric_BI understand that YR is not for everyone. I just posted my personal experience to show that even with two different schedules, it's not a major inconvenience for my family. There are others who have said the same thing. I know this is not true for everyone, but for us it works.
On two different schedules (track 4 and traditional for example) each child still has 81 days off, it's just that 41 days are shared while 40 days fall on different days. Your kids may be home at different times for half the vacation days, but there's not any less total vacation time that you would have with your family together, especially if you or your spouse works a full time job with 5 weeks or less of vacation. There's going to be at least one parent that cannot be with the family due to the limited amount of vacation people have that work full time.
My kids love time together, but they also value one-on-one time with my wife and I. That time is just as precious. The total time you have home with your kids is not reduced in any way.
I guess the main point is if you or your spouse works full time and gets less than 5 weeks of vacation then the amount of vacation time you get together as a family is limited by that and not by a year-round schedule.
I've pointed out that even if WCPSS wins the Wake Cares lawsuit traditional calendar application seats will still be available. I would hope and pray that WCPSS would give first priority to those traditional calendar application seats to those with siblings in traditional.
The problem I have with anti-YR folks is that they are trying to claim a "right" to keep the school they want near their house on a traditional calendar regardless of the potential negatives to the rest of Wake County residents including:
- Costs to taxpayers (70% of whom have no children in WCPSS schools) to build more schools so that more can operate on a traditional calendar
- Overcrowded schools and larger class sizes on traditional calendar.
- Inability for some neighborhoods in close proximity to attend the school closest to them (LRMS for example).
I honestly wish that in 2006 a $2 billion bond could have passed to fund construction of enough schools to allow everyone to have a traditional calendar school. I would have paid higher taxes to make that happen, but I doubt the 70% with no kids in WCPSS would.
It appears that you may be
Thu, 11/20/2008 - 11:41 — BlogObserverIt appears that you may be missing the point Eric_B.
81 days off is a different concept than 81 days off together.
You stated "The total time you have home with your kids is not reduced in any way. " I say it absolutely is. If I have 41 days with Johnny and Judy together as a family, when I used to have 81 days with Johnny and Judy together as a family, our time together as a family has been reduced by 40 days.
I did not even need Trailblazers math to figure that out.
Apparently not everyone defines a family as *every single member of the entire family even those zany high schoolers who some do not care to acknowledge*. We happen to think our older children are as important to the family as the younger ones are. You may not agree, but please try to appreciate the concept.
Does "family time" not include both parents?
Thu, 11/20/2008 - 12:10 — Eric_BI see you did not address at all the fact that in a family with at least 1 spouse that works nobody can spend 81 days together or take 11 consecutive weeks off in the summertime.
Yes, all 81 days is "family time" if you ignore at least one of the parents. That's not my definition of family time. Both parents home with *all the kids* is my definition. Under that definition 41 days is enough overlap for parents with full time jobs to use all of their vacation days home with the *entire* family. Not just all the kids off at the same time without one or both parents as you seem to be implying.
If you or any family is
Thu, 11/20/2008 - 15:39 — BlogObserverIf you or any family is able to have both parents and all children spending 41 weekdays together each year, I would assume you are independently wealthy or unemployed. That is 8 + weeks of vacation. Good for you. Boo for me.
I assume you know exactly what I am saying and what I meant. In case it was unclear, having the kids together to relax and spend extended time with each other and a parent without school to interfere. 9 months of school a year is plenty. Kids, parents, and school staff members deserve a long break so that they are mentally ready for a new year. If that is not important, they have year round options. WCPSS needs to stop forcing MYR on communities that do not want it.
The teachers suffer more than anyone, but no one considers their opinions. The sheep just have to do as they are told or lose their jobs. An exhausted or stressed out teacher is not as effective as one who has had a long break from the stresses of school. Check around.
You beat me to it
Thu, 11/20/2008 - 11:50 — Big_PictureYou beat me to it BlogObserver. Some families prefer to spend a lot of time together, and others do not. It is a personal preference and there is no right or wrong answer. We need choice so those of us who want to keep our families together are not forced to be split. 41 days is not 81 days no matter how you compute it. The Leesville campus never should have been targeted for destruction like it was. This needs to stop. Keep it up CCLP. I know you are out there. We are counting on you.
Reality check
Thu, 11/20/2008 - 10:36 — Voice_of_Reason_And yes, I would also support building more schools. [Eliminate waste though, we also do not need Lexus ones ]. The shear lack of foresight when the big growth push was done in Wake county was remarkable. Why do they still doing it?
Keung, can you help?
Wed, 11/19/2008 - 20:57 — louiselee44Eric_B wrote:"Maybe you can point me to the 2006 poll results. I don't have them, so I can't look at what you're looking at."
Keung - can you please help get this entire poll for Eric? I guess it's archived by now. It was the poll done jointly by the N&O and WRAL in May, 2006. Questions dealt with bond $, year-round schools, etc.
Thank you!
Louise, I don't think the
Thu, 11/20/2008 - 14:50 — KeungHui (author)Louise,
I don't think the 2006 poll results are archived. I can forward them to you if you want.
2006 poll results
Fri, 11/21/2008 - 08:33 — louiselee44Thanks, Keung, that would be great! Is it too lengthy to post?
Louise
It shouldn't be a problem
Mon, 11/24/2008 - 10:23 — KeungHui (author)It shouldn't be a problem. It's a relatively small file.
But It Is A Big Deal For Many Families
Wed, 11/19/2008 - 19:04 — Big_PictureWhen I read Eric's comments *I don't see what the big deal is* and *it's not a big deal* I am saddened. I understand that when both parents work outside the home you are not accustomed to spending much time during the day with your children when they are out of school. Not a criticism, just a fact.
Taking a good look at the Big Picture might help you empathize with what others are saying. Most children with 1 parent at home used to have 81 days off together during the school year. These kids happen to enjoy each other's company, and their parents happen to like being with them as well. Since MYR came into the picture, these same children now only have between 29 and 41 days off together during the year based on their track. How can anyone call that equitable? That is precious family time taken away by WCPSS that we can never get back. Evenings are still family time, but are filled with homework, projects, and other after school activities. It is not the same as relaxing together in the summertime without the stress of school.
You may say that it is not fair for our kids to have 81 days off during the school year while your children have to attend daycare or track out camps and cannot be together. But, that was your choice, was it not? Please try to see what people are concerned about. We cannot afford to take 81 days of vacation together. We do not own a beach house or a mountain house or a yacht. We just want to *be together* for those 81 days and that has been taken away. I do not criticize you because it is not what you want. Please do not criticize me and others for wanting it.
Show Some Empathy Please
Thu, 11/20/2008 - 09:16 — BlogObserverAgreed. A little bit of empathy for the other side would be nice. Some like their off-season Disney trips. Good for you. Others cannot take family trips during track out because part of the family is in school. Did you ever have a high school student stay home sick from school for even 1 day? The makeup work is incredible. You cannot pull an older child out of school for a vacation. Do not judge until you have walked in someone else's shoes. Some just like to take a long break from school in order to start fresh in the fall. Why force your satisfaction on someone facing different circumstances than you?
Spending only 3 weeks together in the summer may be acceptable to some. Why steal away family time from others to force a failed policy?
Maybe you can't, but others are able to do so
Thu, 11/20/2008 - 14:30 — NCParent"You cannot pull an older child out of school for a vacation."
It depends on whether you want to or not, I guess. My neighbors just got back from a 6-month family trip with their 15 year-old and 11 year-old. They managed while away from school for a long time not to fall behind, so surely one day shouldn't be so troublesome, should it?
Let's be realistic. The problem is, some people like year-round, and some like traditional. You're saying "why force your satisfaction on someone facing different circumstances than you". That could be said to you as well.
Whose fault is it?
Wed, 11/19/2008 - 15:37 — SideburnsIt is silly of Eric to blame track overcrowding on the principal. The onus of balancing tracks as well as responding to the needs of families has been placed on their backs but it is not their fault. They are simply responding to a terrible situation (forcing a year-round calendar) created by WCPSS and the Board of Education.
I met someone who lives down in my area who believes that WCPSS should force YR assignments and track assignments as well, regardless of what parents need. Eric, you must share this sentiment. Take away all choice and you get what you get. Period. That is the future of Wake County schools.
yes our principal believes
Wed, 11/19/2008 - 17:09 — AngelaWyes our principal believes in FAMILIES FIRST and knows how unhappy most are with MYR and thus tries to accomodate based on WCPSS poor choice to convert LES. She also is VERY aware of those who lied about middle school sibling reasons for Track 4 and it will not happen again. Those folks also ruined any legitimate reasons for switching tracks.....could it been have because they DIDN'T want MYR? (I don't know the answer but would prefer that thought to the other possible nefarious reasons)
I just visited the website
Wed, 11/19/2008 - 00:03 — louiselee44I just visited the website for Biggerpicture4wake. They wrote under the "facts" section that:
"•In May 2006 the News and Observer and WRAL-TV reported that taxpayers preferred converting schools to the year-round calendar over raising taxes to pay for school construction. (Source: News & Observer, May 2006 ) "
While that is a true statement, it is somewhat misleading. That is from the same poll that had these results:
What percentage opposed year-round schools altogether or thought that they should be optional?
ALL – 50%
BLACK – 52%
LATINO – 52%
WHITE – 49%
Did you ever see those results highlighted? Certainly not - they would not have helped advance the MYR school cause.
This was also the poll that showed the following results when respondents were asked to describe the quality of the Wake County public schools - “fair” or “poor” percentages were as follows:
ALL – 47%
BLACK – 56%
LATINO – 56%
WHITE – 45%
Biggerpicture4wake's "fact" section also said that, "On November 6, 2008 the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction released its annual ABC’s of Public Schools. During the 2007/2008 school year it found that of the 30 schools that achieved the highest levels of recognition, 20 of them are year-round schools."
One can assume that the higher levels were a result of the year-round schedule, but that can't be proven - there are way too many variables. Besides, that's the same department that I mentioned on my blog site quite awhile back.
Here's my reference: "In a 2000 Evaluation Brief, the NC Department of Public Instruction reported the results of their own study, entitled, “Year-round Schools and Achievement in North Carolina”. I quote, 'the results reported here do not imply any clear advantage or disadvantage to year-round education with respect to student achievement in reading and math.' ”
That's directly addressing year-round schools.
I have no problem with Biggerpicture4wake creating their own site - at least they're involved! But with all due respect, I would like to ask them to refrain from listing as "fact" information that can't be proven, or information that could mislead others.
Data
Wed, 11/19/2008 - 09:41 — Eric_BMaybe you can point me to the 2006 poll results. I don't have them, so I can't look at what you're looking at. All I found through Google was this:
http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/155688/
More Year-Round Schools Favorable Choice In Wake Poll
Only about 40 percent of those surveyed supported the bonds; 66 percent
of voters want more year-round schools, which can accommodate more
students. Only 23 percent did not want them.
---
The point of much of the data on the BiggerPicture site is that the sky is not falling in regards to year-round. There's not a teacher shortage at YR schools. There is not a problem recruiting teachers for YR schools. Teachers are satisfied at YR schools based on survey results.
I found some of the data deceptive on your site as well. I'm looking at this:
http://home.nc.rr.com/davidklee/soswake/pdfs/Mandating_Year-round_School_Attendance_in_Wake_County.pdf
Yes, the number of YR schools has been declining or steady nationwide. Most of the YR reversals are in districts without the school capacity problems Wake was and is facing.
Utilities and overhead costs are lower for YR schools on a per-student basis. Of course costs will go up if schools are running 12 months rather than 9-1/2, but you must look at a per-student basis to make the comparison apples-to-apples.
See above for comments about staffing issues.
I do agree with you that there has been no proven academic advantage to YR schools. That said, I would expect overcrowded traditional calendar schools with large class sizes to lose out academically in a comparison to less crowded YR schools with smaller class sizes.
How do we get enough schools built to guarantee everyone a traditional calendar?
The True Bigger Picture
Wed, 11/19/2008 - 11:39 — Big_PictureFrom my vantage point I see 3 groups concerned with the bigger picture, and the self named newcomers are not included.
Louise Lee has always looked at the Big Picture and has tirelessly worked for others. Working alone she has accomplished so much. Her studies and solid reputation amongst all involved parties speak for themselves. Thank you Louise.
Wake Cares looks at the big picture in Wake County, and thanks to their efforts some of the children have choice where they never would have had it before they came onto the scene. Winning the upcoming case will bring more choice for all. Thank you Wake Cares.
One Campus One Calendar aka CCLP looks at the big picture for the Leesville community. They focus on 11 schools in the area, and the impact WCPSS decisions have on all of these schools presently and in the future. If they are successful in keeping the Leesville campus on the traditional calendar, the families in the NW quadrant will rejoice. Thank you CCLP.
Reply from above
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 22:46 — SideburnsOh - I read. Believe me, I read.
Having traditonal calendar application schools "available" and being able to "decide" what is best for your family are two completely different things. You said your family could have "easily applied to Hilburn" to maintain the same calendar. Aren't you lucky you had that choice -- and you would have gotten a seat at Hilburn -- guaranteed -- thanks to WakeCARES. Not true any longer if the lawsuit is won by WCPSS. Force, shove, change, reassign... that's what we all will be facing. I don't understand why you don't feel it is necessary to protect choice in education in Wake County, regardless of which calendar you prefer.
Back to capacity & diversity
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 23:04 — Eric_BThe same can be said for year-round and magnet application schools. No one gets to "decide" to go to those schools either, right? It's a lottery.
Is my daughter being "forced" to go to the "mandatory traditional calendar" LRMS if we didn't get in to Durant Middle year-round this year? I could then say that WCPSS forced the split schedule on my family, right?
It's back to a capacity & diversity argument.
Capacity - if there are limited seats at the school everyone wants to go to, obviously everyone cannot go to that school.
Diversity - must balance F&R numbers, etc... I'm not going to defend this practice because I don't believe the data supports student academic improvement due to "diversity".
I'm all for giving people choice if there really is choice available, i.e., capacity. Plus, I think kids with siblings on other calendars should be given first priority in the traditional/year-round calendar application process.
Modified calendars
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 22:31 — louiselee44Depends how you define "modified" - and I'll have a lot to say on that matter - as Patti knows. This could get veeeerrrrrry interesting! :^)
Zee plot thickens!
Year-round exemption
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 20:13 — louiselee44A couple of things (wish I had time to write more, but can't tonight)--
The 2004 School Calendar Law does exempt "year-round schools" from complying with the August 25 - June 10 start and end dates respectively. If that exemption had not been in the law, believe me, it would not have passed. I know more than anybody how controversial that law is, but there is so much more to its inception and passage than almost anyone knows.
Remember that the law protects the option of a traditional school calendar for the children of NC. Every year that law faces renewed attacks from school board and administrative lobbyists - and they are already gearing up for the 2009 General Assembly session which begins in January. I try not to bring it up much on these blogs, because some people twist the story all around, and I've had all I can take of trying to convince them of the truth.
Just wanted to clarify about the year-round exemption...
*deleted*
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 22:21 — Eric_B*deleted*
Right you are, Louise, and
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 20:18 — AngelaWRight you are, Louise, and it is this law that Patti Head wants to challenge when she mentioned getting Leesville High school on a Modified calendar. right now, LHS cannot be run on a modified calendar.
Trimester
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 20:30 — SideburnsYou are right Angela. WCPSS is unable to create or convert to a modified calendar. However, Patti H. has said she would like to look into a trimester schedule for high schools. It's not YR and it's not modified so it could pass the smell test and become reality. How do we stop the madness?? :>)
Modified calendar for LRHS is a bad idea
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 22:22 — Eric_BI would be the first to argue that modified calendar for LRHS is a bad idea. I don't see the point. It makes 2 tracks line up better, but makes 2 tracks worse. Why would anyone seriously propose this?
I don't know why Eric, ask her.....
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 23:07 — AngelaWWhile it doesn't look like the school board will explore it anytime soon, school board member Patti Head is floating the idea of a modified-calendar high school in North Raleigh.
Head says a nearby modified-calendar high school would provide greater calendar continuity for families who also have kids at year-round elementary and middle schools.
Head said Wake's one modified-calendar high school, Southeast Raleigh High, is too far away for many North Raleigh residents. While's she not proposing a specific school, she said that Leesville Road High School could be a possibility.
I will tell her
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 23:11 — Eric_BI'll be the first one in line to tell her I think that's a bad idea....
I don't think it has a prayer's chance of happening anyway. Modified calendar has few of the benefits of year-round and most of the negatives.
VOTE HER (and the others up
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 20:43 — AngelaWVOTE HER (and the others up for re-election) OUT!
it's a start anyway....
(trimester, what in the world?!!?)
ok looked it up myself
http://www.trimesters.org/TrimesterCalendar.pdf
looks like they still get summers?
Yea Summer!
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 21:09 — SideburnsWell, it is all about having our summers off, isn't it? ;>)
yes, yes it is...(that and
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 21:29 — AngelaWyes, yes it is...(that and that truckload of bon-bons delivered) :p
Not sure, but from all the
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 16:08 — g88ky07Not sure, but from all the LAW Eric seems to know, and all the indside scoop he seems to have, I'd say he's EITHER a boe rep now, related to one or plans to run next year!
Got it!
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 14:59 — RiversideRealistEric - Thank you for clarifying. The info about what Chuck said is NEWS to me.
JSB -- 100% RIGHT ON.
Until and unless WCPSS does away with basing nearly 100% of its decisions on what little demographic box a child fits in, the issues that face the system will NEVER be resolved. There would be NO NEED to FORCE Y/R (for CAPACITY) if they simply allowed ALL families who WANT it to GET IT.
The problem is that capacity never was, is not, and never WILL BE the reason for MYR. The "too-few-poor-families-CHOOSE-Y/R-so-we-need-to-force-it-on-them" is THE ONLY REASON the families in WCPSS are in this mess.
No one will EVER convince me otherwise.
I wish they would choose
Wed, 11/19/2008 - 05:37 — vsheehanI wish they would choose academics as their main concern. The EOG’s might get better if they did. Instead of changing Davis E. into a MYR school the BOE should have looked at what the school was doing and copy it. One thing the BOE could have copied is at Davis if you got 70% right or less on the pre EOG you got tutoring. At most schools you only got help if you got less than 43% correct maybe. At my daughters present school the kids who do not qualify for special Ed but flunk the EOG in Math the only help they get is push in during math class. I hate the Push in model and feel kids do not get as much as they would in a pull out model. WCPSS still does pull out for reading but only if you’re special ed not because you’re getting a 2 in reading.
True?
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 14:52 — SideburnsI heard from a friend who was at the meeting last night that Dulaney said he would recommend all students be put back in their base MYR assignments if WCPSS wins the WakeCARES lawsuit. True? If this happens, not only will WCPSS force YR assignments -- they will force track assignments as well. That, in itself, should be reason enough to fight to maintain choice in WCPSS. It's a shame those that "like" MYR don't see that.
Not force track assignments
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 17:23 — Eric_BYes, Mr. Dulaney did say students would be put back in their base schools if WCPSS wins the lawsuit. The students would then have to apply for traditional calendar application seats that could be approved or denied just as is done for year-round calendar application seats and magnet seats.
(BTW, it was made very clear during the consent form process this year that the traditional opt-out was for a single year only and that no guarantees were being made for subsequent years.)
Nothing was said about track assignments. Right now this is up to the school principals and I haven't heard anything said that would change that.
Yes, he did say that.
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 17:14 — midtownmomBut...I believe he said they "would" rather than "he would recommend."
And one other thing
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 14:49 — JSBinNCEric - I just want to re-iterate what others have said here - it's so nice to be able to discuss both sides of this incredibly complex issue with you. Your writing and thoughts are detailed and thoughtful. THIS is productive!
:)
Thanks
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 15:08 — Eric_BThanks, JSBinNC.
I like talking through this and trying to figure out what's best. There's a lot of smart people who on the blog and out in the community who have a lot of good facts and opnions. I've certainly learned a lot the past several years!
Really, I'm going to be dealing with a split calendar regardless of whether LRMS goes YR or not. I have 6th grader at LRMS and a 2nd grader on YR at Sycamore Creek. If LRMS goes YR I have 4 years of split schedules. If it stays traditional I have 2 years. Either way, I just want my kids to stay at these schools since they are closest to my home. We just have to work out what is best for LRMS.
hear ya
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 15:36 — JSBinNCWe are not Leesville parents - our school was converted though, and today - it's working for us as my kids are both young. (K and 2nd). In time we will face the same challenges as you - our MS is traditional. If they take away that opt out choice - I am not sure what we'll do. We have a new one due in January... ;) so many years of school and scheduling ahead!
For us - it's just about finding ways to incorporate choice with educational opportunity for ALL. Not just the few. I too have learned a lot from the collective wisdom on this board! I firmly believe that if LRMS goes YR that some of the specific "electives" or whatever you call them will go away, or some kids won't be able to take advantage of them because they are only offered on certain tracks. I know that the bigger picture folks say that can happen anywhere - and it can - but it is a "cost" to converting that is sometimes overlooked. Space, space, space - it's all they talk about. School is so much more than just bums in seats.
JSBin NC,
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 21:11 — AngelaWJSBin NC, congrats! and welcome to a life time of dealing with WCPSS
Not the same
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 14:41 — SideburnsHaving to apply to a traditional calendar school if assigned to an MYR base is not the same as it was back in the voluntary year-round days. Voluntary year-round parents applied for YR on the premise of having all siblings on a YR calendar. If they didn't get one, both or all children into a YR school, they could choose to go back to their base assignments which was traditional. Nowadays, base assignments can be MYR and traditional (what I have now) -- elem MYR, middle tradt'l -- and if I don't get accepted into the traditional calendar then I'm faced with 2 different calendars. VYR parents were well aware that they faced a calendar difference when their eldest went into high school and were able to adjust as necessary. Now this calendar split is forced on families -- some will be lucky enough to maintain their family by getting a traditional seat but not all will be so lucky.
I am SO confused.....
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 14:29 — RiversideRealistFrom anything I have EVER read, studied, been presented, found, researched, the traditional OPTION was ONLY made available via Judge Manning's ruling.
I do not EVER recall (prior to the lawsuit) people assigned to MYR being given traditional options -- of ANY kind (per Eric's post, I mean of the kind that is the mirror of Y/R options for folks assigned to TR schools).
Meeting
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 09:23 — SideburnsDid BiggerPicture4Wake make a presentation at the Leesville meeting last night? I am interested in knowing what they had to say. I'm sure many of you out there attended. :>)
A presentation or
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 15:18 — PinkSlipA presentation or infomercial was made but no substance to it. I viewed the website and there is nothing but fluff. I support WCPSS but all I found was an attempt to justify what the powers that be want all to believe.
I was impressed by the brave and courageous teacher from Leesville Elementary School who spoke out. I would like to, but as she said, I fear the pink slip. I cannot lose my job until I find a replacement.
May I do my own myth busting and clarify what was found in the myth busters page of the website. There may only be 1 teacher who has told Ms. Hamler of his/her intentions to leave. But not one teacher I know wants to teach on the year round calendar. Not one. We have to conform to something we did not ask for in order to keep our jobs. We just do not feel as though we can speak publicly like that brave teacher did.
Who was the rude parent that insulted the teacher and claimed that Leesville Elementary School wanted year round? Think again. I know that is a lie. MYR has caused too much strife next door. We do not want or need it at LRMS.
Different opinions
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 15:28 — Eric_BPinkSlip,
So I guess you have nothing to say about the teacher satisfaction survey of over 4,700 teachers showing teachers in year-round schools to be just as satisfied with their jobs as those in tradtional...
Speaking to teachers in my child's team at LRMS, one teacher is pro-YR because she has a child at LES while one is anti-YR. I'm sure opinion is split.
Satisfaction is greatly
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 16:15 — PinkSlipSatisfaction is greatly reduced when you have no choice. We were never asked for our opinions. Our boss was not asked for her opinion. The lack of respect for WCPSS' own employees is atrocious.
I spoke with someone last night after witnessing that parent insult the teacher. The parent lied. She may have personally wanted year round but the staff and parents did not. I was directed to a survey taken of LES staff members before MYR. 71% agreed or strongly agreed that class sizes were reasonable. 84% agreed that they had access to appropriate instruction materials. 84% felt they had a clean and well maintained environment. Need I go on? Sometimes we are willing to endure slight discomfort in order to keep things constant. We are fine with class sizes at LRMS. I was told that LES teachers felt the same before MYR. When given the choice, they preferred crowded classrooms to a conversion. Now they have to deal with both. We do not want this conversion. Stability has been established at LRMS. It should not be taken away in such a thoughtless manner.
"We Liked It Overcrowded"
Tue, 11/18/2008 - 17:08 — Eric_BBTW, at the meeting last night, the LES teacher that spoke made the same comment you just made. You both prefer it overcrowded.
Well, I know many parents at LES did NOT like it overcrowded. They did not like the overcrowded, large class sizes. After all, shouldn't reduced class sizes be a priority? Don't kids learn better in smaller classes, especially in elementary schools?
I don't know any data in this area, but intuitively I would think that smaller classes operated on a year-round calendar would show better results than larger classes operated on a traditional calendar, especially in elementary school!
Oh no no no. You did not
Wed, 11/19/2008 - 08:32 — PinkSlipOh no no no. You did not listen. She did not prefer the school overcrowded. I do not prefer overcrowded. I prefer traditional so that we do not have to face the problems that have been heaped on LES as a result of MYR. I do not think the LES teachers prefer it overcrowded. Like us, they were never asked either. They prefer not to have the hateful division and controversy brought on by the parents who refuse to look into the future. This small group only has concern for here and now. I understand this is the group that has misnamed themselves Bigger Picture. For the most part the members of this group are unknown around the school. They show no consideration for the teachers, but only care about getting what they want. We will be the 'lucky' recipients of these parents soon and do not need their closed minded views.
Believe it or not, we do talk to each other and the LES staff does not like the calendar. They wish desperately to have it switched back to the traditional schedule. A few think it is okay, but do not prefer it. The families who have entered LRMS the past 2 years have been so relieved to be finished with dealing with the disruption brought on by MYR. The few parents in favor of MYR are willing to cram Patti Head's logic down the throat of anyone who will listen. While they are a small group, they get what they want because they give Patti Head what she wants.