Should OKC get the REDS out?

Monday night, the Oklahoma City school board had its regular meeting and, in addition to the problem of weather related school closings, discussed how to meet a $4 million budget shortfall caused by reduced state funding. Various items were discussed including the sale of some closed school properties, such as old John Marshall High School, and "realigning the support and certified staff in the central office."

One area of administrative expense needs to be addressed by the district: the six Regional Educational Directors, or REDS as they are often termed. These are six "super-principals" who oversee schools in six different regions of the school district. These are administors who administrate other administrators. They do not have direct contact with students in the classroom.

Frankly, most of the rank and file certified and support staff cannot fathom what these people do other than create another layer of meddlesome bureaucracy as well as administrative expense. If the district wants to make cuts in personnel, many teachers point to these offices as a way for the district to save a considerable amount of money, perhaps as much as as a half-million dollars or more.

Personally, I do not know if this is a wise move, but it is something constantly discussed among teachers whenever the subject of staff reductions comes up.

If the district chooses to hold on to these positions, it should explain to teachers and staff faced with the possibility of reductions why these positions are retained while those who have more direct contact with students face reductions.

OKC School Board Talks About Money Saving Options

Angela Monson and Gail Vines Sworn-In as School Board Members

Angela Monson takes the oath of office as the newly elected chair of the Oklahoma City Public School Board
Monday evening, former state senator Angela Monson was sworn in as the 3rd chairman for the Oklahoma City Public Schools, Board of Education in a ceremony at the school board auditorium before a large and enthusiastic crowd. Ms. Monson challenged those attending to "get involved" in the district. "This is just the beginning of our journey to create a school district that serves the needs of all our students," she told those present. Monson won her position in an election against incumbent school board chair, Kirk Humphries. She is the third person to hold the position of chairman since the office was created by a the Oklahoma legislature.
Gail Vines takes the oath of office for School Board District Two Representative
Also sworn in were Lynn Watson who is the newly elected representative for District One and Gail Vines who was unopposed in her bid for a second term in District Two.

Oklahoma County Judge Vicki Miles LaGrange administered the oath of office to all the officials.

Angela Monson upsets Kirk Humphries in OKC School Board Race

new OKC School Board Chairman Angela Monson
Angela Monson, who only decided to get into the race for Oklahoma City School Board Chairman on the last day of the filing deadline, defeated incumbent chairman Kirk Humphries 57% to 43% on Tuesday. Monson was a former member of the Oklahoma House and Senate. Oklahoman News Article on the race
This win is satisfying on many levels. First, Angela is not a part of the corporate power structure that has rule the district for many years now. She is a friend of working families and their children. She is also willing to listen to the teachers who have direct contact with the kids.
Congratulations, Angela.

Kirk Humphries Selected as OKC School Board President

Kirk Humphries, newly appointed chairman of the Oklahoma City Public School District School Board
Former Oklahoma City Mayor Kirk Humphries was selected as chairman of the Oklahoma City School Board last Monday. While mayor, Kirk helped to pass the "MAPS for Kids" bond issue and sales tax that has been used to do a massive building and remodeling project in the city's schools.

The first big task facing Humphries and the rest of the board is to find a new superintendent to succeed John Q. Porter who resigned after a brief time of leading the district following allegations of financial impropriety.

Kirk is well connected with Oklahoma City's business community. This, plus his service on the Putnam City School Board, are his chief assets. His chief liablity from this teacher's standpoint is that he doesn't have much experience dealing a democratic urban school district. He believes in the "school is a business" [false] analogy as evidenced by his statement:

"I believe the customer is always right, and in a school district, the customer is every family in our district with school-aged children."

The problem with this model is that, in a school, sometimes the customer is wrong. For example, if a parent believes that her child should remain in school due to his "special needs" when that child is disrupting class for all his classmates and making it impossible for a teacher to do her job, the parent/customer is wrong.

OKC School Board Votes for a Seven Period Day

This evening the Oklahoma City Public School District's Board of Education approved a proposal by the administration for middle schools and high schools to operate on a 7 period a day schedule. Two schools, Classen School for Advanced Studies and Northeast Academy, have been exempted from this change.

This will mean that we will see our students every day during the term rather than on alternating days as in the present schedule. Teachers will have 5 classes each day, a "planning period", and a "collaborative period" reserved for meetings, professional development and tutoring.

I have been advocating a daily schedule for some time. The present block scheduling doesn't work for our students. However, I am a bit leary as to what the district has in mind for the collaborative period. My fear is that the district will want to require us to use it to remediate failing students, especially those taking the core subjects of Language Arts, Math, Social Studies and Science. Since every teacher has a "hard core" group of students who perform poorly in class, usually because they won't do their work, this "tutoring" could turn into a 6th class for us to teach.

The district says it is willing to work with the our union, the American Federation of Teachers, to resolve potential problems, but I fear the Greeks even when they bring gifts. And this may turn out to be another Trojan Horse.

Will Our Planning Time Be Cut in Half?

A Teacher's Responsibilities

On Monday a group of Regional Education Directors will present to the Oklahoma City School board a plan to lower high school credits from 28 to 26. This is being done in order to implement a 7 period day as opposed to the 4 period a day “block scheduling.” The Regional Education Directors, REDs for short, are "super principals" who oversee the high schools and their "feeder patterns," the schools that send their graduates onto the high schools.

Presently, high schools use block schedules where classes meet every other day for around 80-85 minutes. The new schedule would call for 5 instruction periods, one planning period, and one "collaborative" period. It's the last part of this proposal that has me fuming, but first, I need to address the move away from block scheduling to a daily schedule, which I favor.

I've never thought that block scheduling is good for high school students. In the modern, "over-stimulated" world of adolescents, I find it difficult for them to remember concepts we have covered during a class period much less those covered the day before yesterday. It is also difficult to schedule tests to see how much the students have learned in a unit since invariably some students miss a class and complain that they did not get a chance to cover the material being tested. Also when they miss a period, they have missed at least a day and a half of instruction.

Meeting students daily is more difficult and stressful for teachers, but far better for students. We get to review daily. Scheduling homework and tests can be a matter of routine. You can tell your students to expect homework during the first part of the week and a test during the latter part (or even vice versa), and the students will know what to expect. Since one has less class time, students can be focused on one or two concepts to be taught and reinforced on a daily basis. I applaud the idea of going to daily classroom instruction.

I oppose having half my planning time being taken away from me without so much as a "by your leave." When I first taught in the district, we were on a 6 period day with one period being my planning time when I had no classes. Planning time is needed to grade papers, contact parents, set up instruction, catch a breather, and, oh yes, plan lessons. Going to block scheduling increased my planning time and decreased my daily instruction load by two classes. Good for teachers, bad for students, in my opinion.

However, with the 7 period schedule, the REDs want us to teach 5 classes in 45 minute periods (a bit short in my opinion), have one planning time, and one hour for "collaborative" work. Usually, this would mean a period for department meetings, committee and team meetings, and professional development. However, the devil, as they say, is in the details. Principals could use this period in any way they feel they can use it such as for doing hall duty, detention duty, or covering and teaching classes. More teachers may be needed to implement this schedule change, and in light of state budget problems, we may face greatly increased class sizes come fall.

Some principals have said that they would not abuse the collaborative period in their buildings, but they may not have a choice given the fact that they may not be given the staff to handle their school's increased responsibilities. And that is hardly the point. The point is that the REDs (one person who works at the Admin building told me the REDs are "running amok" in the absence of a real superintendent) want to cut teacher's planning time in half and increase our load and stress.

I would be more than willing to have 2 of the 5 collaborative periods be used for meetings and professional development opportunities. However, using all 5 would be tantamount to adding an extra period of instruction and/or responsibilities to our day. Classroom teachers are under increasing stress due a host of state and federal mandates, most of them woefully unfunded. The district should not "collaborate" to heap more stress on our workload.

The school board needs to look closely at the details before they unloose this devil on the classroom teachers in this district.

District Attorney David Prater Reports on Porter Investigation

David Prater, Oklahoma County District Attorney
District Attorney David Prater's office released the results of his investigation into the allegations made by the Oklahoma City School Board against Dr. John Q. Porter. The DA's investigation cleared Dr. Porter of all allegations of criminal wrongdoing by Dr. Porter. DA Prater's statement reads,

"The evidence uncovered during the investigation failed to prove that Dr. John Q. Porter committed any crimnal act. In fact, an number of documents discovered in possession of the school district tended to exculpate or explain away most of the allegations made against Dr. Porter."

While this statement would give support to those who feel that Dr. Porter has been exhonorated and the victim of a "palace coup" as I have alledged elsewhere in the blog, a report on interviews done with 19 administration employees and board members, including former board president Cliff Hudson, paint a picture of a superintendent who acted as a "bully" and tended towards paranoid behavior. One example of this is a report by school board member Gail Vines who said that Porter told him that people in the school administration offices were "ratting on" him. Porter also, some claimed, instructed his employees never to use e-mail or written notes to communicate with him insisting on phone or personal conversations. Porter, himself, claimed that there were "moles" in the administration who reported on him to Cliff Hudson among others.

In the end, the Dr. Porter's supporters and detractors will probably read into this report what they want to read. I am more inclined to feel that Dr. Porter's resignation was a "necessary evil" due to the fact that any hope of a good working relationship between him and the board was impossible.

I also think this strengthens my claim, one shared by many in the district, that the next superintendent should be an "insider" whom we know and whom we feel has credibility. At the least it can be said that Dr. Porter felt isolated having come from a far different environment, and it would seem that his management style in the administration building did not allow him to build kind of ethos he needed to lead the district and make the changes we all know need to be made to lift our district to a higher level.

Looking Ahead Part IV: Leading a democratic School District

What does it mean to lead an American school district? One of the chief considerations is that American public schools are by design democratic in nature. (Note the small "d") By this I mean that we have in no true sense of the term, a national school system as can be found in countries like Japan, Germany, or China, countries to which American school children are often unfavorably compared.

We do have a Federal Department of Education, but if the Secretary of Education were to say, "All elementary students in America must be taught phonics.", the thousands of school districts in this country would be free to ignore the mandate and set their own curriculum. Nor do we have any sort of national pass examination as is the case in Germany where students take exams to determine whether they will be allowed to go into the country's college prep schools (the "Gymnasium") or into one of the vocational schools (Hauptschule, Realschule). (Once we had a group of teachers from Germany visitng our school under an exchange program. One of them remarked to us, "I don't see how you can teach a class with students who have so many different levels of intelligence in it.")

States have more control over the schools than does the federal government since they provide more direct funding and can set standards like the school year, the graduation requirements, teacher certification requirements and so forth. However, the real power resides in the local school boards who set the curriculum, oversea the administration, make decisions on attendance zones and aprove all purchasing.

In America, we like this local control and the fact that we avoid "tracking" children. We like to feel as if any child can, if the child chooses, go onto college or technical training after high school. We like to feel that this reflects our values of individual initiative, free enterprise, and personal liberty. However, our methodology is not without cost.

For one, American schools try to give every child, regardless of aptitude or intelligence level, the equivalency of a college prep education. We try to make concessions to those who do not have the intelligence or the desire to go on to college through offering special education courses and vocational/technical training, but our core curriculum is geared towards college prep.

We are thus admonished to hold "high standards" in our teaching, but at the same time leave no child "behind" the others. To do this, we are told to account for "multiple intelligences" do "interventions" on behalf of struggling students, and allow for "grade recovery" for those in danger of failing. (This is a part of the many mixed messages teachers get from those outside the classroom. I will address this problem in a later post.)

The result often is a sort of school that resembles the procedure used by the Merchant Marines during World War II where a convoy of Liberty Ships could only go as fast as the slowest ship in the convey so it would not be, well, "Left Behind!" Teachers, for the most part, do not teach to the slowest student in their classes, but they cannot teach only for to the "brightest and best" because that would deny those at the botton to their right to a proper college prep curriculum.

Another problem associated with a democratic school district is that as the local boards are free to ignore the directions of the Secretary of Education (sometimes at the risk of losing Federal Government funding), administrators and teachers often ignore the directions of superintendents (sometimes at the risk of their positions). This is why those who would model schools after businesses make a false analogy. In public school systems, especially urban schools, there is often more attention paid to due process on the part of administrators, teachers, parents, and even the students themselves. Some superintendents try to ignore this factor, but they do not tend to stay around for very long. A well know teacher attitude is "I was teaching before this guy came to the district. I'll be teaching when they get enough of him, and he leaves." I think part of the reason for our "short tenured" superintendents can be traced to this fact.

The most effective superintendents appear to me to be the ones who use a kind of "carrot and stick" approach: equal parts of praise and admonishment. Perhaps I like this because it matches my own approach to teaching as I discussed in my post where I described the fact that I tend to be tough on myself at times and forgiving at others. However, this seems to me the kind of approach that works in a democratic school system. We cannot ignore the need for change, and this requires vision, direction, and, yes, a little "butt kicking." Yet one cannot be negative all the time. One must look for the good and praise it. There must be proding and healing from the same source.

To me, this provides an additional reason to hire an "Insider" as our next superintendent. That person must be able to understand just where we are and how much we need to do to get to where we hope to be. As I have discussed before, this is what rhetoricians term "Ethos" or credibility. And as Aristotle pointed out his book The Rhetoric, Ethos is primary to any attempt to persuade, to lead, and to change. Without credbility, change is nigh to impossible.

Rumored School Closings: "The Mulligan Gambit ?"

The latest rumors concerning school closings in the Oklahoma City School District are as follows: Northeast High School and Douglas High School will be merged. The recommended plan is to have Norteast retain its Magnet School status. Just how this will work out, I do not know. Also, Southeast High School and Capitol Hill High School will merge. Southeast will lose its Magnet School designation.

It appears to me that this is an attempt to do an "End Run" around NCLB. The schools in question have not made "Adequate Yearly Progress" (AYP) for five years. If the school does not make AYP for a fifth year, the district must initiate plans for restructuring the school. This may include reopening the school as a charter school, replacing all or most of the school staff, or turning over school operations either to the state or to a private company with a demonstrated record of effectiveness.

Merging schools can be seen as an attempt to comply with this requirement. This way, the district can claim that these are new schools which begins the whole process anew. Something like this was accomplished with opening "New John Marshall" and creating our school, Oklahoma Centennial.

Think of it as the educational equivalent of a "Mulligan" in golf.

OKCPS School Board Under Investigation

Oklahoma County District Attorney David Prater
The twisting and turning saga of Dr. Porter has taken a new twist. Now the school board is being investigated for possibly violating the Oklahoma state Open Meetings Law. Our DA David Porter was made aware of the possible violation by The Oklahoman.

I know David. He is a good, fair man. He will handle this fairly. It once again shows me that there has been enough mistakes on both sides that they should try to come together in a spirit of reconciliation and humility. For the kids' sake!

City board faces test

Rally for Dr. Porter--A Need for Atonement and Reconciliation

For Our Children's Sake

Last night at the Fairview Missionary Baptist Church there was a meeting and rally for Dr. John Q. Porter. About 600 people attended. Rev. Reed, the Fairview pastor, hosted the meeting. According to an article in The Oklahoman " 'We are all calling for his reinstatement. We are going to, as a community, work towards that end because his concern is children, not the politics,” the Rev. John Reed said" (The Oklahoman 1.9.08). I have much respect for Rev. Reed. He has been a big friend to labor and education.

I fear that if the Board fires Dr. Porter the harm caused in the community will last a long time. I think that we should work for reconciliation. Dr. Porter has shown that he is willing to acknowledge his mistakes. I think we should find the appropriate atonement for those mistake and, for our children's sake, move on.

Porter backers fight for his job

My Take on John Q. Porter

Dr. John Porter in happier times


I've noticed that I have had quite a few "hits" on my blog since my school district's controversy over district superintendent John Q. Porter. Several have come from Porter's previous school district back in Maryland. I wish someone from back there would either post a comment on the blog or send me an e-mail to let me know what your opinion of Dr. Porter is. If you want to keep it confidential, I will be glad to accomodate you.

For what it's worth, here's my take. I wish we could get beyond this, but I'm afraid it's gone too far already to do so. There are many claims and counter claims. The School Board believes that Dr. Porter has misused district funds. Dr. Porter claims that he has made errors and is willing to reimburse the district for any expenses not allowed by district policy. The Board is also upset that Dr. Porter has refused to discuss these problems prior to their being made public. Dr. Porter claims that he was unable to respond in a timely manner because he was involved in family matters during the holidays. The Board claims that Dr. Porter has created a hostiliies with employees and principals. He claims that he has just be doing his job in regards to incompetent administrators.

I wish that we could say, "We've all learned a valuable lesson here, and we will do better together in the future." That only works in sitcoms. Perhaps the board could allow Dr. Porter the opportunity to state how he would change his procedures to comply with board policy. I think he could become a good community leader. But I fear he has been weakened too much to do the job he was hired to do.