Important PAUSD Vote on January 9th
Original post made by Jamie Maltz on Oct 31, 2006
Please note that there will be no board meetings between those two dates for public comment. The time between the presentation of feasibility study and the final board vote is almost entirely HOLIDAY time, with school schedule resuming on January 3rd.
If the public is interested in the results of the feasibility study and/or would like to comment on the Mandarin Immersion program, they should
a) plan on attending the December 12th session and the January 9th board session. Normally held at 7:00pm at 25 Churchill.
b) please send letters, emails or phone calls to the board if you feel there should be more time available for community input between the feasibility study presentation and the final vote.
For the sake of transparency, and to avoid the appearance of trying to railroad this important decision through under the community radar, I would like to see a Town Hall Meeting forum scheduled in January. I assume improved public awareness is something most sides of this issue could support.
on Nov 2, 2006 at 3:01 pm
So I guess no body notices, or cares, that this is more of the same from the district staff.. The fact that they are manipulating the schedule for this to occur during a time when nobody will be listening or engaged in school issues, is very typical of the vast level of respect that MC and MC have for the community they 'serve'.
The feasibilty presentation is on 12/12. There are less than 3 days before the holiday break, and 3 working days after the holiday break, before the scheduled FINAL DECISION on MI, which has now been moved up to 1/9. There are no board meeting schedule between. I guess they could really care less about the community input on this matter.
(My goodness people, even if you agree with the program, you MUST disagree with this tactic. Next time it could be YOU at the wrong end of MC's pet project.)
Well, thank goodness this is a program that fits squarely within this district's TOP PRIORITIES. There will be no VALID community objections to this program anyway. They could really have just spared us all this pesky community dialog (woops monologue), and just let us know there was nothing that could be said, no evidence that could be shown, that would impact their decision.
on Nov 3, 2006 at 1:41 pm
I agree. It looks bad for the "sneakiness" quotient. This wasn't even a publically announced change in newspapers and e-news and through the schools. It has just appeared out of nowhere.
I tend to believe that folks mean well and just goof up, but this sudden, unannounced departure from the schedule that we have all known about and planned for over the last 5 months...well, I am starting to wonder if there is a pattern emerging here. Good grief, we all know that if you want to "bury" a news item you release it late Friday. By extension the time to get a "sticky" issue through is when our culture is traditionally occupied with the busiest time of the year.
The "trust" issue seems to be broader than just with the management team. I am losing trust rapidly that this process about MI is anything resembling "unbiased" on the part of the MCs ( Marilyn Cook and Mary Frances Callan). Nobody else schedules these agendas, as far as I know, so it looks bad.
If anyone involved in the agenda making process sees this, please pay attention, and schedule AT LEAST one meeting for public processing before the Board takes action. Maybe we should all write and ask for this.
on Nov 6, 2006 at 4:21 pm
Chalk another one up for the Sneakiness Quotient:
I understand that PACE is currently shopping for big name sponsors for a Delaine Eastin speech to happen in PAUSD in Palo Alto in November, to convince a fabulous school district like PAUSD to provide language education. This is another wolf in sheep's clothing, as PACE expects to parlay this into PROOF POSITIVE that Mandarin Immersion is supported by the community and all these big heavy hitter organizations. Well lets watch and see if these organizations step up to an actual endorsement for PACE's MI Proposal or if PACE tries to twist it in to this without their express consent.
(Support for language education does NOT EQUAL support for MI> Some believe PAUSD needs to prioritize, and if a language offering is part of our top priorities, then a language strategy to reach all children is needed.)
To their credit, I understand that (of ALL organization who are declining to support this PACE driven engagement,) that PAUSD has declined because of the controversial nature of MI, and the appearance that so endorsing would look like an endorsement of PACE. Good for them. But our League of Women Voters, and PTAs, etc.? What are they doing on this. Do they KNOW what they're doing on this?
Mountain View School District and Mountain View League of Women Voters is sponsoring this idea. Does this automatically imply they endorse PACE's MI proposal? Do they even realize the motives of PACE for pushing this at this time? How big of them to endorse the a speaking engagement in Palo Alto, regarding the spending of PAUSD funds, in PAUSD, on luxury programs.
Does Delaine Eastin support PACE's MI proposal for PAUSD?
And why so many outsiders interested in convincing PAUSD how to spend PAUSD tax payer dollar on PAUSD kids?
(I wonder if Delaine Eastin supports language education programs that reach across our communities elementary children in a way that gives equitable benefits to all children who need it or want it, or if she favors winner-take-all type lottery programs. I ~think~ she favors focusing on closing the achievement gap. I wonder if she thinks language education should be focused on that first (ie: English Language Learners) or if second language should be part of the core curriculum for all children in the State of California, or if it should be a wild benefit program only a few lucky kids get access to?
Maybe if anyone besides PACE is allowed to ask any questions there, someone will ask the sponsors and the speaker these questions.
Maybe the Newpaper reporters who cover our schools would be motiviated to learn more about if and where our state and local politicians stand on MI, if anywhere at all...