Inconsistencies in Board Member’s Arguments
Tonight I watched the rerun of last Thursday’s public hearing and work session and I couldn’t help but notice some of the inconsistencies in board member’s arguments.
Why are board members suddenly questioning whether it makes fiscal sense to close Jefferson when they didn’t ask the same question about Marshall? Board member Ruth Adkins said her analysis showed that there wouldn’t be enough of a savings from closing Jefferson to warrant doing so. What did her analysis show the savings to be in closing Marshall?
Adkins also argued that closing Marshall made sense because the current small schools on the Marshall campus had demonstrated some success. She said that the district could build on that “success” by closing Marshall and re-opening a new small focus school. In her mind, it didn’t make sense to open a focus school at Jefferson because there wasn’t a demonstrated need or desire for one and there wasn’t a defined plan for one.
Ruth sets a very low bar for success at Marshall. Against community wishes, the campus originally split into 4 small schools. One school died off right away. Another is on the federal watch list and it would have to make major changes next year. Of the three schools on the Marshall campus now, only about one half of the students are at benchmark in math and reading. Just over 40% of the students living in the Marshall attendance area attend the school.
As for the argument that a focus school at Jefferson isn’t a good idea because there isn’t a demonstrated need or demand for one…we’ve been saying exactly the same thing about Marshall.
The district has NO EVIDENCE that there’s a demand or need for a focus school on the Marshall campus. About 200 people showed up at Marshall’s community meeting recently but you didn’t hear much about it in the press. Not one person at the Marshall meeting testified in support of a focus school on the campus.
I’ve already written about the district’s shady plan for a focus school at Marshall. It has no chance of success.
Let’s pretend for a second that Ruth is right and a focus school could actually build on the success of the small schools at Marshall…how does reducing the size of the proposed focus school “build” on that? If small schools are successful because of the relationships that are developed in smaller learning environments, how does forcing a larger number of kids out of their neighborhood and into someone else’s large neighborhood school strengthen relationships?
I’m not advocating for Jefferson’s closure. My point is that the arguments being used for keeping Jefferson open should also be applied to Marshall.
Both schools need to remain open. The costs associated with closing them far exceed any anticipated (rarely realized) savings. Marshall and Jefferson closures would increase the drop out rates and decrease academic achievement.
As the superintendent’s high school resolution stated (when she was still trying to portray the high school redesign plan as being about equity):
According to a 2006 Alliance for Excellent Education issue briefing, a 5% reduction in the dropout rate of male students across the state of Oregon would decrease crime related costs by $21 million and would increase the annual earnings of this population by $30.
According to a 2009 Alliance for Excellent Education economic report, a 50% decrease in the dropout rate of the seven county Portland Metropolitan area would result in:
The bottom line is that poor, minority, English language learners and students with disabilities at both schools are having to carry the budget deficit burden for the entire district. It’s not only morally wrong but it’s a civil rights violation and legally wrong. Here’s a brief look at the student populations that the majority of the board are expecting to subsidize the education of wealthier students:
| Student population | Marshall High School Average for campus (percentage) | Jefferson High School(percentage) | Portland School District (percentage) |
| Free/reduced lunch | 72.7 | 70.5 | 45 |
| Special Education | 17.4 | 21.7 | 14 |
| English Language Learners | 18.9 | 8.4 | 10 |
| Asian | 17.2 | 6.5 | 10 |
| African American | 8.5 | 53.2 | 14 |
| Hispanic | 18.77 | 15.6 | 15 |
| Native American | 3.07 | 0.8 | 1 |
| White | 49.9 | 19.6 | 54 |
| Multiple Ethnicities | 2.17 | 2.9 | 5 |
8 comments
As I was reading through this post, I became aware that the whole enchilada comes down to the breakdown done at the very end. It’s about RACISM and CLASSISM. I’d love to see a breakdown around income of families at Jeff, Marshall, and the rest of the district. I’m comfortable believing that the outcome would be similar to what you found with the students themselves…
What I’ve said all along: this was never about “equity.” It was always about identifying which school(s) to close and THEN making a case for it.
Well, too, this is a way for them to sneak it in ( possibly closing Jeff ). I believe all of the community input meetings are over and perhaps last nights board meeting was the only way for those who have paid attention, to address it. And now they vote in a week? And how does that work, anyway? Since the idea of closing Jeff was brought up by board members and not the superintendant, does she have the ultimate say or is she just part of the vote?
I still feel that a focus school at Jefferson would do much better than placing one at the Marshall campus, partly because of location. We know many families that were hoping for an arts focus school but won’t even consider traveling to Marshall for it.
I think the fate of Jeff was looked at this way- if it wasn’t going to be a neighborhood school, then the district might as well either sell it or lease it to PCC, with nothing else considered. They aren’t interested in a focus school there unless it has something to do with a PCC partnership type of thing ( which is pretty much what the ” middle college ” thing is all about ).
I am really bothered by the district switching from a high school redesign plan to produce equity to a school closure plan. There has been no process for school closures. In order to have a decent school closure process you need to first address accurate savings and educational gains. Then you need to have criteria for the closures which are clear and fairly drawn. Then you need to have a community process where the criteria, savings, and educational gains can be substantiated or challenged. Then you need give and take discussions with community members — give and take, where questions from the community get answers and the answers can be challenged. None of this has taken place. It is just more of the same old school board crowd doing their political manipulations to make sure their schools work. Same old thing.
If they did it that way ( probably the fairest, most logical way ), they would probably end up with a scenerio in which they should close a school such as Grant or Lincoln and gee, they certainly can’t have that!
How much do you think the high school redesign charade has cost the taxpayers?
Chump change, compared to what it’s gonna cost in the future if they go forward as it appears they will.
Then again, there have been so many sudden left turns out of nowhere, who knows what might happen between now and the vote?
Don’t forget that a good part of the 49.9% white number comes from Eastern Euroupean families who have only been in the States for a few years or less. Don’t let that number fool you.
Leave a Comment