Posts from — December 2009

If you were going to be Trapped in an Elevator for 41 Hours with someone who is involved in public education, who would you want that person to be at the local level?  National level?

I’ve never forgotten my first visit to Whitaker Middle School in June 2001.  It was shortly after Willamette Week broke the story  The Poisoning of Whitaker.  The Willamette Week story exposed a long history of radon poisoning along with other indoor air quality concerns at the school.  For about 10 years, PPS administrators failed to adequately address building conditions or to inform staff or students of the health hazards.

The first thing I noticed when entering Whitaker School (Pictured in the Cheating in Class banner) was that the cove base had been removed from along the bottom of the walls exposing mold.  There was a solid, thick, black line that ran parallel to the walls.  I realized as I got closer that it was a trail of dead ants which ran the full length of the hallway.  It looked as if someone had sprayed for ants but didn’t bother to clean up the dead ants.

It was during that visit that a staff member gave me a sample of what appeared to be a mushroom scraped from the wall in a special education classroom.  The building smelled awful.  I later learned that the smell was probably coming from a squirrel that had died in the basement.

I am not an environmental health and safety expert.  I’m a mom.  A mom who recognizes mold when I see it.  Whitaker clearly had a mold problem. 

Still, PBS Engineering and Environmental who had been on contract with PPS for years, had produced report after report stating that there wasn’t an indoor air or mold problem.  They even produced a report the same month of my visit saying that “ventilation of the spaces tested appears to be adequate with respect to the ventilation parameters monitored and the particulate identified in the laboratory reports.”

In July 2001, Whitaker was vacated and later determined to be too toxic to renovate.  After spending $700,000 on maintenance for the vacant building over the next few years, PPS administrators decided to demolish the building.

The PPS board voted to borrow $2.1 million for the demolition in August 2006.

Well PBS may have missed the boat on the mold problem but they weren’t going to miss out on their share of the demolition dollars.  PBS oversaw the decommissioning of several underground storage tanks, hydraulic lifts and water wells.  They also developed erosion control and grading plans.

According to the PBS Engineering and Environmental project website:

“The Whitaker School project is a good example of how PBS incorporates their multi-disciplinary structure into a successful project.  Led by the Sustainable Design Group, all four PBS service areas - Engineering, Environmental, Health and Safety, and Natural Resources – brought this project to successful completion.”  It sure did!

You’d think that PBS would count their winnings and move on but no…they’re still providing services to PPS.  Their annual contract was amended on 10/12/09.  They continue to receive about $450,000 annually.

The Whitaker situation raises a question about potential conflicts of interest.  But that’s not new for PPS.

In 1998, PPS contracted with KPMG to conduct a comprehensive performance audit.  At that time, the district claimed to have solicited four firms to submit bids to perform the audit but only two firms responded.  KPMG’s proposal was incomplete.  The only mention of costs was a handwritten note at the bottom of a letter.  The note estimated costs at $300,000 – $350,000 with formal cost estimates to be sent at a later time.  The district didn’t follow their own Request for Proposals policy.

KPMG came up with 230 audit recommendations.  The most controversial being the recommendation to close 13 schools.  An Oregonian analysis conducted shortly after the audit found KPMG’s numbers to be inflated.  Many of KPMG’s findings are still in dispute today.

Research into KPMG’s background suggests that KPMG might have been motivated by their desire to profit from PPS closures.  KPMG was a partner in a for-profit education management company.  They used public school system audits to gain entry into schools. 

KPMG was actively involved in pushing charter school legislation, vouchers and privatization.  It makes you wonder why the PPS board would have approved a contract with a company hostile to public education. 

Now we have Magellan.  The Magellan website states:

Magellan K-12 is a specialty consulting firm providing services to education clients nationwide.  The firm is focused solely on the K-12 marketplace and provides Educational Adequacy and Suitability Assessments.  The firm develops educational standards and specifications, architectural programs, site selections, enrollment projections, geographic information systems, economic models, bond programs, and construction implementation plans.

Once again…one stop shopping.  Magellan can identify problems with PPS facilities, make recommendations about renovations and new construction, and manage all projects. 

Not surprisingly many of the PPS staffers involved in today’s questionable contracts are the same people who brought us PBS Engineering and Environmental and KPMG. 

I agree with the little girl.  There’s a fungus among us.  What do you think?

The district failed to honor the Office for Civil Rights agreement and PPS was found in noncompliance with civil rights laws again in 1999.  That pattern has repeated itself over the last 15 years.   

It’s no surprise that the state cut federal funding to PPS in November 2009.  Read the history of this issue at:

PPS’ Program for English Language Learners: A History of Persistent Problems 

Excluding “inspirational videos” and one page stories, this is ODE’s entire coverage of closing the achievement gap.  Apparently closing the gap in Oregon is an annual banquet.

“The Academic Achievement Gap describes the gap in achievement that often exists between low income or minority students and their peers. Nationally, low income, minority, and special education students as well as students who are non-native English speakers tend to achieve at lower levels then students overall. In Oregon, our focus on this issue has seen results, and in two of the past three years we have seen a closing of the gap. However, the achievement gap still exists and there is still a great deal of work to be done. Minority and low income students still lag behind in state and national tests and are still over represented in dropout numbers.

Changing Oregon Schools

The racial and cultural diversity in Oregon has increased dramatically over the past ten years, adding great richness to our classrooms and communities and posing new challenges for our schools as they attempt to meet the needs of an increasingly culturally, racially and linguistically varied student population.

The number of Hispanic students has increased over 200% since the early 1990’s (up 700% from 1980) and the minority population overall has doubled since the 1995-96 school year. The percent of non-native English speakers has also risen from 2.7% in 95-96 to 11.5% in the 06-07 school year. The percent of students in poverty has increased ten percent in the last ten years. The increase of minority students in our schools has not been mirrored by the teaching population. While 27.7% of students are considered minorities, only 5.2% of teachers are.

Closing the Gap

While we’re not where we want or need to be on student achievement levels, over the past several years, we have seen achievement levels rise for students of color and low-income students. Although graduation rates for minority students are still lower than their white peers, we have seen a real decrease in dropout numbers. For example, in the 1994-95 school year, almost 18% of Hispanic students were classified as dropouts. In 2005-06 it was down to 8.4%. Through focus, strong leadership, use of data, and a commitment to success for all students we are seeing progress in closing the gap.”

Celebrating Student Success Banquet

The Celebrating Student Success Banquet is an annual event recognizing and honoring Oregon Schools that are making substantial progress in closing the achievement gap. The event unites educators, business leaders, community members, legislators and parents to recognize schools from around the state for their successful strategies for closing the achievement gap and to learn from and share their good work. The top schools are awarded an unrestricted, $3000 sponsored grant to further the outstanding work they are doing every day for Oregon students. The 2009 Celebrating Student Success Banquet will be held at the Oregon Convention Center in Portland on May 1st from 6-8 pm.

There are many problems with PPS high school redesign plan but one key problem is that it’s being developed absent common sense.  This has been apparent from the beginning. 

Do you remember getting the postcard earlier in the year inviting you to the high school redesign meetings?  If the meetings had been held according to the schedule on the postcard, Superintendent Smith wouldn’t have been able to attend all of the meetings because someone double booked her.   The meetings had to be rescheduled, making the postcards a waste of time and money. 

I’ve attended three of the redesign meetings and heard at each one that the purpose in making the changes to the high school system is to:

• Promote equity
• Increase graduation rates (which sounds much better than reducing dropout rates)
• Inspire and engage students
• Ensure all schools are in high demand
• Ensure all students are prepared for success at the next level

Let’s talk about equity.  Has the district defined it?  How will they know if they’ve achieved the goal of creating equity?  Who will monitor it?  What is the plan for correction if they’re not achieving equity (the thing that they haven’t defined)?

PPS Chief Academic Officer Xavier Botana has said repeatedly that students need a solid K-8 foundation to be successful at the high school level.  Yet, the K-8 reconfiguration is still a mess in many schools.  So what if PPS offers Advanced Placement classes at all high schools when not all students are being prepared to take them.  Where’s the equity?

It seems that district leadership is hellbent on making sweeping changes without having taken the most obvious smaller steps to address the issues.

The proposed high school model in the redesign plan reduces the counselor/student ratio by 100 students per counselor.  That’s a waste of time without a comprehensive evaluation of the high school counseling offices.  

Some school counseling offices are responsible for increasing dropout rates.  The #1 reason that students drop out is because they are too far behind in credits to catch up.   

Many counselors are not available to students.  They don’t return parent phone calls.  They fail to inform students that they are not eligible for credits in some situations.  Communication about withdrawal/transfer policies and deadlines is often inaccurate.  School counselors rarely (in high poverty schools) initiate contact with students.  Unless the student goes to the counselor for help with getting into college, it won’t happen.

I have yet to hear specifics about how the proposed high school redesign will “close the achievement gap.”  Wasn’t that the goal with the switch to smaller schools? 

My final thought on this whole redesign process and the lack of common sense behind the plan is regarding students. 

Why are district administrators soliciting input from students that are doing well?  We know the system works for them.  That’s wonderful. 

What about the kids that aren’t on Super SAC or didn’t attend the community meetings?  District administrators need to be actively seeking out the students that the system failed and engaging them in genuine conversations.

[polldaddy poll=2401806]

PPS Two-Tiered Public Education System

 PPS is part way through a high school “redesign” process.  District administrators claim the redesign is intended to eliminate inequities within the school system.  These inequities were created and/or maintained by many of the same people now charged with fixing the broken system. 

The table below is a snapshot of the programs at Jefferson and Lincoln high  schools.  It’s clear that inequities exist.  Lower income students do not have the same  opportunities as students from wealthier backgrounds.  The results in terms of achievement, dropout rates, and college preparation reflect  the district’s investment in the students. 

Can the PPS school board, superintendent, and district administrators be trusted to right their wrongs? 

 Sources: Oregon Department of Education 2007/08 Dropout Report, AYP Reports, School Report Cards and Portland Public Schools Research and Evaluation Department.