http://paloaltoonline.com/square/print/2007/10/16/c-is-for-campaign


Town Square

'C' is for campaign

Original post made on Oct 16, 2007

School-board candidates discuss their views on enrollment growth, foreign languages, and avoiding future conflict

Faced with rising enrollment and plans for new curricula, schools in Palo Alto are poised to change. At the helm will be the district's Board of Education -- itself slated for transformation in November's election.

  • About the candidates

  • Election 2007: Stories, links and resources

    Read the full story here Web Link posted Tuesday, October 16, 2007, 2:33 PM
  • Comments

    Posted by Parent, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
    on Oct 16, 2007 at 8:02 pm

    A very well written and researched article. However, I am very put off by the smiling picture of Camille Townsend at the top. I realise all the candidates are paying for advertising space and quite possibly the picture at the top of this article will change and include all the candidates at some time or other, but for anyone reading they will see the face of just the one candidate who happens to be there at the time and I think that is not on.

    Please leave the paid advertising to appropriate places and do not include them in articles like this.

    Thank you.


    Posted by Duveneck Parent, a resident of Crescent Park
    on Oct 16, 2007 at 10:01 pm

    I agree with the previous posting that ads for school board candidates should not be posted on the same page as this article. It is inappropriate.

    Thank you.


    Posted by Parent, a resident of Gunn High School
    on Oct 17, 2007 at 10:37 am

    I was surprised at Ezran's comment regarding a third high school: "[We could have] a high school for the 20 to 30 percent of our students who don't go to four-year colleges. A focus on drama or art would be possibilities." He seems to suggest that students who have a strong interest in drama or art are those uninterested in four-year colleges, which is rather insulting to those students and also untrue. All the students I know who were committed to the arts in high school were also outstanding students (one is currently at Stanford, another at UC Berkeley studying theater and art, respectively). A third highschool with an arts focus is an interesting idea, but Ezran just lost my vote by seeming to suggest that those students are the ones who don't go on to four-year colleges. Also, many students who go to our excellent local 2-year community colleges also transfer to 4-year colleges later on.


    Posted by example of poor thinking, a resident of South of Midtown
    on Oct 17, 2007 at 1:05 pm

    Well, referring to the 3rd high school for those who don't go on to college was a reasonable possibility, ...but to suggest that what these same kids really need to have a chance at succeeding in their lives is art or something shows, again, the kind of disconnect between priorities of what our kids NEED and what would be "fun" or "pretty"..we have had enough of that thinking lately...no thanks.

    So, for the least likely to go to college in our midst, we are going to give them art classes so they can do what kind of job when they graduate?? pump gas or flip burgers?

    This is Board of Education level thinking?

    Kind of disappointing, really, for a guy from France, where by age14 kids are channeled into different "tracks" so to speak, some college bound, some post high school "2 year" technical bound, some service industry bound by 18 ( how to be a good restaurant worker etc)..but pretty much all toward a useful skill level.