[ProgressiveEd] Meetings with Klein, Pt. II

Thu, 08 May 2003 12:30:34 -0400

Hi Donna and List-folks--
I think the selection of the parent coordinator is a potentially 
complicated deal.  When you say parents should choose, how would that 
work??  I think that for some of the PENNY schools, becasue the Director or 
Principal is so connected with the parents, it would also work to have the 
Director or Principal have the final authority to choose.  What I think is 
a minimum standard on this is that parents must be involved in a meaningful 
way in the selection process.  (What does meaningful really mean, I don't 
actually know....).
I know I've missed a couple of PENNY meetings, so I apologize in advance if 
this is ground that has already been covered.
-Jane
--On Thursday, May 08, 2003 11:01 AM -0400 Donna Nevel 
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> Sounds like some important issues will be raised at the meeting.. I
> wasn't at the meeting last night and was wondering why we aren't raising
> the issue about the importance of parent coordinators being selected by
> parents (which is what parent activists are fighting for), which seems so
> connected to all the other issues and is one where PENNY's voice (as a
> body that has parents as well as administrators and teachers) could be
> particularly valuable. My understanding of schools affiliated with PENNY
> is that the principle of having parents select their own representatives
> would not only be compatible with, but would further the goals of those
> schools. Donna Nevel
>
>> From: "Massey Sidney H (04M155)"
>> To:
>> Subject: [ProgressiveEd] Meetings with Klein, Pt. II
>> Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 10:14:42 -0400
>>
>> Dear One & All
>>
>> The PENNY delegation is all set for Friday's 2nd meeting with Chancellor
>> Klein. The original 10 folks are back for a 2nd try and the team has an
>> added4 members to ensure representation from schools that are currently
>> considered "programs" or "academies". Members of the group met last
>> evening at Anne (thanx 4 the hospitality) Weiner's home to prepare for
>> the meeting. The following will update you as to our agenda and approach
>> towards these ongoing discussions.
>>
>> We plan to frame the discussion as a continuation of the previous one,
>> stating that we're here to follow-up on his request that we share our
>> reaction to what's going on and how it's affecting our schools. We will
>> stress the immediacy of the situation, i.e. that decisions and actions
>> are being taken that undermine our ability to continue to provide the
>> successful instructional programs and school communities that we do.
>> Actions such as forced ordering of text books or inappropriate classroom
>> libraries, the cavalier assignment of DO staff into our schools, hiring
>> and placement of coaches without school imput. threaten our existence as
>> schools of choice and require a timely response. We will ask for his
>> reaction to the following items and request a written response within a
>> week to 10 day period.
>>
>> * School status: Jane Andrias and Donna Brewster will outline what makes
>> a school and then ask for the specific procedures the Department of
>> Education is using. We'll argue that we want equity; schools that meet
>> specific criteria that qualify them to be a school should be made
>> schools. We intend to leave with a commitment that the DOE recognize our
>> schools as schools at once.  * ⤢Networks: Louisa Acosta-Cruz and
>> Michelle Harring will present the need for the creation of like-minded
>> networks supported by like-minded instructional superintendents, and
>> coaches. Here we'll argue that our schools are very different from other
>> schools in important ways. We need to be in our own networks so we can
>> share staff development and developers, for instance.  * Choice. Benita
>> Miller, Steve Siegelbaum, and Judy Garnar-Wortzel will lead off on this
>> point which includes family, student and staff choice. Parents need to
>> continue to choose the schools their children will attend. The
>> homoginization of our schools, de facto, destroys parent access to
>> schools of choice. We'll present the intake procedure in one of our
>> schools illustrating that they are designed to increase diversity in our
>> schools. We will point out that in fact our school are filled with
>> students whose families have selected our schools, that they have been
>> exercising their right to leave unsatisfactory schools in search of a
>> better choice long before federal NCLB legislation.  * Longitudinal
>> Assessment study: A fourth point addresses the way we measure students'
>> growth and progress.  At our first meeting with Mr. Klein and Ms.
>> Cahill, Mr. Klein suggested alongitudinal study. We want to propose an
>> in-depth study that would bring together a group of middle schools to
>> look at ways we can measure student  learning. We want to propose that
>> we continue to work with Mr. Klein and others from the Department of
>> Education to develop a longitudinal study and to look at other forms of
>> assessment.
>>
>> GO TEAM GO! YOU HAVE OUR SUPPORT!
>>
>> Sid Massey
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ProgressiveEd mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://www.altschools.org/mailman/listinfo/progressiveed
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN
> 8._______________________________________________ ProgressiveEd mailing
> list [email protected]
> http://www.altschools.org/mailman/listinfo/progressiveed