Here are a few links (most local, some not) for your evening pleasure.
- Whose side is Larry Corrigan on? thehim sets the record straight:
According to Stefan, he’s a Ron Sims Campaign contributor, which is true, but kind of like describing Lou Gehrig as a famous cripple.
From what I remember, Lou Gehrig hit a few homeruns too.
- Here’s the question. My answer? Yes, absolutely. Why? Because it works pretty well for Seattle. We have a not only a “strong mayor” system but a “big mayor” system.
- If you like comedy and protecting a women’s right to choose, go here. If you don’t like comedy or protecting a women’s right to choose, go hunting with Dick Cheney.
- Some ballots from just east of Issaquah to be recounted. Cue frothy rightwing post decrying non-existent election fraud.
- There are lots of reasons to question a potential Barack Obama candidacy in ’08. His age or his middle name ain’t one of them.
- Here’s a post that shows why zoning and environmental laws are actually good things. Imagine if that absolutely piece of garbage, I-933, had passed? How worse could it have been?
Don Joe spews:
Question for MtWR (repeated from the last open thread):
1) What happens to a crane tower in high winds when the boom is locked in position?
2) Who is responsible for ensuring that the boom is not in a locked position during high winds?
Don Joe spews:
Let’s settle a small controversy here. I pointed to a statement on christmasghost’s web site about a standard of conduct, which reads in part:
“Clowns who abuse free speech by attacking other people for no good reason will be dealt with promptly…”
I also pointed out that attacking other people for no good reason is something christmasghost does here quite often, and called her out for it.
Now, the Ghost says that I’ve put my foot in my mouth, because I, somehow, presumed that this meant that such comments would be deleted on her web site. I say that I never made reference to any precise punishment, and that the punishment is irrelevant to the fact that christmasghosts conduct here doesn’t meet the standard of conduct she would prefer from guests on her own blog.
I thing the Ghost is just trying to rationalize away her hypocrisy, but I’m open to other points of view. So, who do you think is out of line here?
My Left Foot spews:
Found this post at (un)SP. I am guessing the writer is correct and that Snarky will delete it.
Why is OK for Republicans to SwiftBoat (lie and deceive) but when the paper, correctly I might add, categorizes a political insider as a GOP opperative you have a snit? This man’s contributions run about 80% GOP and 20% DEM.
Wait, I know the answer. You just wish to divorce yourselves from yet another Republican pervert and in the process you want to make it appear as if he is a Democrat thereby disparaging the Dems. You get two for one that way.
Accept the fact that this pervert is one of your own and move on. No one believes that all Republicans are perverts. Nope. Just the elected and appointed ones.
I know the censors are going to snip this, but someone has to speak up.
Don Joe spews:
I’ve been waiting for someone here to bring up Barak Obama’s middle name, and it’s amazing what the ignorant will try to do. In this case, it’s a clear cut case of guilt by association, but even the association is tenuous at best.
Let’s see, Barak Obama was born in 1961. Saddam Hussein didn’t become president of Iraq until 1979. Indeed, when Barak Obama was born, the Baath Party hadn’t even come into power in Iraq. This is how tenuous the association really is.
But it gets even worse. Before I get to this, however, I should point out that Barak Obama is not a Muslim. He’s a Christian.
I don’t know about Barak Obama’s parents, but it’s highly likely that they were at least influenced by Islam. Because the name “Hussein” (often also transliterated as “Husayn”), long before it became associated with Saddam Hussein, has long since been associated, in Islam, with supreme heroism. The shrine at Karbala is commeorates the death of the Imam Hussein.
N in Seattle spews:
Thanks for the link, Goldy. Sometimes going without a post for a week and a half works well.
N @ 5
N in Seattle spews:
Yep, silly me.
Though it seems a bit lame for a guest/newbie on HA to post an open thread.
My Left Foot spews:
Let me weigh in. I am in the middle of Barack Obama’s latest book. While I am admittedly a political junkie, the book is an excellent read. He is a bright, optimistic man. He is young, energetic and willing. Neither his age or his middle name should be an issue. Unfortunately at some point the Wingnuts will begin to play the race card and that is going to present the greatest challenge.
He has my vote if he runs.
This is no slam on Hilary Clinton. I love her too, but I think that she is too devisive. You either love her or hate her, no middle ground…..and the middle ground is how you get elected.
My Left Foot spews:
I might have named the book. The Audacity of Hope.
My Left Foot spews:
Perhaps John Edwards would be nice alternative. He needs to use the lawyer skills when debating. The nice guy white gloves need to come off and the boxing gloves strapped on.
Richard Pope spews:
How about the continuing slide of the King County Republican Party into political irrelevancy?
In this September 2006 primary election, the King County GOP elected only 785 Precinct Committee Officers, which is the smallest number of PCO’s in many, many decades — i.e. back from the time when King County didn’t have nearly so many precincts. This leaves only 30.7% of the 2,555 precincts in King County with a Republican PCO — which certainly has to be the lowest percentage ever.
The King County GOP held its reorganization meeting today, to elect officers and adopt by-laws for the next two years. A whopping 389 PCO’s showed up for the meeting, held at a central and easily accessible location on Mercer Island — convenient for PCO’s from all over the county. This was somewhat less than half the elected PCO’s (no quorum worries — that number is 20% of PCO’s, unless you want to remove someone already elected, in which case 50% quorum is required).. Certainly this has to be the lowest number of Republican PCO’s to ever attend such a meeting — at least not since the time King County had a much, much smaller population.
In the King County GOP, once the biennial reorganization meeting is held, the PCO — assuming he or she even attended the meeting — can basically go home for the next two years and not attend any other meetings. This is because the only role a PCO plays in GOP goverance in King County is to elect certain county party officers. All of the district chairs in the various legislative districts are appointed by the county chair. All of the party decisions are made by the county executive committee, which consists of the county chair, the other elected officers, and the district chairs appointed by the county chair. Basically an echo chamber for whatever the county chair wants to do.
A intrepid Republican PCO actually proposed a reasonable change to the party by-laws. He suggested that the district chairs should be elected by the PCO’s in each district, instead of being appointed by the county chair. This was denounced by party leaders, who explained that appointment was necessary to keep “Democrats” from taking control of legislative district organizations. You see, there are so few people interested in being Republican PCO’s — especially in Seattle — that party leaders are paranoid that a bunch of “Democrats” could file for PCO (and actually attend the meetings!) and takeover a district. At least this seemed like a reasonable excuse for maintaining a top-down centrally controlled organization. The proposed by-law change was resounding defeated.
This year, the King County GOP By-Laws were changed to further strengthen the iron hand of the county chair. There is a new Article XIX, which basically allows the county party officers to kick out anyone from the Republican Party for a period for up to six years, for any reason that they see fit. If someone is “expelled” from the King County Republican Party, they cannot served as a PCO, even if re-elected by the Republican voters in their precinct. Nor can they participate in the precinct caucuses, even when these caucuses are held for the purpose of determining the next Republican nominee for President.
http://www.kcgop.org/documents.....oposed.pdf (see Pages 20 and 21 of PDF)
Some intrepid Republican PCO’s also spoke out against these proposed by-law changes, but they were resounding approved by the PCO’s in attendance at the meeting.
This is an excellent tool to keep the same leadership clique in charge of the King County Republican Party forever. Obviously, with only 30% of precincts represented by PCO’s, a determined grass roots movement could easily gain a majority of PCO positions in any given primary election. Not to mention that existing PCO’s could also be defeated in contested races. If this happens, the incumbent chair and his/her followers can get together after the September primary and before the December reorganization meeting, declare any number of newly elected PCO’s not to be “loyal Republicans”, and ensure that a majority of those remaining PCO’s are supportive of their administration.
On the other hand, none of this is going to make the King County Republican Party more popular with the voters who are required in order to elect its candidates to public office. Nor is this likely to increase the number of people who will volunteer their time and money to help the King County Republican Party or its candidates. And it certainly won’t encourage civic-minded men and women to elect election (or re-election) under the banner of the King County Republican Party.
harry poon spews:
Richard Pope: Stamp the dust from your shoes, shout: “Get the behind me Satan!”
Quit the Republican party and come over to the light.
My Left Foot spews:
Richard Pope, you know you are a closet Democrat. Come out. Declare yourself a Democrat for all the world to hear. You will be free. You will be empowered and you just might get your ass elected to office.
Mark The Redneck KENNEDY spews:
DonJoe 1 – It’s called “weather vaning”. Is there some evidence it didn’t happen? Did it cause any problems?
Mark The Redneck KENNEDY spews:
The ummm… main reason to…umm.. question Hussein Osama’s fitness for president… is… umm…. his lack of track record. He’s a junior senator with an unremarkable history. Just the fact that he’s black and charismatic is NOT sufficient qualification to lead the free world.
Same goes for TSWITW. Just the fact that she has a vagina and usta let Bubba use it is NOT sufficent qualification to lead the free world.
Don Joe spews:
“Weather vaning” is what happens when the boom is not locked. I asked what happens when the boom is locked.
And, you haven’t answered my second question.
My Left Foot spews:
Fuck you. Pay your debt. Vanish. Pick one. Or two.
Don Joe spews:
“The ummm… main reason to…umm.. question Hussein Osama’s fitness for president… is… umm…. his lack of track record. He’s a junior senator with an unremarkable history. Just the fact that he’s black and charismatic is NOT sufficient qualification to lead the free world.”
I have no problem with that. I’m complaining about Republican talking heads who evade talking about that track record by invoking the guilt-by-association meme. It’s still more evidence that even Republicans don’t believe they can win elections based solely on the issues.
So, how well did that convince-people-that-they’re-better-off-than-they-think-they-are strategy work for you this past election cycle?
MarkTheRedneck is My Bitch spews:
Please state GWB’s qualifications to lead the free world. Failed baseball team owner seems to be the best he could do. Come on, tell us all how his vision and expertise is helping him now. He has single handedly ruined the Republican party. His idea of foreign affairs is to blow up everything and repeat. Stay the course.
Fuck you, Mark.
My Left Foot spews:
I see LSoS has no response to post 20. Small wonder. Just like his dick.
Funny how that works.
Don Joe spews:
Here’s a flash-back for the middle-aged among us; a little-known song by a well-known band first recorded in 1972. Could have been written today:
Golden country your face is so red
With all of your money your poor can be fed
You strut around and you flirt with disaster
Never really carin just what comes after
Well your blacks are dyin but your back is still turned
And your freaks are cryin but your back is still turned
You better stop your hidin or your country will burn
The time has come for you my friend
To all this ugliness we must put an end
Before we leave we must make a stand
Roger Rabbit spews:
15 Mark The Redneck KENNEDY says: It’s called “weather vaning”. Is there some evidence it didn’t happen? Did it cause any problems? 12/02/2006 at 10:17 pm
1. All the news reports I’ve seen say the boom was locked and didn’t weathervane.
2. The crane fell down.
Now pay your gambling debt, double-welsher.
Roger Rabbit spews:
16 What’s the beef? You’re party elected an unqualified imbecile to lead the free world. Now it’s our turn.
Roger Rabbit spews:
Your not you’re
Don Joe spews:
The vile and ugly face of prejudice. This is what you get when you invoke the politics of fear.
Mel Westbrook spews:
I had been asked to put forth some thoughts about school closures as I served on the Closure and Consolidation committee.
I honestly don’t want to get into specifics. People would want a blow-by-blow on each school and I think it not worth rehashing. I’m a big picture person so maybe I can give perspective that way.
In answer to one question, could the Montessori program be duplicated elsewhere? And the answer is yes, because the principal who originated it at Goldy’s school, Graham Hill, was transferred to Bagley elementary specifically to create that program. The problems really come in the evolution of programs. Graham Hill had a tremendous disadvantage in having multiple principals who either may not have understood the program, not cared about it or gave free rein to teachers/PTA. Somehow the school, to the CAC’s perception, evolved into two very separate programs.
The district uses a system called site-based management which basically means the principal and staff make many decisions on their own including budget. Parents have a varying role here. I would like to see that pulled back because many principals are NOT good at lots of tasks and the more you pile on them, the less time they have to do their real task which is to monitor academics at their school. They need to be in classrooms daily, seeing how teachers are doing and coaching and guiding them. That’s their primary role. I think we should start over with principals with a theory called earned autonomy where the district monitors the principals and, if they are doing well on academics and interpersonal relationships at their school, the district will loosen the reins. I always get a unnerved feeling that some schools are just running based on one person’s vision and not the vision of the district.
About programs, I remember vividly when I took a tour of TOPS, years ago, and ask the-then principal, “If TOPS is so popular, why doesn’t the district duplicate it?” The principal told me it couldn’t happen because it was based on the teachers at that school. I was dumbfounded. I am pleased to see that our new Chief Academic Officer, Carla Santorno, has put into motion a plan to offer more dual-language schools in the district. John Stanford International is hugely popular and deserves to be replicated. I believe, too, in the Montessori vision and wish it was replicated in more schools. Honestly, I think that the district/Board has a vision but do they have a plan? That’s one thing that troubles me because they do make decisions without sometimes looking at long-term ramifications.
I have a personal belief that if you co-house two programs, there has to be some sort of resolution to have some interchange or overlap. (This is my problem with the current situation at Rainier Beach High School. The district has been asked by a private foundation if a 6-12 math/science academy could be co-housed there. Sounds great, right? The Seattle Times keeps going on and on about this program – see today’s Sunday editorial – without clearly understanding the situation. More on this another time although I think it would be interesting to hear what others have to say about public/private partnerships in public schools and how they should play out.)
A couple of things that came out from the CAC work. Parents want more K-8s (and let me know what you think). Some parents, especially in the south end, perceive that there is more safety in a K-8 for their student than in a middle school. I think that’s more a problem for the existing middle schools than the need for a K-8. Most of the K-8s in the district are alternative/non-traditional. For people who don’t understand/like alternative programs it leaves them with wanting what we don’t have which are traditional K-8s (there’s Blaine and Madrona and possibly TOPS which claims to be alternative but I don’t see it). So here’s the big picture question, how to honor what parents are saying they want? Whether it is Montessori or K-8s, how should the district proceed with creating new programs? How long should a program be in place before it is judged (and, either altered or dismantled)?
One last note on middle school. I think it’s the black hole of education. It’s a very confusing age and very worrisome for parents when they move their child from the relative serenity of elementary to a middle school. The amount of drop-off of parental involvement at the middle school level is staggering even at the better middle schools. And, it is really the one last chance to save a kid, academically, before he/she hits high school. I just don’t believe you can take a freshman who is way below in math/reading/writing and hope to get them to pass the WASL. It has to be done earlier, certainly in elementary but the last, best chance is middle school. More energy has to be placed here. I do think the district is finally getting that.
That does lead me to another big picture issue. I’ve been a parent in this district for many years and attended more meetings with district staff than I can count. I’ve spent a lot of time wondering about how decisions get made especially the ones that make you scratch your head and make you go, “hmmm” or “wha???” After serving on the CAC, I see more clearly that things aren’t always what they seem. There are very few knee-jerk reactions. Many more issues enter into decisions (from unlikely areas) than you might imagine. So, really, don’t assume the worst about a decision or the superintendent or the Board from the start.
P.S. Now for something completely different. No Hilary for President (unless Condi runs and oh, boy would that be fun). Hilary is way too polarizing and hated more than her husband by Republicans and nothing mobilizes the Reps like hatred (or jealousy). There are other good Dems who can run and win. Hilary can’t.
Thanks for posting Mel.
As I’ve long said, when it comes to middle schools, the biggest problem is all those damn middle school aged children. If we could just get rid of the students, these schools would be great.
This is indeed the black hole of Seattle Public Schools, and it was one of the things that was so frustrating about the district choosing to address elementary school consolidation first, and above all else. Yes, there are a handful of elementary schools with poor performance, low enrollment and decaying buildings, for which it would be hard to objectively argue against closure. But most of the elementary schools in the closure list were good schools. Meanwhile, many of us parents were looking ahead towards middle school and seeing no good options.
For example, my local middle school, Aki Kurose. As one prominent local politician told me, it doesn’t matter how much they improve their scores, it can never overcome its bad reputation with parents. As dedicated to the public schools as I am, I just can’t see putting my daughter in Aki. Being that age is tough enough.
When I raised this issue to one of your fellow CAC members, I was told “You say you care about all the children, but you obviously don’t. If you cared about all the children you’d put your daughter in Aki and work as hard as you can to turn that school around.” But a) that’s exactly what parents did at Graham Hill, and yet the district was threatening to shut the school down in response, and b) my daughter is not an experiment. She has just one shot at this.
Yes, parents look to the K-8 programs because we view them as safer. But they bring so many educational disadvantages with them, since the smaller populations can’t afford the specialized teaching and other programs available in larger middle schools.
Perhaps one solution is to find a way to make schools within schools work? For example, if you moved New School and Orcas into the Aki building, they could both grow into K-8 programs, while sharing all the resources that are not specific to their individual programs.
And instead of building a new facility for the New School, we could spend the money giving the SE cluster what it really needs… a brand new middle school to replace Aki, with a fresh start.
All that said, there are some reforms that are just plain obvious, but we won’t implement because they cost money. You want to close the achievement gap between the two programs at Graham Hill? Provide all the kids free pre-school and full day kindergarten. It works for the Graham Hill Montessori (with paid tuition.) It works for the New School (free via private grants.)
Until the state ponies up for what we all know works, I just can’t take talk of reform seriously.
Thanks, Mel. Both my principal and I agree that the District has swung way too far in the site-based management direction. It will be hard to get it back.
Also, regarding middle school, I’ve talked to many parents who would be happy just to go back to K-6. Some of the social stuff that happens at middle schools is just too advanced for that which most sixth graders are ready. It would go a long way to help the middle school situation.
Nobody disagrees that pre-k and full-day k is needed. Nobody. That’s why so many schools are now offering pay-for-K and parents who can afford it are gravitating to those schools.
Regarding Aki Kurose school, I don’t understand Goldy’s comment: it doesn’t matter how much they improve their scores, it can never overcome its bad reputation with parents.
Well, isn’t that just typical from some of our know-it-all parents. If Kurose raises its scores, it is doing something right. If you want your kid in a school that achieves, then put your kid there. Unless there are other more relevant and current reasons not to. Isn’t that what we liberals/progressives are supposed to be about? Making things work? Giving second chances when earned?
Finally, you said it, There are very few knee-jerk reactions. Many more issues enter into decisions (from unlikely areas) than you might imagine. But your point is ignored because people like Goldy still demand to acknowledge only what serves them. So disappointing.
Regarding Montessori, not all montessories are equal. The best I’ve seen is Pacific Crest. Hope Graham Hill’s results in high achieving learners . . .
BTW, have you spent all that “Millionaire” money yet?
And I agree with you about Hilary! I think that’s why Carville wants back in. I think he thinks he can get Hilary elected.
Goldy, you can relax now. I’m probably done. (LOL!) Sorry to keep this going but it is important and I thought you got a good discussion started. Just wish I could have moved you a little on the need to see this thing in a more global and less me-centered way. We all want all kids to learn and it will take buy-in from the whole community.
Stop lecturing, Skagit!
Mel Westbrook spews:
Well, I can certainly see both sides. Goldy is absolutely right; his daughter, my son, each student only has one shot. It is enough in life to have one bad teacher (hopefully in high school and not in elementary school) as we all have probably experienced. But to be in a school environment that doesn’t work? That’s hard to get past. And, I regret that a CAC member said that to you about thinking of other children. It isn’t your job to worry about every kid in the district. I have the time and energy to do that and that’s where I put my efforts.
I think it depends on what is the problem at the school. Aki has a security problem. I have been trying to get to figuring out why police are no longer able to be at several high/middle schools. A security officer at Roosevelt told me it makes such a difference because of the deterent effect of having a police car parked in front of the school. (I’m sure it’s about money but I think the SPD might have some money that could go towards this. I’ll try to ask the Mayor or the Chief next time they are on KUOW.)
I’m hoping to put forth an argument sometime about the upcoming capital bond measure coming up in Feb. Goldy hits on some points that really have a lot to do with buildings and how we spend that money. I think many parents (and voters) say, “It’s for the kids and they are shiny new buildings so what’s the problem?” The problem is Seattle, after San Franciso, has the smallest child population of any other of the 100 major cities in the country. We are dependent on our friends and neighbors goodwill (and votes) to support our schools, both on the operations side and on the building side (both new and maintenance). But that money has to be used properly and not fixing the buildings that need it most and/or have been on the list longest or moving schools ahead of others because of their connections is just plan wrong. I’ve always thought that facilities runs on a separate track from the rest of the district and I think the proposed BEX III capital list proves that.
Skagit, I have no idea how you know about my Millionaire appearance but if you do know, you know I didn’t win a million. Yes, it’s all gone.
Just one more comment and really for Mel: I don’t understand why the District keeps moving principals around. It just keeps politics boiling at the top . . . when a school, like Graham Hill, is working under a principal’s leadership, leave it alone. If the principal’s expertise is needed at Bagley, let that principal mentor/assist Bagley’s principal in setting up the program there. Then, you would have two principals who understand their programs.
I’m so tired of getting new principals every few years and watching teachers jockey for the attention of the new guy . . . everything in education is politicized. Common sense would dictate that if a school is doing well, you leave it alone.
Goldy, as for your daughter’s “one shot” – don’t you think that is a little melodramatic? You’re her main teacher. Your daughter is going to do fine. She has many shots just because she is coming from a loving, enriched home with a very educated and caring parent. Think about the kids who don’t have that. For them, school really is their “one shot.”
Now I’m done.
Mel Westbrook spews:
So to chime in once more; the principal issue is HUGE. I used to think that a school was a three-legged stool; the kids are the seat with the principal, teachers and parents propping them up. But I believe the principal is key. I’m sure Goldy could say a lot on that issue. It is one reason I joined the Site Council at Roosevelt because we are getting a new principal.
The district has no real, discernible policy. Some schools, like Dunlap, get a principal assigned with no input from staff/parents. (I happen to know that principal who is a great principal but I still think it was disrespectful to the community.) Other schools get a lot more input and so there’s resentment out there. There was a situation when Garfield needed a new principal and they allowed the parents to be part of the process. So guess what happened? The parents wanted one candidate and the superintendent another. It was not pleasant. So what I have been told at Roosevelt is that we will be part of the interview process and we have to submit a list of 3 candidates, any which would be fine with us. (I think to avoid the Garfield situation.) Well, okay, but human nature dicates that you would probably like and/or believe that one person would be a better fit for your school but we are not allowed to rank them at all.
The thinking about moving principals is simply to help a school by giving them a proven leader. But, for many parents, who invest in a school and a principal, it can be hard to take especially if you get little ability to influence who gets the open spot at your school.
(One CAC aside, one of the very best things I got from this experience was meeting the wonderful principals. Not just, “oh yeah, here’s my school” but “here, let me tell you about our wonderful community and what we are about”. I only saw one or two principals that I thought were not effective and one retired this year.)
Mel, teachers see a different side to principals than parents do. The one you mentioned above wasn’t nearly so effective at a prior site. Parents thought so but there was a lot of divisiveness amongst the teachers. He has not been missed except by a couple of teachers.
I understand the “proven leadership” thing but it doesn’t pan out well in the long run. A leader at my school which practically runs itself will face different issues at another school with a different population of parents and different needs. Strong leaders are formed in the trenches. My school is not a trench school. I’m all for letting parents have a huge part in choosing the principal and then holding said principal accountable for achievement. Parents are, in that regard, much more demanding than the District.
Mel, think Nicky and “The Little Red Lighthouse . . . ” :)
Since Portland City government works far far far better than Seattle’s Big Mayor format, there should be no question, Portland should not emulate Seattle in any way. Get a frickin’ clue, Goldy. There’s darn good reason why I call Seattle “The Armpit of the Pacific Northwest”. Seattle is all PR and hype. Potter is walking on thin ice nowadays, what with his drowsy, diffident personality, and this just hurts his chances for re-election, IMNSHO.
Sorry to burst your bubble, bu I wrote that.
Mel at 33: I would have to agree that the Principal has quite a bit of influence in what eventually happens in the school.
I’ve mentioned before, that my kid’s elementary school (in Edmonds School District) was closed for two years for a remodel. Why it takes two years to re-model a school I’ll never know – perhaps they should have torn it down and re-built it within six months. But in the meantime the kids were dispersed to other schools, and when the school was re-opened there was a new principle, mostly new staff, and a PTSA that had to be completely re-constituted.
As I found out, the Principal had her eyes on a bigger prize. She wanted a job in the school district administration, or perhaps a faculty position in a major college’s education department. She had her MBA and PHD, but she needed a couple of years as a Principal to get her “ticket punched” before moving on to bigger things.
Her goal was to make sure that no complaints, bad reports, etc. made their way to the School Board. Teachers were “informed” that if they could’t control their kids, they should submit there resignations. They were NOT to send kids to the office, recommend suspensions or expulsions. They were also NOT to fail any kids, and she expected the lowest grade issued to be a “C”.
Her pet goal was to create a little “micro-society” where the kids spent an hour or so each day performing jobs like letter carriers, bankers, etc. I assume that this was going to be the subject of a scholarly paper she was writing, which will taught the “success” of the project in teaching social skills to the kids. In the meantime PE was expanded to an hour and a half each day (physical fitness is SO important to combat childhood obesety, you know), and teachers were required to give each class an hour of “quiet time”. Then there was lunch, and “DARE” class.
My daughter went through the fourth and fifth grades without learning long division. After spending many hours at night working with her on math, I started asking her how come none of this was being covered in class. After working out her schedule, I discovered that they were only getting 1/2 hour of math instruction on Tuesdays and Thursdays, if a special assembly didn’t interefere. They skipped teaching the kids how to write in longhand entirely, saying that keyboarding was a more practical skill for the future. Maybe so, but did a choice really have to be made? I think its a shame that my kid will never be able to read her grandparent’s letters.
My attempts to rectify the situation are the subject of another, much more lengthy post, the contents of which I will spare you for now. In the end the situation was resolved, for us, when we moved out of the district.
So yes, a bad principal can certainly have a bad impact upon a school.