| Author |
Message |
    
Phenixrising
Citizen
Username: Phenixrising
Post Number: 501
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Friday, March 18, 2005 - 12:51 pm: | 
|
ffof
You said you opened with "the thought that communication is a good thing". I would never guess that reading your statements above. |
ffof
Citizen
Username: Ffof
Post Number: 3473
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, March 18, 2005 - 12:54 pm: |
|
ffof quotes from this thread:
4:52pm March 16 "Thanks for posting this David Frazer. This sounds more reasonable."
12:16pm March 18 "First - I too think that the willingness to work out the levelling problems from both sides (students versus admin) is a step toward better communication and education. Win-win."
I guess you don't read all these posts thoroughly. Too busy screaming in bold-face. |
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 7949
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, March 18, 2005 - 12:59 pm: |
|
While I agree that there are a lot of problems in our schools concerning equitable leveling and a lack of communication between races, both among the students and between students, parents and teachers, I don't think this should be reduced to all blacks or all whites. Traditionally a fair number of African American students do very well in our schools. Others don't. Is it lack of effort on their part? Lack of skilled "parent advocates? Or is it a perception that no matter how hard they try they will not get ahead?
I am also very curious about the timing of all of this. Their is a BOE election coming up, a rather extensive lawsuit was just filed and the principal is coming up for tenure. Is this coincidence? Somehow I have my doubts. I hope the students in the MLK Club aren't being used as pawns in a larger political battle.
|
Sarah Macyshyn
Citizen
Username: Sarahzm
Post Number: 3
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Friday, March 18, 2005 - 1:20 pm: |
|
Sorry, I don't have more details - My daughter tells me a lot, but when I push for more it doesnt work.
Actually, this is not in any way an "ordeal" for my daughter, and despite all the hulabaloo, and all the perceived problems, my daughter's experiences at Columbia have been wonderful. In addition to the dedicated teachers, the varied curriculum and the incredible extra-curriculars, she has learned here, in a way that she would never have elsewhere, to be color blind. She has been exposed to challenges and situations that have broadened her mind and helped her grow. Her friends come from across the color spectrum. Some are affluent, and some come from working class families. What they have in common is that they are hard working kids whose families understand the importance of education.
Like many teenagers, she has an acute sense of social justice and becomes incensed at the hint of racial or social inequity.
She feels there is racism in the enforcement of the ID requirement, that it is easier for white kids to get away without IDs than it is for blacks.
She has had teachers tell her that there are minority kids in level 3 who should be in level 4 or 5.
On the other hand, she has also been in unleveled classes in middle school and high school and feels that on average, there is a very real difference in behavior in kids in the level 2 and 3 classes. She once said that some of the kids in lower levels are really smart and if they would only pay attention and do some work they could do a lot better.
She has also been told that being smart is a "White Thing" and that there is no way she can relate to the black experience because she has never been enslaved. |
Phenixrising
Citizen
Username: Phenixrising
Post Number: 503
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Friday, March 18, 2005 - 1:21 pm: |
|
I do read these threads thoroughly. It's the the aftermath of your replies.
March 18, 6:34 am
"I know what Sarah is talking about. One of mine at the assembly said that there were some MLK representatives that were basicly saying "get whitey". This makes him very upset - he's gone to MSO schools his whole life. Makes friends with everyone. Swallows all the "diversity" and "acceptance of all" philosophy. Minds his own business. Follows the rules. And then is told that he is the problem by a bunch of MLK kids.
March 18, 2005 - 12:16 pm:
First - I too think that the willingness to work out the levelling problems from both sides (students versus admin) is a step toward better communication and education. Win-win.
But, Excuse me blyntonj-It is the MLK club who is doing the lumping of all blacks into one category. They are doing it to themselves. And it is not an all black experience (the "stuck in a level" thing). Plus, there are many very high achieving black students at CHS. While I'm sure they are empathetic to anyone who has been caught in a leveling problem, do you think that the MLK club speaks for them to?
How sincere are you?
In labeling my words in "bold face" I'm making my point to you and to you alone. |
apm
Citizen
Username: Apm
Post Number: 239
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, March 18, 2005 - 1:25 pm: |
|
My step-daughter said the same thing about the ID requirements. The security guards never bother the white kids only the black kids and all of the security guards she knows are black. |
bklyntonj
Citizen
Username: Bklyntonj
Post Number: 332
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Friday, March 18, 2005 - 1:58 pm: |
|
Ffof, I'm surprised at you. Misreading posts?
No where did I write or insinuate reverse racism. If anything you could have gotten MLKA's actions were stereotypical or prejudice but not reverse racism.
I admire all of you, as well as everyone else who's involved in this at the BOE and CHS for at least being involved in dialogue. Its a great start.
Believe me, as you, Sarah, Phenixrising and anyone else posts on this thread, the ones that need to be involved in this dialogue are AWOL. |
ffof
Citizen
Username: Ffof
Post Number: 3478
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, March 18, 2005 - 8:02 pm: |
|
bklntonj- Of course that's what I should have written, stereotypical or prejudice. Mea culpa. |
John Davenport
Citizen
Username: Jjd
Post Number: 467
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 19, 2005 - 1:35 pm: |
|
I have three points to make.
(1) First, I'd like to praise the MLK club for
"asking all students in support of this initiative to honor the dress code, which is similar to that of what you would wear on a job interview." In my judgment, this would do a lot to improve the atmosphere of academic rigor and seriousness at the high school. Over time, it might help change attitudes towards study and the value of academic achievement that would help more students of all races move into higher-level classes.
(2) Progressive candidates for the school board will support this crucial initiative, I think. But the current incumbents up for re-election on the Board will certainly not. Moreover, they will vote to reappoint Peter Horoschak, and will support him when he gives tenure to Ms. Pollack. Everyone who sympathizes with what the MLK society is trying to achieve (which includes me), should think seriously about this before they assume that a vote for Jasey and Miller is a vote for the MLK goals of improving academic achievement for minority students. That improvement begins with a more rigorous curriculum in elementary schools, which Jasey and Miller have rejected. If you agree with the MLK goals, you should NOT vote to re-elect the incumbents.
(3) The MLK society should make clearer what kind of 'de-leveling' it has in mind. When 6th grade language arts was de-leveld, despite my urging, the Board of Education did not require that the new class (combining former levels 3 & 4) all be held to the same rigorous standards of the former level 4 class. This is what I call FIXED RIGOR de-levelling: all students are expected to perform up to the prior highest level criteria, and are graded accordingly. But without this principle, de-levelling can simply mean watering down the academic rigor of the class for everyone: everyone get the level 3 curriculum, with level-3 grading measures etc. Then de-leveling entirely fails to achieve its purpose. Student previously stuck in level 3 without adequate opportunity to move up are STILL stuck. Student previously challenged in level 4 are no longer challenged -- and thus become bored, alienated, likely to act out -- or their parents simply remove them to private schools. Then the result is a less racially diverse school with more students getting essentially level 3 education with a nicer label.
Thus I call on the Martin Luther King Association publically to declare support for FIXED-RIGOR de-levelling only.
(3) |
Brian O'Leary
Citizen
Username: Brianoleary
Post Number: 2605
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, March 19, 2005 - 7:18 pm: |
|
Leaders of the MLKA asked that students who supported their requests dress on Wednesday. I don't know that they are looking to create an every-day dress code.
I'm not sure how John comes to the conclusion that our elementary curriculum is not rigorous. The NJASK results, disaggregated by race, show our white students outperform the DFG in both language arts and math. Our black students do not. It's easy (and misleading) to assume that the underachieving population is poor or otherwise disadvantaged and therefore hurt by our "less rigorous" curriculum. If that's the case, then, why does the relative performance of black students improve through high school?
People should vote (or not vote) for candidates based on good data. While John is passionate in his criticism of Mark, the reality is that Mark has been on the Board since June, a period during which we have not voted on any elementary curriculum resolutions. Personally, I have a hard time imagining that a guy who sends his oldest to Harvard is somehow light on rigor, but at least give him a chance to vote before claiming otherwise.
On the sixth-grade transition, I have to ask: do you have any data that suggests we watered down the curriculum this year? You know that I voted against that proposal, but I have to say that I've heard substantially positive things from parents about both expectation and engagement this year. That the language wasn't adopted by the Board is not synonymous with a lack of rigor.
By the way, I think there should be a limit on the number of times John posts the same thing. Let's start with something reasonable, like one. This particular version is already at three. I am answering only with this one version. |
Brian O'Leary
Citizen
Username: Brianoleary
Post Number: 2606
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, March 19, 2005 - 7:22 pm: |
|
And to Tucker's question - I attended a meeting on Monday and the two assemblies on Wednesday. With the students involved in the Monday meeting, I said that I would be more than willing to schedule meetings with additional members of the Board. I also explained that meetings of more than four members would have to take place with prior notice in a public setting. In a recent letter, we were asked to schedule a couple of community forum-style meetings, something I am sure the Board will be happy to do. |
Reflective
Citizen
Username: Reflective
Post Number: 837
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, March 19, 2005 - 7:35 pm: |
|
Brian:
You are back - must be election time - just kidding.
1) It's Dave and Jamie's site - they set the rules, not us, feel free to make suggestions.
2) Meetings with more than 4 members need a) prior notice and b) in a public setting. Sounds like the MLK group want to change NJ Open Meeting law rules. More likely they are grandstanding with their demand, knowing that you look nonresponsive because you can barely meet their timeframe demand.
Last, I do want to know why you and the superintendent are so quickly responsive to this group and why you didn't and still haven't addressed the religious music ban. And I guarandamndee you that issue has upset many more residents then this internal school issue has.
But this issue is developing legs as we MOL posters are want to say. (forget journalists) |
Brian O'Leary
Citizen
Username: Brianoleary
Post Number: 2607
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, March 19, 2005 - 8:27 pm: |
|
My suggestion is .. one time is adequate.
In the meetings I have attended, no one made any suggestions that we ignore OPMA. I just explained what is required by law.
|
Tully Mars
Citizen
Username: Tullymars
Post Number: 4
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Saturday, March 19, 2005 - 8:50 pm: |
|
I posted this in the other thread as well... excuse the repeat.
I am reading this with interest. When I went to Columbia, I have to say that there may have been a divide, but I didn't notice it. Ignornace or simple case of not seeing it as a teen? Perhaps.
My question is this: everyone is really railing on eachother about the language used at the forum, but aside from Mr. Frazier and Mr. O'Leary, was anyone else there? If so, great; if not, remember that there are at least 3 sides to every story: the two participants and then somewhere lost in the middle is the truth. Just some food for thought. |
John Davenport
Citizen
Username: Jjd
Post Number: 470
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 1:24 am: |
|
I rarely do this, if ever. But there are three threads Brian. The language arts curriculum review "action plan" has passed the Board without substantial objection from Mark or Mila this past fall. I did give them both a chance to comment on an extensively researched letter on the problems with our elementary reading curriculum. More tomorrow... |
nan
Citizen
Username: Nan
Post Number: 1905
Registered: 2-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 7:49 am: |
|
John,
From what I've seen there was not a lot of guff from anyone, including your candidates from last year’s BOE elections, over the language action plan. It's got plenty of phonics, and even "scope and sequence" in it to make everyone happy. As you recall, at the 12/20 BOE meeting, Lynn Crawford, praised the Fountas and Pinnell program the district is piloting at Jefferson. And, I’m sure she is happy that they put in that Louisa Moats, Language!! program in for special ed students. Finally, lets not forget Marilyn Davenport fawning over DIEBLES.!
What's the extensive research you will cite, John? Will it be more of the usual ACE propaganda you are always relentlessly shoving down everyone's throat? Will it be the findings from the "objective review" done by three direct instruction advocates, one of which is actually a violence prevention expert who moonlights as an authority on children's reading instruction for the Bush administration?
Or will it be the same extensive research that provides you with the ability to fabricate definitions from the NJ Core Standards to fit your latest ploy to get scripted reading programs into our school? |
Concerned07040
Citizen
Username: Concerned07040
Post Number: 40
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 8:20 am: |
|
I thought this thread was about the current situation at CHS....not another drift into the LA curriculum?
It seems no matter what is discussed on the Education forum, it gets back to the same people posting about Language Arts. Let's focus on something else!
Concerned07040 |
Nathan Winkler
Citizen
Username: Nathanwinkler
Post Number: 3
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 12:00 pm: |
|
I am the student who raised the importance of hard work and showing up on time at the MLKA assembly.
I did not and would never use the phrase "you people". The meeting was video taped and as soon as the TV studio makes the tape available I will be able to prove this.
I did use the word "you" implying that I am separate from the students I was talking to, specifically the leadership of the MLKA who sponsored the assembly. This is because I would never consider myself part of a group of students who would use the phrase: "These are our demands" and threaten the school if they are not met.
I would never consider myself part of a group that pulls the race card and paints with such a large brush. Are there a lot of problems at CHS? Of course. Does that mean that the "school” is "racist"? Certainly not.
By saying the school is racist the MLKA leadership implied that all of the teachers I've had, black and white, which have shared tremendous knowledge with me are racist.
By saying the school is racist the MLKA leadership implied that its alumni and students were racist.
Accusing Columbia High School of racism is a disgusting overstatement that clouds many real issues. That is why I used the word "you" because listening to the MLKA leadership during that assembly left me burning with anger at the damage they were inflicting on the school I love.
--Nathan Winkler CHS Class of 2005
|
LibraryLady(ncjanow)
Supporter
Username: Librarylady
Post Number: 2324
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 3:09 pm: |
|
Eloquent statement, Nathan. Beautifully written, logically presented. Obviously written by someone who was well educated by our school district.
Thank you for presenting your view point.No hearsay or second guessing. Nice to hear from the original source. |
Montagnard
Citizen
Username: Montagnard
Post Number: 1477
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 11:36 pm: |
|
Thanks Nathan. Your calm and reasoned response does you a lot of credit. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page