Click here: Shooting Case Raises Questions About District's Credibility
Tribune says: "Instead of treating parents' questions with respect, they obfuscate or cavalierly dismiss them. "
I have been using the words "obfuscate" and "cavalier" to describe the HCDS since 1996.
*****************
Shooting Case Raises Questions About District's Credibility
The Tampa Tribune
Published: September 30, 2007
Video: Shooting Raises Questions For Parents
If Hillsborough County public school officials want parents to trust them with their children, they need to be responsive and honest. But in Temple Terrace, where many parents are worried about the safety of the area's high school, straight answers are hard to come by.
And this seems characteristic of a school district that all too often appears obsessed with avoiding blame and minimizing problems.
Consider the town hall meeting inTemple Terrace earlier this month.
School leaders brushed off valid questions about student safety, telling parents the area's schools are merely the victims of bad publicity and misperceptions. The handling of the shooting death of King High School student Dalshon Walton during an after-school fight was particularly revealing.
It has been nearly two years since the shooting, yet it continues to be a flashpoint for parents with safety concerns because the district has been so eager to dismiss this tragic event as irrelevant.
Officials have insisted Walton's death had nothing to do with the school because it occurred just off campus and the shooter wasn't a King student. That remains King Principal Carla Bruning's stance.
But investigators and prosecutors have amassed a voluminous file of documents and testimony that shows otherwise. And district officials who maintain there was no connection between the shooting and the school either are ignoring facts or are in denial.
We dug into the case, which is detailed in thousands of pages of public documents at the Hillsborough County State Attorney's office. We found strong evidence that Walton died as a result of a dispute between King students, which started in the school days earlier over a minor insult and erupted into the brawl at the McDonalds.
Testimony and investigators' reports say Otis Lorenzo Neal, who has since pleaded guilty to second-degree murder, was summoned to the fight by a relative who was a King student involved in that ongoing quarrel.
In disturbing - but uncorroborated - testimony, a female King student said she saw the boy who brought Neal into the fight with a gun at school the same day.
Hillsborough County Sheriff's Deputy Nathaniel Johnson, who is assigned to King, also testified he met with the same boy and his mother earlier that day because she was concerned trouble was brewing. Defying his mother and the deputy, the boy ended up at McDonald's.
The fight clearly was a case of a school dispute spilling onto private property.
Yet when asked why the school has always denied a connection, Bruning said she never knew the facts. Bruning says she was never briefed on the case and she never asked the details.
Sheriff's Major Harold Winsett, who oversees the school resource officer program, says that's not true - Bruning was told by the school deputy the extent to which King students were involved.
Even the school district's head of security, Dave Friedberg, says he has long known the facts of the case and that he and Bruning jointly made improvements in the school in response to those facts.
Friedberg says school officials may have said the shooting was not 'related' or 'connected' to King because incidents not on school property are not considered school-related. But Friedberg says he also understands parents would have a broader interpretation.
'Is it school related? No,' Friedberg said. 'Does it involve us? Yes.'
Friedberg, though, was not the one tasked with responding to the public about this incident. The school officials who did played word games.
Their conduct makes the district look as if it intended to mislead people. This undermines school officials' credibility and takes some shine from what appear to be laudable safety improvements at King.
The school has undergone security upgrades, adding a fence, surveillance equipment and an armed security officer.
The school's annual crime stats show there were just three fights at the school last year, compared to the 58 that occurred in the 2005-06 school year.
Yet school officials didn't come to the Temple Terrace town hall meeting armed with such facts, perhaps because that would have required them to acknowledge violence had been a concern.
Reasonable parents will understand that bad things happen despite educators' best efforts. And there is no evidence the school was in any way negligent in the shooting.
Yet being defensive seems to be school leaders' natural reflex. We've seen it in the way they've dealt with parents who have questioned the elementary math curriculum; in how they've handled parents who objected to abrupt boundary changes and now in how they answer questions about school safety.
Instead of treating parents' questions with respect, they obfuscate or cavalierly dismiss them. At the town hall meeting, a King student who says he was at the fight animatedly talked about running when he heard the shots. Bruning heartily laughed at his account.
But parents take such matters seriously. And when it comes to their children's safety, they want, and deserve, the unvarnished truth.
To see video of a King High School student talk about safety at his school, go to TBO.com. Click on Tampa Tribune and then Opinion."
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Milwaukee Public Schools loses special ed lawsuit - Coming to a District near you soon?
Milwaukee Public Schools loses special ed lawsuit.
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=660882
See below how the judge answered this one: "lawyers hired by the school district had argued that much of the testimony from the parents was not reliable"
Systemic delay in HCDS was addressed a few years ago. The District has, to the last of my knowledge, a written policy that requires initial evaluations to be initiated within 30 days of parent's signed consent and completed within 60 days of same consent.
Unless the parent knows that the signed consent is the only thing that triggers this timeline (possibly a false premise under Section 504), verbal assurances that the issues will be adressed only delay the timeline. Suspending kids whose behavior is dramatically different from his/her peers (usually a sign that it may be a manifestation of their disability) without the District acknowledging or evaluating the kid for a suspected disability certainly saves money.
Suspending kids sets the stage of "First we blame the kid, then we blame the parent". It absolves the District from providing resources needed to address the manifested behaviors. While the parent is repeatedly assured that the District personnel are trained professionals, the District personnel's ignorance of understanding the concept of "special education" is on full display. This is prevalent with site administrators who have no concept of special ed.
What is the cost to saving money?
<<<<<<<<<"The inability of MPS to reach full compliance with the law in the area of Child Find is not the result of numerous isolated and unrelated cases, but stems from systemic inadequacies," Goodstein wrote. MPS said two years ago that it had spent $1.8 million on its defense, some of which it could possibly recoup through insurance. That was before the three-week-long trial in 2006. Spitzer-Resnick said his group has spent more than $1 million, money it hopes MPS and DPI will now be forced to pay. During the 2006 trial in front of Goodstein, lawyers hired by the school district had argued that much of the testimony from the parents was not reliable. But Goodstein cited specific cases presented at the trial where he judged the district had not addressed students' needs appropriately. Spitzer-Resnick said that throughout the legal proceedings: "We've heard 'It's poverty, it's mobility, it's homelessness.' Guess what? Those excuses are not given any credence by the court or by the law." One of the mothers involved in the lawsuit, whose son's story was chronicled in a December 2005 Journal Sentinel article, said she made repeated requests that her son be tested for learning disabilities. Eventually, the boy was 12 years old but still in the third grade at MPS. He was suspended so often that his mother and teachers sometimes lost track of where he was supposed to be. In another case, one girl cut herself at school and once wrote on her desk: "Kill all people. Solve the problem." While she did well on standardized tests, she couldn't seem to pass the sixth grade. The judge noted that school officials suspended the girl and referred her to a new school - but did not evaluate her for special education until prodded to. "The issue of suspension has an effect on the timely identification of children in need of special education," the judge wrote. "It also had an effect on the timeliness of providing services.">>>>>>>>
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=660882
See below how the judge answered this one: "lawyers hired by the school district had argued that much of the testimony from the parents was not reliable"
Systemic delay in HCDS was addressed a few years ago. The District has, to the last of my knowledge, a written policy that requires initial evaluations to be initiated within 30 days of parent's signed consent and completed within 60 days of same consent.
Unless the parent knows that the signed consent is the only thing that triggers this timeline (possibly a false premise under Section 504), verbal assurances that the issues will be adressed only delay the timeline. Suspending kids whose behavior is dramatically different from his/her peers (usually a sign that it may be a manifestation of their disability) without the District acknowledging or evaluating the kid for a suspected disability certainly saves money.
Suspending kids sets the stage of "First we blame the kid, then we blame the parent". It absolves the District from providing resources needed to address the manifested behaviors. While the parent is repeatedly assured that the District personnel are trained professionals, the District personnel's ignorance of understanding the concept of "special education" is on full display. This is prevalent with site administrators who have no concept of special ed.
What is the cost to saving money?
<<<<<<<<<"The inability of MPS to reach full compliance with the law in the area of Child Find is not the result of numerous isolated and unrelated cases, but stems from systemic inadequacies," Goodstein wrote. MPS said two years ago that it had spent $1.8 million on its defense, some of which it could possibly recoup through insurance. That was before the three-week-long trial in 2006. Spitzer-Resnick said his group has spent more than $1 million, money it hopes MPS and DPI will now be forced to pay. During the 2006 trial in front of Goodstein, lawyers hired by the school district had argued that much of the testimony from the parents was not reliable. But Goodstein cited specific cases presented at the trial where he judged the district had not addressed students' needs appropriately. Spitzer-Resnick said that throughout the legal proceedings: "We've heard 'It's poverty, it's mobility, it's homelessness.' Guess what? Those excuses are not given any credence by the court or by the law." One of the mothers involved in the lawsuit, whose son's story was chronicled in a December 2005 Journal Sentinel article, said she made repeated requests that her son be tested for learning disabilities. Eventually, the boy was 12 years old but still in the third grade at MPS. He was suspended so often that his mother and teachers sometimes lost track of where he was supposed to be. In another case, one girl cut herself at school and once wrote on her desk: "Kill all people. Solve the problem." While she did well on standardized tests, she couldn't seem to pass the sixth grade. The judge noted that school officials suspended the girl and referred her to a new school - but did not evaluate her for special education until prodded to. "The issue of suspension has an effect on the timely identification of children in need of special education," the judge wrote. "It also had an effect on the timeliness of providing services.">>>>>>>>
Monday, September 17, 2007
For those who are still interested in the Union and MAP
Click here: Broward Teachers Union negotiates big raises for vets, little for newcomers -- South Florida Sun-Sentinel.com
I have in the past said that school system administrators and union administrators work together for the benefit of the top tier of each
Sometimes my ideas are supported by others.
Comments may be found at this site.
Click here: Florida School Boss: You Break It, You Own It
I have in the past said that school system administrators and union administrators work together for the benefit of the top tier of each
Sometimes my ideas are supported by others.
Comments may be found at this site.
Click here: Florida School Boss: You Break It, You Own It
Saturday, September 15, 2007
"We have known for a long time (decades!) about what constitutes effective staff development. As the latest version of the National Staff Development Council Standards for Staff Development notes, effective staff development has small groups of educators working together over time in professional learning communities; is based on principles of effective adult learning; and
deepens educators’ content knowledge.
Yet what does staff development look like in most school districts? Typically it involves three or four one-shot “sit and get” (or “spray and pray”) sessions spread across the year, each on a different topic than the one before, that are attended by most or all educators in the organization. A “one size fits all” model is used, meaning that there is relatively little differentiation between, say, music teachers and math teachers and industrial arts teachers. Sometimes schools spice it up a bit and have a buffet day where educators can pick from multiple choices throughout the day, much like a professional conference."
deepens educators’ content knowledge.
Yet what does staff development look like in most school districts? Typically it involves three or four one-shot “sit and get” (or “spray and pray”) sessions spread across the year, each on a different topic than the one before, that are attended by most or all educators in the organization. A “one size fits all” model is used, meaning that there is relatively little differentiation between, say, music teachers and math teachers and industrial arts teachers. Sometimes schools spice it up a bit and have a buffet day where educators can pick from multiple choices throughout the day, much like a professional conference."
and from the comment section, I chose this:
"The one area that has frustrated me as a consultant is that there is little to no funding to provide executive coaching services to principals. If a principal needs help, they often can't speak up or they are admitting weakness"
I posted the above to say this:
As those who should know, transition plans (school to post school) can start as early as the age of 14. I was aware that the common practice in HCDS was to wait until the last two years of the student's stay, and that out of these last two years, "work training" was usually no more than half a year per year out of the last two. One could understand the difficulties that arose when I insisted on my son obtaining work experience starting at the age of 15.
While there is so much information that should be provided leading up to the following point, suffice it to say that my son became involved in a "pilot program" in HCDS. He was one of three students in the program. The District paid money for an outside consultant to demonstrate how to set up "school to work" situations for even the most "challanged" students. I thought it was a great program and it provided support and guidance to my son's team.
The program consisted of 3 teams for each of the students. My understanding was that the information and strategies of the "pilot program", once developed, would be shared to others and become integrated within the system. In one of the early meetings one of the teachers of one of the teams said" Why am I here? I have a bunch of student's in my class room that need me - I don't have time for this."
I am sure it baffles the administrators that know how much my son received from HCDS to hear me be critical about the system. My previous post under "A Piece of the Dysfunctional Puzzle" speaks to the difficulty of challanging a mindset as opposed to challanging what is perceived as an isolated incident. An illustration of this may be revealed by a comment another teacher made to me one day. She said to me "it is unfair that your son get's more than the other students in the class."
I recently heard that the "pilot program" and the systems that were in place at the school my son was at the time are no longer there. As far as I can tell, the key players of the program are gone from the school. Some have "moved up the ladder" and some transferred out.
I can only assume that when the next parent comes along that insists on following the rules, another "pilot program" will be invested in.
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
Sacred Cows and Unwritten SP&P's.
There are some things that happen in one’s life that one wants to forget. There are some things that happen in one’s life that one should forget and move on. The recent events revolving around the actions and comments of the HCDS’ Board has jostled my memory about past events that I would like to forget.
Blogging affords me the opportunity to present past events in a manner that gives some substance to why I have done the things I have done. One must read my adjacent blog as well. What those who read about me should understand that my cause is not about me, it is about the ethical people within the system, the parents and the students. I have repeatedly seen good hard working people doing the “right thing” be subverted by a system and the people who carry out the system’s desires.
Many pieces of the dysfunctional puzzle are shaped as unwritten SP&Ps within the realm of Special Education. When one has their finger on the pulse of the District, it is not difficult to recognize these unwritten SP&P’s. One of these unwritten policies was brought out as a finding in the Whitehead vs. HCDS case. The allegation was that the District had an unwritten policy to not write individual speech therapy into an IEP as a related service. My understanding is someone, who apparently did not know this unwritten policy, first wrote individual speech therapy into the IEP. Another IEP was convened soon after that to discuss something else, and when the IEP was updated, the individual speech therapy was removed from the new IEP, without discussion.
"66. Respondent violated the procedural requirements relating to the formulation and implementation of Andrew W.’s IEP by the following actions:
(a) Implementing a policy of omitting from IEPs specific speech/language services that will be provided to an individual, irrespective of the individual’s needs for specific speech/language services. '
One interested in learning the mechanisms of the system should read this case. The ensuing events cost the District a lot of money. Judging by the number of District personnel that were in attendance in the Federal court the day of the decision, one wonders what the toll was to the staff over the many years this case ran. Perhaps some were hardened to the process. The Whiteheads proved in Federal court the ensuing events were deemed to be retaliatory by the District.
Click here: Wrightslaw - The Division of Administrative Hearings
Most of the unwritten SP&P’s appear to revolve around clever ways to save money. Ignorance of the law contributes to them being carried out unwittingly by the one's lower on the chain. I remember seeing countless IEP’s that had signatures of staff who did not attend the IEP meeting. How can that happen unless it is part of the culture? The answer lies in the least expensive method for the system to be in compliance with their paperwork. To be morally and ethically compliant to the law and to student’s needs requires money and resources. The recent finding by the state of the unfulfilled OT/PT services should raise an alarm. However, with lack of sanctions, it is business as usual.
While none of us like to have a past of slamming doors, I can relate to the need to take actions that in hindsight are not the best choice, but something has to happen to stop the injustice. I know in the past I have said things that needed to be said, but it needed to be said to someone other than the person I said it to, and came off wrong.
What should now be coming to light is the hidden cost in saving money. While I will reserve my opinion of those who not only obfuscate the truth but defend the parsing to the hilt, what should be a concern for all of us is the impact it has on the quality of life for the employee’s who know the truth and have to live with the distortion. Keeping it from the parents is relatively easy, Having a chilling control on keeping teacher’s quiet is an issue of itself.
Sacred Cows and Unwritten SP&P’s, no matter how cleverly contrived, have a cost.
Blogging affords me the opportunity to present past events in a manner that gives some substance to why I have done the things I have done. One must read my adjacent blog as well. What those who read about me should understand that my cause is not about me, it is about the ethical people within the system, the parents and the students. I have repeatedly seen good hard working people doing the “right thing” be subverted by a system and the people who carry out the system’s desires.
Many pieces of the dysfunctional puzzle are shaped as unwritten SP&Ps within the realm of Special Education. When one has their finger on the pulse of the District, it is not difficult to recognize these unwritten SP&P’s. One of these unwritten policies was brought out as a finding in the Whitehead vs. HCDS case. The allegation was that the District had an unwritten policy to not write individual speech therapy into an IEP as a related service. My understanding is someone, who apparently did not know this unwritten policy, first wrote individual speech therapy into the IEP. Another IEP was convened soon after that to discuss something else, and when the IEP was updated, the individual speech therapy was removed from the new IEP, without discussion.
"66. Respondent violated the procedural requirements relating to the formulation and implementation of Andrew W.’s IEP by the following actions:
(a) Implementing a policy of omitting from IEPs specific speech/language services that will be provided to an individual, irrespective of the individual’s needs for specific speech/language services. '
One interested in learning the mechanisms of the system should read this case. The ensuing events cost the District a lot of money. Judging by the number of District personnel that were in attendance in the Federal court the day of the decision, one wonders what the toll was to the staff over the many years this case ran. Perhaps some were hardened to the process. The Whiteheads proved in Federal court the ensuing events were deemed to be retaliatory by the District.
Click here: Wrightslaw - The Division of Administrative Hearings
Most of the unwritten SP&P’s appear to revolve around clever ways to save money. Ignorance of the law contributes to them being carried out unwittingly by the one's lower on the chain. I remember seeing countless IEP’s that had signatures of staff who did not attend the IEP meeting. How can that happen unless it is part of the culture? The answer lies in the least expensive method for the system to be in compliance with their paperwork. To be morally and ethically compliant to the law and to student’s needs requires money and resources. The recent finding by the state of the unfulfilled OT/PT services should raise an alarm. However, with lack of sanctions, it is business as usual.
While none of us like to have a past of slamming doors, I can relate to the need to take actions that in hindsight are not the best choice, but something has to happen to stop the injustice. I know in the past I have said things that needed to be said, but it needed to be said to someone other than the person I said it to, and came off wrong.
What should now be coming to light is the hidden cost in saving money. While I will reserve my opinion of those who not only obfuscate the truth but defend the parsing to the hilt, what should be a concern for all of us is the impact it has on the quality of life for the employee’s who know the truth and have to live with the distortion. Keeping it from the parents is relatively easy, Having a chilling control on keeping teacher’s quiet is an issue of itself.
Sacred Cows and Unwritten SP&P’s, no matter how cleverly contrived, have a cost.
Monday, September 10, 2007
Get Out Of My Dreams Get In to My Car
I had this really weird dream the other night. I don’t know what it means, but here is my recount. I dreamed I lived in a rather large subdivision. It was so large that it had a “national recognition“. There were a lot of houses in it. Some were ok looking, and some looked very nice. There were so many houses that not every one knew everybody. Some people were known more than others. The people with the nice houses and the fancy cars seemed to be more widely known.
There was one particular house that was well known. It had a really fancy car. Recently the house had changed ownership, but the car remained with the house. This car was one of those extremely high priced vehicles. No one ever saw it out on the road, but it was parked out front of the house every two weeks, usually on the same day.
A traditional event that the local schools have is fundraisers. The kids have to go around and sell magazine subscriptions. I was with a group of kids and parents not long ago and had the pleasure of going around the neighborhood.
We happened to walk by the big house. The car wasn’t out front, but the kids knew it was there somewhere. There was a brand new elaborate water fountain that had been recently installed. The water splashing down was quite pretty. A woman answered the door bell ring. One of the kids repeated his rehearsed script to ask her if she would buy a magazine. She said something about not being able to because it would set a precedent, and there were too many kids in the neighborhood. The kid with the special way of thinking couldn’t help himself. He blurted out “Where’s the car? We want to see it!”
She told him it was parked in the garage. She obligingly led us to the car and there it was. It certainly was a beautiful model. We noticed there were a lot of pictures and certificates on the wall. This car obviously had some National Recognition too.
One of the dads then asked ‘It sure is a good looking car. How come you never drive it”? The lady explained that it cost a lot of money to maintain the car. Parts were expensive. Labor was expensive. She only ran the engine a couple of hours every two weeks and parked it out for every one to get a glimpse of it. She told us she kept it because it had always been with the house and her friends liked to look at all of the accolades the car has received.
The kids seemed to have overlooked the fact that she did not purchase any subscriptions. As we were leaving, we once again passed the beautiful water fountain. The kid with the special way of thinking blurted out again: “Hey how much did that thing cost”?
The lady said “It cost a little over $16,000.” As we were walking to the next house, the same kid that has a special way of thinking said “Why would she spend money on a water fountain when she can’t afford to drive her car?”
His dad and I both shrugged our shoulders. How do you answer a question like that?
And then the kid just had to ask: “Dad, what does “national recognition” mean if you can’t drive the car?”
I never heard the answer because I woke up and my dream was over.
There was one particular house that was well known. It had a really fancy car. Recently the house had changed ownership, but the car remained with the house. This car was one of those extremely high priced vehicles. No one ever saw it out on the road, but it was parked out front of the house every two weeks, usually on the same day.
A traditional event that the local schools have is fundraisers. The kids have to go around and sell magazine subscriptions. I was with a group of kids and parents not long ago and had the pleasure of going around the neighborhood.
We happened to walk by the big house. The car wasn’t out front, but the kids knew it was there somewhere. There was a brand new elaborate water fountain that had been recently installed. The water splashing down was quite pretty. A woman answered the door bell ring. One of the kids repeated his rehearsed script to ask her if she would buy a magazine. She said something about not being able to because it would set a precedent, and there were too many kids in the neighborhood. The kid with the special way of thinking couldn’t help himself. He blurted out “Where’s the car? We want to see it!”
She told him it was parked in the garage. She obligingly led us to the car and there it was. It certainly was a beautiful model. We noticed there were a lot of pictures and certificates on the wall. This car obviously had some National Recognition too.
One of the dads then asked ‘It sure is a good looking car. How come you never drive it”? The lady explained that it cost a lot of money to maintain the car. Parts were expensive. Labor was expensive. She only ran the engine a couple of hours every two weeks and parked it out for every one to get a glimpse of it. She told us she kept it because it had always been with the house and her friends liked to look at all of the accolades the car has received.
The kids seemed to have overlooked the fact that she did not purchase any subscriptions. As we were leaving, we once again passed the beautiful water fountain. The kid with the special way of thinking blurted out again: “Hey how much did that thing cost”?
The lady said “It cost a little over $16,000.” As we were walking to the next house, the same kid that has a special way of thinking said “Why would she spend money on a water fountain when she can’t afford to drive her car?”
His dad and I both shrugged our shoulders. How do you answer a question like that?
And then the kid just had to ask: “Dad, what does “national recognition” mean if you can’t drive the car?”
I never heard the answer because I woke up and my dream was over.
Saturday, September 8, 2007
Name that Tune - Living in the USA or Suspicious Minds
I will present a hypothetical situation. I am interested in any one's response. At least mull it over for the implications.
There is a parent who owns a business. There are 100's of patrons to this business. It has a good reputation. At the time of my hypothetical situation, the business had been operative right at 20 years.
During this 20 years, there have been countless employee's of the HCDS who have used this business. No problems. In fact, the good reputation is why so many used it.
In the last 16 years, this same parent/business owner has had a child enrolled in the HCDS. There was an older kid than the one below.
It was happenstance that one of the business patrons was also an HCDS employee and was also involved with the second child of the business owner. The relationship was positive both as patron/business owner and HCDS employee/parent. In fact, the relationship between HCDS employee and parent spanned almost 14 years. Relationship started when kid was 4 months old and was extremely positive. HCDS employee was extremely competent in her area.
Due to circumstances that evolved, the relationship between the parent and the HCDS became adversarial. The above mentioned relationship remained the same.
Within a few weeks of an event that "drew a line in the sand" between parent and HCDS, the above mentioned patron of the parent's business (employee of the HCDS) was told by some one in the District to not do business with parent/business owner, as it was a "conflict of interest".
Fast forward. Business has now been operative 32 years. Still has patrons of HCDS. No issues.
Change the hypothectical to a real event. Mull it over. Let me know what you think.
There is a parent who owns a business. There are 100's of patrons to this business. It has a good reputation. At the time of my hypothetical situation, the business had been operative right at 20 years.
During this 20 years, there have been countless employee's of the HCDS who have used this business. No problems. In fact, the good reputation is why so many used it.
In the last 16 years, this same parent/business owner has had a child enrolled in the HCDS. There was an older kid than the one below.
It was happenstance that one of the business patrons was also an HCDS employee and was also involved with the second child of the business owner. The relationship was positive both as patron/business owner and HCDS employee/parent. In fact, the relationship between HCDS employee and parent spanned almost 14 years. Relationship started when kid was 4 months old and was extremely positive. HCDS employee was extremely competent in her area.
Due to circumstances that evolved, the relationship between the parent and the HCDS became adversarial. The above mentioned relationship remained the same.
Within a few weeks of an event that "drew a line in the sand" between parent and HCDS, the above mentioned patron of the parent's business (employee of the HCDS) was told by some one in the District to not do business with parent/business owner, as it was a "conflict of interest".
Fast forward. Business has now been operative 32 years. Still has patrons of HCDS. No issues.
Change the hypothectical to a real event. Mull it over. Let me know what you think.
A Piece of the Dysfunctional Puzzle
It is very difficult to succinctly explain 15 years in a few sentences. But I can use the contents of a document I have to illustrate one of the many issues I faced.
At one point in time, an issue concerning my son's report card occurred. My issue was not about the grades. I could have cared less. How does one objectively grade a kid who is deaf, visually impaired and had other challenges that needed to be met. Grades were insignificant compared with needing to be taught adequate behaviors and how to function in his world. My issue was about what was not being done for my son that the IEP called for. I can only assume that the below interaction was just one more indicator of someone who should have known, did not understand my issues, and unfortunately passed it off as a shallow request from "a parent who wants his kid to get a better grade".
Preceding this action below, I had written a letter to the Area Director outlining my concerns. I received a response with a copy of my son's report card with red marker drawn through a couple of the grades and a higher grade written with same marker.
This did not address the issues, it simply added another dynamic. I subsequently found out that the grades had not been changed at the school. Again, the issue was not about the grades, but now, not only was I once again brushed off, I had just one more concern about getting false information, which I was accustom to. A short while later, I came upon another document.
I have in my possession a copy of a Student Withdrawal Form. I will withhold the date and the names used because I do not need the hassle of any type of litigation. I am writing about it now in hopes more people will understand how I got to where I am with this blog, and my adjacent blog.
I have always assumed that this document was to have never been seen by me, but I have it.
Along with the identifying data, it contains the Subjects and the original grades. Two of the original grades were "D"s. They have been slashed through and have "C" written next to them.
At the very bottom of the form is the following written by a teacher about an Area Director. It states:
" * These grades have been changed as per (name withheld)'s request although I feel it is unethical to do so. I have changed them solely to avoid any charges of insubordination".
Once again, this is one "small piece" of the dynamics I faced for many years.
This has been years ago, but another interesting find was the last time I checked the "J" screen, according to the "J" screen he wasn't even enrolled in HCDS during the time these events occurred, which was a little over three months. Must have just been an entry mistake. Or, maybe it was to lessen the chance his records would be found by an outside auditor.
At one point in time, an issue concerning my son's report card occurred. My issue was not about the grades. I could have cared less. How does one objectively grade a kid who is deaf, visually impaired and had other challenges that needed to be met. Grades were insignificant compared with needing to be taught adequate behaviors and how to function in his world. My issue was about what was not being done for my son that the IEP called for. I can only assume that the below interaction was just one more indicator of someone who should have known, did not understand my issues, and unfortunately passed it off as a shallow request from "a parent who wants his kid to get a better grade".
Preceding this action below, I had written a letter to the Area Director outlining my concerns. I received a response with a copy of my son's report card with red marker drawn through a couple of the grades and a higher grade written with same marker.
This did not address the issues, it simply added another dynamic. I subsequently found out that the grades had not been changed at the school. Again, the issue was not about the grades, but now, not only was I once again brushed off, I had just one more concern about getting false information, which I was accustom to. A short while later, I came upon another document.
I have in my possession a copy of a Student Withdrawal Form. I will withhold the date and the names used because I do not need the hassle of any type of litigation. I am writing about it now in hopes more people will understand how I got to where I am with this blog, and my adjacent blog.
I have always assumed that this document was to have never been seen by me, but I have it.
Along with the identifying data, it contains the Subjects and the original grades. Two of the original grades were "D"s. They have been slashed through and have "C" written next to them.
At the very bottom of the form is the following written by a teacher about an Area Director. It states:
" * These grades have been changed as per (name withheld)'s request although I feel it is unethical to do so. I have changed them solely to avoid any charges of insubordination".
Once again, this is one "small piece" of the dynamics I faced for many years.
This has been years ago, but another interesting find was the last time I checked the "J" screen, according to the "J" screen he wasn't even enrolled in HCDS during the time these events occurred, which was a little over three months. Must have just been an entry mistake. Or, maybe it was to lessen the chance his records would be found by an outside auditor.
Looking Back On The Memories
As one who tries to be introspective regarding my outlook on many aspects of my life, there have been many times I have been accused by those who know me that I over analyze issues.
Having grown up in a very rural part of Hillsborough County, I have had the benefit of knowing many people who have been employed in the local school system over the last 50 years. Some of them were my school mates. Many of the ones who have risen to the highest ranks possible were teachers at the high school I attended. Some of them I knew, some of them I did not. I probably would have never recognized the significant number of how many future administrators were directly tied to that particular school had it not been for particular circumstances in my life that afforded me that information.
I fondly remember my days as a student. I believe I can still name all of my first 8 elementary school teachers and one of my principals. I remember the challenge through the years of trying to get the highest score on the tests. My rivals were a couple of girls. In the third grade, a boy from out of state moved in to our area, at which point I had a male rival.
My high school years were memorable. My attendance record for my 12 years in school was excellent and was close to perfect one year. Despite my relative lower economic status and family dynamics, I was able to participate in several extra curricular activities. I was involved in both academics and sports. I played baseball (12-0 in our conference in my senior year), 1st chair trumpet player and played bass clef sousaphone, was undefeated in 1st chair chess club, drum major and school mascot, 99 percentile in aptitude assessment, a two year member of NHS and was voted “most likely to succeed”.
One of my memorable days was a Saturday in which I played sousaphone in a Concert Contest at Chamberlain in the morning, played a baseball game at Turkey Creek in the mid day (knocked in the winning run either in the last inning or may have been an extra inning), and then went to Sarasota to fulfill my Drum Major duties in a night parade.
I say all of this because one would think that I would be an ambassador for the school system that did so much for me. I held the teaching profession and school administrators in high regard for many years when my kids entered the system. There was a period of about 10 years that I continued to see the professional behavior and mutual respect between parent and school personnel. In 1990, circumstances started to change.
Along with the continued professionalism by many, it took six years of repeated incidents that demonstrated to me that there were a few people who I had to deal with, regardless of which school my son was in that could not be trusted. Along with them, there unfortunately were different key people in three of the 4 sites that repeatedly demonstrated actions and words that were repeatedly shown to be disingenuous.
Despite my many efforts to collaboratively and honestly communicate, these efforts were not reciprocated. On December 16th, 2006, this group of which I was a part of hit rock bottom. The rest, as they say, is history.
As with any profession, I recognize there are levels of experience and capabilities. I had the expectation that if I voiced my concerns and demonstrated repeatedly what was happening that there would be attention paid to what I was complaining about. Instead, the focus was on me being a malcontent, troublemaker and naysayer.
Having grown up in a very rural part of Hillsborough County, I have had the benefit of knowing many people who have been employed in the local school system over the last 50 years. Some of them were my school mates. Many of the ones who have risen to the highest ranks possible were teachers at the high school I attended. Some of them I knew, some of them I did not. I probably would have never recognized the significant number of how many future administrators were directly tied to that particular school had it not been for particular circumstances in my life that afforded me that information.
I fondly remember my days as a student. I believe I can still name all of my first 8 elementary school teachers and one of my principals. I remember the challenge through the years of trying to get the highest score on the tests. My rivals were a couple of girls. In the third grade, a boy from out of state moved in to our area, at which point I had a male rival.
My high school years were memorable. My attendance record for my 12 years in school was excellent and was close to perfect one year. Despite my relative lower economic status and family dynamics, I was able to participate in several extra curricular activities. I was involved in both academics and sports. I played baseball (12-0 in our conference in my senior year), 1st chair trumpet player and played bass clef sousaphone, was undefeated in 1st chair chess club, drum major and school mascot, 99 percentile in aptitude assessment, a two year member of NHS and was voted “most likely to succeed”.
One of my memorable days was a Saturday in which I played sousaphone in a Concert Contest at Chamberlain in the morning, played a baseball game at Turkey Creek in the mid day (knocked in the winning run either in the last inning or may have been an extra inning), and then went to Sarasota to fulfill my Drum Major duties in a night parade.
I say all of this because one would think that I would be an ambassador for the school system that did so much for me. I held the teaching profession and school administrators in high regard for many years when my kids entered the system. There was a period of about 10 years that I continued to see the professional behavior and mutual respect between parent and school personnel. In 1990, circumstances started to change.
Along with the continued professionalism by many, it took six years of repeated incidents that demonstrated to me that there were a few people who I had to deal with, regardless of which school my son was in that could not be trusted. Along with them, there unfortunately were different key people in three of the 4 sites that repeatedly demonstrated actions and words that were repeatedly shown to be disingenuous.
Despite my many efforts to collaboratively and honestly communicate, these efforts were not reciprocated. On December 16th, 2006, this group of which I was a part of hit rock bottom. The rest, as they say, is history.
As with any profession, I recognize there are levels of experience and capabilities. I had the expectation that if I voiced my concerns and demonstrated repeatedly what was happening that there would be attention paid to what I was complaining about. Instead, the focus was on me being a malcontent, troublemaker and naysayer.
Friday, September 7, 2007
Who is Robert? Where did he Rule?
I have learned not to question coincidence. I knew there was a HCPS workshop on cable last night, but never intended to watch it. Somehow, just before the discussion about the Merit Pay debacle, I passed through the channel, saw a familiar face and decided to watch for a minute. I was shocked that there was actual "Board discussion". I so wish I had seen the beginning. I was not at the TV that records. I was so mesmerized at the dialog it took a few minutes to decide to record it.
While there is much to be said about the Merit Pay debacle, I was more intrigued with the discussion about the Parliamentary issues the Board grappled with. I have had the experience of being on a District Council Board. After the first meeting, I immediately bought a book - "Robert's Rules of Order". I had no clue what they were, but I quickly realized there was one member in the group who knew them, and he wielded a lot of influence through the use of the "rules". I started reading the book, and kept it with me for the two or less years I was involved.
Which brings me to last night. This is the second recent revelation I have had about the "non-knowledge" (ignorance always sounds so negative despite the proper use) of the Board as a group to either independently know or collaboratively use "the rules of the game". From my Little League coaching days, I would much rather play a team whose coach knew the rules. Otherwise, I always looked like a jerk having to protest this, challenge that, show the rule book to everybody, and interrupt the flow of the game to try to maintain the integrity of the game.
I was quite surprised that the School Board attorney offered that there already is a template used by other counties that the Board could analyse and adopt to fit their needs to better address issues of getting and receiving information. My surprise was not about the attorney, my surprise was the fact that our Board did not have these procedures in place.
We continuously hear from the Board and the Superintendent the accolades of HCPS. Yet there is obviously issues at hand that have not been dealt with in an open and honest manner. The use of the word "disconnect" and insinuations that some Board members "didn't get it" is more a denigrating commentary about the Board as a whole than the member it was directed at.
We now seem to be on a track that hopefully will lead to more sound direction. But one must ask the question - how can a system that proclaims to be so advanced be so far behind in best practices.
While there is much to be said about the Merit Pay debacle, I was more intrigued with the discussion about the Parliamentary issues the Board grappled with. I have had the experience of being on a District Council Board. After the first meeting, I immediately bought a book - "Robert's Rules of Order". I had no clue what they were, but I quickly realized there was one member in the group who knew them, and he wielded a lot of influence through the use of the "rules". I started reading the book, and kept it with me for the two or less years I was involved.
Which brings me to last night. This is the second recent revelation I have had about the "non-knowledge" (ignorance always sounds so negative despite the proper use) of the Board as a group to either independently know or collaboratively use "the rules of the game". From my Little League coaching days, I would much rather play a team whose coach knew the rules. Otherwise, I always looked like a jerk having to protest this, challenge that, show the rule book to everybody, and interrupt the flow of the game to try to maintain the integrity of the game.
I was quite surprised that the School Board attorney offered that there already is a template used by other counties that the Board could analyse and adopt to fit their needs to better address issues of getting and receiving information. My surprise was not about the attorney, my surprise was the fact that our Board did not have these procedures in place.
We continuously hear from the Board and the Superintendent the accolades of HCPS. Yet there is obviously issues at hand that have not been dealt with in an open and honest manner. The use of the word "disconnect" and insinuations that some Board members "didn't get it" is more a denigrating commentary about the Board as a whole than the member it was directed at.
We now seem to be on a track that hopefully will lead to more sound direction. But one must ask the question - how can a system that proclaims to be so advanced be so far behind in best practices.
Saturday, September 1, 2007
You can't make this stuff up
Copied from "the gradebook"
http://blogs.tampabay.com/schools/2007/08/who-got-merit-p.html?cid=81351013#comment-81351013
"Did all of the Adminitrator's and ex-administrators including Board and ex-Board member's kin folk get the merit pay?
Speaking of that - wouldn't it be great to see the family trees growing in the District. Along with a statistic of the average salary of a "tree member" compared to average person in same position and tenure?
A few recognizable names: Alonso,Barrington,Bookman,Cimino(2),Davis(alot, but any connected to Jack?),Franklin,Greco,Hildebrand(2), Ippolito,Kinsey(2)Lamb(2),Lennard(2),McClellan,Otero(2),Strickland(2).
Posted by: Jim August 31, 2007 at 07:14 PM
looks like this guy picked up on names of present or ex administrators, Board members and Division Directors.
How does one go about doing a genealogy study, ferreting out those who have married into other names, etc. What a study that would be.
http://blogs.tampabay.com/schools/2007/08/who-got-merit-p.html?cid=81351013#comment-81351013
"Did all of the Adminitrator's and ex-administrators including Board and ex-Board member's kin folk get the merit pay?
Speaking of that - wouldn't it be great to see the family trees growing in the District. Along with a statistic of the average salary of a "tree member" compared to average person in same position and tenure?
A few recognizable names: Alonso,Barrington,Bookman,Cimino(2),Davis(alot, but any connected to Jack?),Franklin,Greco,Hildebrand(2), Ippolito,Kinsey(2)Lamb(2),Lennard(2),McClellan,Otero(2),Strickland(2).
Posted by: Jim August 31, 2007 at 07:14 PM
looks like this guy picked up on names of present or ex administrators, Board members and Division Directors.
How does one go about doing a genealogy study, ferreting out those who have married into other names, etc. What a study that would be.
Thankfully someone has the fortitude to enforce freedom of speech.
This has been copied from http://soundoffandbeheard.blogspot.com/2007/08/superintendents-evaluation.html
It appears that virgin cynic is a teacher that has been blocked from reaching a School Board member's blog.
Modern technology will change the playing field for those who derive their power by controlling the flow of information.
"virgin cynic said...
While I am able to read your postings, my ability to read or leave a comments is BLOCKED! This is a recent change.I tried today, Friday, during my lunch period.Not sure I like that Ms. Griffin but I am willing to listen to why this may have been changed.
August 31, 2007 9:00 PM
April Griffin said...
Virgin Cynic,I had my site unblocked by the IT department a while back and was told it had been taken care of. I told them this site was a tool to interact with my constituents, including staff. Staff should be able to communicate with a school board member without any roadblocks. Blocking it is hampering my ability to do the job I was elected to do and I will take care of this problem.Thanks for the heads-up, April
September 1, 2007 9:23 AM
It appears that virgin cynic is a teacher that has been blocked from reaching a School Board member's blog.
Modern technology will change the playing field for those who derive their power by controlling the flow of information.
"virgin cynic said...
While I am able to read your postings, my ability to read or leave a comments is BLOCKED! This is a recent change.I tried today, Friday, during my lunch period.Not sure I like that Ms. Griffin but I am willing to listen to why this may have been changed.
August 31, 2007 9:00 PM
April Griffin said...
Virgin Cynic,I had my site unblocked by the IT department a while back and was told it had been taken care of. I told them this site was a tool to interact with my constituents, including staff. Staff should be able to communicate with a school board member without any roadblocks. Blocking it is hampering my ability to do the job I was elected to do and I will take care of this problem.Thanks for the heads-up, April
September 1, 2007 9:23 AM
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
