Ruth Adkins on school choice and school size

Back in December, before my medical hiatus from blogging, I wrote a piece on Vicki Phillips' decision to move Winterhaven, the math science magnet in the inner Southeast Brooklyn neighborhood, to Clark Elementary in outer Southeast.

I wrote then that Phillips' decision (since postponed for a year) managed to anger both sides in the often contentious school choice debate.  I bring this up again because, rather ironically, those two sides --comprehensive neighborhood schools versus the proliferation of option programs-- are represented in the two challengers for the school board --Ruth Adkins of the Neighborhood Schools Alliance, and Winterhaven's PTSA chair, Michele Schultz.

Ruth responded both to my post and with one of her own on the Neighborhood Schools Alliance site.  In the  latter, she reacted strongly to Vicki Phillips' claim that "...the district has a clear mandate that all schools must reach a certain size."  Ruth asked:

"When was this 'clear mandate' developed, and by whom? At what point was there a public process to discuss this 'mandate' that is changing our entire system of neighborhood schools and thus our city?

"Like the sudden, seismic shift last spring to a world in which K-8 is the 'preferred' model, this 'mandate' lacked any meaningful public input or Board deliberation."

Moreover, in a long comment to my post, Ruth directly questioned the wisdom of  "cannibalizing" established neighborhood schools with niche options stuffed into the neighborhood buildings:

"I am beginning to think the only way out of the 'choice'/focus option mess in this town is to create a 'special focus' program integrated into EVERY neighborhood school. Not a special program alongside and cannibalizing from the neighborhood, as PPS has disastrously imposed at so many schools (Brooklyn, Richmond, Hayhurst, etc) but a neighborhood-based focus option (as at Buckman)."

You won't read any of this on Ruth's campaign website beyond her call for a "strong school" in every neighborhood.  But it's clear that she clearly differs with Phillips --and her opponent, Doug Morgan-- on school choice and school size.  It's also clear that this particular race is about changing the direction of the board and the district on a whole host of issues, including whether Vicki Phillips, with her top down decrees,  is suited to continue to serve as superintendent the Portland Public School District.

Amanda Fritz has generated a lively discussion of just those issues on her blog with her endorsement of Ruth Adkins' candidacy.

As for Michele Schultz, who lives in St John's and drives her son clear across town to Winterhaven, she's certainly an advocate for choice.  I wrote about her testimony to the board about the proposed Winterhaven move here, and it's clear to me that she has little use for neighborhood schools, at least for her own child.

CORRECTION:  Michele Schultz was NOT the woman who testified to the board,  does NOT live in St. Johns, and is the chair of Winterhaven's PTSA, not its site council.  I apologize for the error.  I can only assume that Ms Schultz, as a Winterhaven parent, is an advocate for school choice.  I wish her the best in her campaign for the board.

 

Comments

[Mary Kusaka]

Mr. Olson,

Some of your statements are incorrect. You apparently have confused Michele Schultz with someone else. Michele is not Site Council Chair and does not live in St. Johns and does not have a son. She is the PTSA president, lives in Buckman, and has 2 daughters. May I suggest you research candidates a little better before you blog about them.

[Mary Kusaka]

I should also add that Michele did not give the testimony you attributed to her elsewhere on this blog. It was the site council chair, NOT Michele. In fact, Michele did not testify at that meeting at all. You accused Winterhaven of "slander"; what do you call what you are doing to Michele?

[Terry]

Apparently I did confuse Michele with the site council chair, whose name I thought was Shultz. For that I apologize. I will post a correction on my post immediately.

However, I stand by my characterization of some of the testimony at the Winterhaven/Clark board meeting about the failings of public neighborhood schools (and their students) as slanderous. As you may have guessed, I'm no fan of school choice.

[Mary Kusaka]

Then you might be interested to know that a considerable number of Winterhaven parents were made VERY uncomfortable by the same testimonies you cited. I am not sure what the standard is for "slander" so I cannot comment on that. As far as not being a fan of choice, you are entitled to your opinion, but so are all the folks who ARE fans of choice.

But you ARE a fan of Ruth Adkins. You want her to get as many votes as possible, right? Then why alienate people who might consider voting for her? I was wearing a "Ruth Adkins" button until I read your blog yesterday. I was interested in her stance on small schools. Now I am reconsidering my vote (and discussing it with my friends around town) because I am not sure I want to vote for someone whose supporters are attacking other parent groups. At the end of the day, we will still be in this together, regardless of who gets elected to the Board.

This "neighborhood vs. focus option" brouhaha is playing right into the school administration's hand by diverting our attention and resources (sound familiar?) away from what's going on at the BESC. We need to support one another in our quest for improved education for ALL Portland children and hold Dr. Phillips and the Board accountable for everything they do. Attacking one another does not accomplish that.

I also feel compelled to point out that, even if every magnet school were eliminated tomorrow, it would solve nothing at any neighborhood school. Yes, they would get more budget money, but only in direction proportion to increased enrollment. Would they get music, art and PE teachers? I doubt it. If Dr. Phillips had any intention of making good on that, she would already be hiring those teachers at the schools that already meet her alleged "400 mandate." Instead, her plans are to use the levy money to hire more vice principals! Not one dollar has been earmarked to hire one single additional teacher (unless you consider a counselor a "teacher," but I believe that grant $, not levy $, will be used to pay for them). Why is that? Well, more teachers would strengthen the teachers' union, and we can't have that! No, we need more administrators so that Dr. Phillips can have more groupies. That's not why I voted for the levy. Is that why you voted for the levy? Shouldn't we get together on holding Phillips and Board accountable for the levy $?

And I bet that if we looked, we could find more common ground.

That you for allowing me to sound off here, and thank you for apologizing and correcting your post.

[Mary Kusaka]

I apologize for posting twice--it was an accident because I was having trouble with my computer--perhaps you can take down the second copy?

Thanks again!

[Terry]

Thanks for your thoughtful comment, Mary.

I hope you put your Ruth Adkins button back on because we indeed share common concerns that go beyond the neighborhood school vs. magnet squabble. The bigger issue, as I have argued and you have correctly pointed out, is Vicki Phillips and her school board backing.

I don't speak for Ruth Adkins, by the way. I merely support her candidacy. That said, I've heard the argument before that fighting over the proliferation of focus options and magnets plays into the hands of the district administration. Perhaps. But I remain convinced that the combination of Portland's lax transfer policies and the lure of educational options hurts neighborhood schools, especially --and I emphasize this point-- low income neighborhood schools. That shouldn't be allowed to happen in a public school district.

If it's any consolation, I'll probably vote for Michele Schultz in May. I like David Wynde personally, but he's been too willing (until recently) to rubber stamp any of Vicki Phillips' top-down decrees. I suspect he was also instrumental in her hiring.

You're welcome to "sound off" here any time, Mary, especially if you put that Adkins button back on. Or even if you don't.

[Mary Kusaka]

Thank you, Terry. You are a gentleman.

I don't speak for Michele, either. I am actively supporting her campaign. If it makes YOU feel any better, Michele has joined the Neighborhood Schools Alliance; she shares your concerns about Vicki Phillips' war on "small" schools. (When did 350 become "small"?) If we could arrange some manner of private correspondence, I would be delighted to send you a spreadsheet of enrollment-and-transfer data (data source: PPS website) I made for Michele; you may be surprised to learn that focus options do not have as great an impact as you may now believe--even in low-income neighborhoods. (I am not sure, but I believe Michele may have shown the spreadsheet to Ruth at some point.)

And I'd be even happier to get you a Michele Schultz button!

[kokok]

jkhjkhkjhkjlhklhkhjkljh