Category — ESL

June 16, 2010

Dear Superintendent Smith and Members of the School Board,

I need to be honest – I wasn’t going to write this letter.  I had given up on the process some weeks ago when, after 200+ members of the Marshall Community came together to speak and plead for a comprehensive school on their campus ,Superintendent Smith presented her revised proposal which recommended the slow and painful death of Marshall Campus.  Today however, I received an email from Superintendent Smith, wishing me “relaxation and rejuvenation this summer.”  Please allow me to tell you about the start of summer for so many of us…

Yesterday was the last day of school for students on Marshall Campus.  As the freshmen, sophomores and juniors walked out of their classrooms, many gave their teachers hugs, and asked, “Will I see you this fall?”  My freshman English class spent time talking about their own plans for the Fall…  Many have younger siblings who would have been freshmen next year.  Because of the recommendation to not allow freshmen at Marshall Campus (no matter their interest), many parents are looking to pull these older siblings as well.  After all, what parent would want their children at two different high school campuses? 

Our principals are scrambling around – strongly desiring to create a master schedule with teacher names, classes, and student rosters.  But they too are in the dark.  They have been given estimates on which to create a “Worst-Case Scenario” schedule.  They have to reevaluate program needs, and examine teacher seniority.  These decisions are not easy – especially considering that all of these actions were already completed two months ago; schedules were complete, contract exceptions filed and approved, hiring completed.  They now have to start over.

Teachers know that all this is going on.  We are grasping to find any information we can: seniority within the building, seniority within the district, any rumors whatsoever about whether or not we have a job next fall, let alone if it may be here.  Meanwhile, we have been teaching our hearts out, trying to keep some sense of normalcy in the lives of our students.  Normalcy in a time of grieving. 

Our students, who have been fighting for their schools (whether as individual small schools, or as a comprehensive campus) for nearly two months, are grieving.  They see the news, and see in the Superintendent and Board’s recommendations, that their actions and desires do not matter.  They see that their voice, which asked so strongly for a comprehensive school, and for more time, was ignored.  They see that Benson students got what they wanted by skipping class on a walkout.  They see themselves attending school, getting an education, making their demands on their own time rather than their teachers’.  They see that Jefferson students get a voice in the media because of the color of their skin.  They see that they are ignored because they are poor.  They get the impression that they don’t matter to their own school district.

What many don’t see is the impact of having the freshmen pulled out from underneath us.  Students haven’t realized that they will lose anywhere from 25-33% of their teachers.  Students haven’t realized that they will lose elective classes.  Students haven’t realized that they will lose JV sports.  Students haven’t realized that they will lose out on so much that makes up a high school education. 

All of this in the name of “EQUITY”.  Isn’t that what this is all supposed to be about?  Creating an EQUITABLE education for all students of PPS, regardless of their ZIP Code?  Yet the proposal not only plans to ship these kids OUT of their ZIP code in order to get that “equitable” education – it also aims to provide the current students of Marshall’s three small schools a LESS THAN equitable education as the District “phases out” BizTech High School, Pauling Academy, and Renaissance Arts Academy.  How is this fair?  How is this equitable?How is this right?

By taking our freshmen, many of whom truly wanted to come to one of the three small schools, we are being set up for failure.  The staff we will lose as a result of having no freshmen severely limits the educational opportunities we can offer our students.  The sloppy process being followed here takes away any rights that we as students or staff should have gotten:  students’ right to apply for a transfer passed in February; staff rights to apply for new positions in Phase One passed in early April.  Only in late April did we find out that our schools’ livelihood was at risk.  And only two weeks ago, in early June, did we learn that it was critical, and that the District is placing a DNR tag on our doors.

I cannot imagine being an eighth grader in this neighborhood these past few months.  In February, these students filled out an application stating their desire to attend BizTech, Pauling or Renaissance (or any of the other schools in the District).  Just a few months later, these students received a letter saying that while their school was slated for closure, they could choose again: they could indicate their desire to remain committed to technology, science or art, or opt to go to their “new” neighborhood school: Madison or Franklin.  Then, just a few weeks later, they were sent yet another letter saying that they would not get to go to any of the three schools on Marshall Campus, nor Benson; rather, they would be sent to their NEW “new” neighborhood school of Cleveland, Franklin or Madison.  How confusing this must be for a 13-year-old!  And the uncertainty of not knowing where your friends will be in the Fall Semester must have certainly put a damper on their promotion celebrations.

Our Second Language students are being inundated with letters from the District, as well as from the ESL departments at Franklin, Madison and Cleveland.  They are being led to believe that they must transfer.  Over the past few weeks, countless students have brought in these letters to their ESL teachers, or to our ESL Educational Assistants asking, “What does this mean?  Do I have to leave?”  They love the small classes in their schools here.  They love that they are able to be fully mainstreamed into classes that are still small.  They love that they are part of the community alongside every other student in their small school.  They do not want to leave.

This is awfully late in the year for such drastic decisions.  It is unfortunate that the end of a two year process has to happen so quickly and at a time where those so dramatically affected have lost all opportunities to make a choice about their own future.  As for Superintendent Smith’s hope for “relaxation and rejuvenation” this summer – it is not starting off well.  As I clean my classroom, it is bittersweet; anticipating the summertime (or summer job, in my case), while also uncertain about where I will return to in two months.  Will I return to my students at Marshall, or will I get a phone call mid-summer informing me of my placement elsewhere? 

Emily Paddock
BizTech High School
English/History/Digital Media Teacher
Marshall JV Girls Soccer Coach

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:

• $38 million in increased earnings
• $25 million in increased spending and $9 million in additional investing.
• $108 million in additional home sales.
• The creation of 300 new jobs and an increase in gross national product of $47 million.
• $4 million in increased tax revenue.
• 61% of these additional high school graduates would be likely to pursue some type of post-secondary education.

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:

PPS administration has attempted to frame the high school redesign issue in a way that pits low-income area schools against each other.  They would be happy to see Marshall attack Jefferson, Roosevelt or Benson but why should we?

Each of those schools have suffered from PPS actions or inactions.  Those schools along with Marshall have been underfunded, denied resources, mismanaged and neglected while Lincoln, Wilson, Cleveland and Grant have benefitted. 

The question isn’t why does Jefferson or Roosevelt get resources that Marshall doesn’t?  The question is why does Lincoln, Grant, Cleveland and Wilson continue to get so much more than everyone else? [Read more →]

Let’s be clear on Superintendent Smith’s high school redesign proposal. 

She is recommending that 3 Marshall Campus schools close and a new school opened on the campus.  She is also recommending that Benson High School close and a new program is housed on the campus.

Both recommendations are in violation of  PPS School Initiation and Closure policy 6.10.030-P.  Where are the School Initiation and School Closure Reports?  Is she planning to produce those after the board votes?

 Superintendent Smith’s recent recommendation to cut paraeducator and bilingual educational assistant staff is certainly consistent with PPS history.  Like a playground bully, Smith picks on the weakest members.

Her recommendation to close Marshall is just one more example of that.  She doesn’t have the courage to stand up to Grant or Lincoln or Wilson so she took the easy route.  She doesn’t expect resistance from the Marshall community. 

Her high school redesign plan closes Marshall without giving parents or students the opportunity to be on the focus school redesign team.  I’m sure that’s because the “redesign” will be the old design, certain to fail. 

The small focus school at Marshall isn’t going to open.  There isn’t any student or parent interest in it.  Remember the Young Men’s Academy?  The high school redesign plan says a representative from Marshall (staff member) wanted a small school at the campus.  One person wants it so the community suffers?

The parents and students in the Marshall area have been saying for years that they’ve been cheated by the small schools concept.  They weren’t happy with the small schools because they didn’t offer anything. 

The high school redesign is our chance to FINALLY get a decent shot at a public education. 

The superintendent couldn’t justify her recommendation to close Marshall based on the SEER data so she added bullshit criteria and lies.  One of the essential factors that informed decision-making was “local understanding of the city’s topography, neighborhood’s sense of community, and travel routes.”  How does she measure the neighborhood’s sense of community?  Do they complain about paying premiums for their homes?

Another essential factorinforming Smith’s decision-making is the opportunity for unique partnerships.  David Douglas isn’t going to lease Marshall.  The letter from David Douglas superintendent Rommell (Smith’s friend) says she’s encouraged by the possibility of providing opportunities for David Douglas and Marshall students.  How encouraged?  Has David Douglas made a commitment to lease Marshall?  Or does Smith expect the PPS board and community to assume David Douglas will be leasing Marshall when closing the school?  Has Smith seen David Douglas’ proposed budget?   

New homes are cropping up everywhere in the Marshall cluster and enrollment at Marshall has increased since 2004.  One issue Smith said she plans to address in the high school redesign is “very large enrollment at Harrison Park”.  That would be our multiple award winning Clark Elementary which was merged with Binnsmead Middle School illegally.  Harrison Park’s enrollment is very large because of the district’s decision to close Clark while the area was seeing significant growth. 

Here’s a profile of Marshall High School now:

How does closing a school that serves a higher than average percentage of students who are poor, minorities, and/or have disabilities promote equity?  It doesn’t but it does make them an easy target.

This Wednesday’s Willamette Week included a blurb about proposed changes to PPS English as a Second Language (ESL) program. 

The district wants to cut 23 bilingual educational assistants (EAs) and replace them with 12 ESL teachers.    That would be a mistake. 

The bilingual EAs are often the only ones in the schools able to speak the language of the students and their families.  The district can’t even find 12 bilingual ESL teachers. 

No Child Left Behind requires the bilingual educational assistants to have a minimum of 2 years of college or the equivalent.  When NCLB first passed, the PPS Human Resources department asked all bilingual EAs to submit their transcripts to HR for review.  Many of the bilingual educational assistants were college graduates in their home countries and some were teachers prior to moving to the United States. 

Bilingual EAs submitted their foreign transcripts to HR but they just sat in a box for over a year.  The assistant director of HR refused to use Title I funds to cover the cost of translation and evaluation of the transcripts even though that was an allowable use of Title I funds.  She claimed it wouldn’t be fair to other employees.  Never mind that she didn’t have a problem with administrators hiring their kids for “Limited Term” positions. 

It would have been to HRs advantage to have the transcripts evaluated because the bilingual EAs would have been a natural pool of candidates for a career ladder program.  They were already working in the schools, college educated, committed and BILINGUAL.   

PPS HR administrators have long argued that they can’t find bilingual ESL teachers.  While working in the PPS HR department, I researched the effectiveness of the Bilingual Teacher Pathway program.  The career ladder program is a partnership between PPS and Portland State University.  The PSU website says:

The Bilingual Teacher Pathway (BTP) is a teacher preparation program designed to fill critical shortages of bilingual education/ESL teachers in the Portland metropolitan area. This is accomplished by recruiting and supporting bilingual/bicultural educational assistants so they can become licensed teachers.

My research found that 1/3 of the program participants became teachers, 1/3 left PPS and 1/3 remained in bilingual educational assistant positions with the district.  That meant that the district was investing their resources into a program with a 33% success rate.   

The program has the potential to be effective but like most activities involving equal opportunities district administrators create barriers to equity. 

Those barriers contribute to the rapidly increasing gap between Oregon’s teaching staff and student diversity.  Oregon Department of Education’s State Report Card shows a 30% minority student population compared to a 5% minority teacher population.  What’s worse is that the minority teacher population has remained virtually unchanged since 1998.

The ESL program clearly has problems but it’s not because of having too many bilingual EAs.  They should not have to take the fall for the incompetence of district administrators.

The superintendent and board need to put their money where there mouth is and invest it in the kids.  No more bull shit about how they’ve cut Central Office staff.  It’s actually doubled in the last 10 years.  Keep the bilingual EAs, cut twelve of those Central Office administrators (I could provide a list) and hire the 12 bilingual ESL teachers!