Trudy wants another term

In other local school news, Portland School Board member Trudy Sargent announced that she wants ...four more years! 

I can only ask, why?  With all due respect, although Director Sargent may well  be a very nice person, well-meaning, and kind to her dog and her kids, I really don't think she has a clue about what's going on in the district, even when presented with the evidence directly, as she was at the last school board meeting. 

What evidence?  For starters, how about the data, in graphic color  and nifty bar graphs, presented to the board by John Wilhelmi and Sara Allan showing that the equity chasm between the four wealthiest high schools in the district and all the others had increased dramatically in the last 12 years?  The highlights:

• --"students in poverty are more heavily concentrated in specific schools", namely Jefferson, Roosevelt, Marshall and Madison.  That trend has accelerated over the past 12 years, from a 24% gap in 1995 -6 to 44% in 2007 -8.

• --"Declining enrollment has been coupled with these demographic shifts."  Only the wealthiest four high schools --Cleveland, Wilson, Grant and Lincoln-- have gained students.

And here's the clincher:

• --"Data show that students at benchmark [e.g. good test scores] transfer to other neighborhood schools as well, so not only are we losing students, we're losing students that perform at levels above students who remain at those schools."

Hmmm.  It doesn't take an expert statistican or a deep thinker to conclude, given the data, that lots of good students are leaving poor neighborhoods schools. And that's what accounts for the enrollment drain.  That's what accounts for the clear exacerbation of segregation in the schools by socio-economic status. 

In short,the culprit in the growing inequity between schools is, quite simply, the district's transfer policy and its commitment to school choice. 

But Trudy doesn't see it that way.  In a question to Wilhelmi and Allan, she blamed the problem entirely on Portland's neighborhood school student assignment system:

"Our neighborhoods are segregated by poverty and by race... .  So our system which is based on neighborhood schools results in different populations at different schools based on the neighborhood."

In other words, the problem lies not with the transfer policy, but with existing neighborhood demographics, despite evidence just presented to the contrary: the transfer policy directly exacerbates segregation in the schools.  And it contributes to the marked enrollment declines in the poorest of Portland's high schools. 

The Flynn-Blackmer audit said precisely the same thing.  So did Steve Rawley's masterful study, Charting Open Transfer Enrollment, a copy of which should be in Trudy Sargent's hands: 

"Portland Public Schools has a system of school choice that has resulted in a radical redistribution of public investment. ...

"Since funding follows students, this has created a self-reinforcing pattern of money leaving our poor and working-class neighborhoods and flowing into our wealthiest neighborhoods. As more and more students have followed the money with their own funding, we are left with a two-tiered school system... ."  

To be fair, no other school board member, with the exception of Dilafruz Williams, mentioned the transfer policy as a problem in need of fixing.  And even Williams could only say it was a "complex problem."

It's not complex at all, except politically.  Simply end neighborhood to neighborhood school transfers and scale back charter and magnet school options. 

Here's another suggestion to help clear up any lingering confusion on the board.  I ask that Trudy and the other board members read (or re-read) another inspired piece by Steve Rawley.  It's called The Very Important Problem: Three Parables. 

Just click on the link, school board members.

Comments

[Marian]

Trudy rubber stamped all of Vickie's closure proposals without due diligence. Trudy introduced a boundary change, at the last minute during a very long board meeting, that significantly and adversely affected the attendance area for Roseway Heights. This resulted in reduced FTE for that school and furthered economic segregation in NE Portland. The boundary change and closures of Rose City Park that Trudy voted for also resulted in overcrowding at Fernwood (Cleary), Laurelhurst, Alameda, Rigler, and Scott. Laurelhurst will add portables next year for its incoming 8th graders because of overcrowding. Rigler and Scott have had to send their 8th graders to an "academy" at Madison because of overcrowding.

Her lack of due diligence has contributed to a huge mess for which our children are now paying a huge price. She will not have my vote. I sure hope someone with some character to stand up for our kids runs in her district.

I'm sure she's a nice lady but she's proven that she has done us wrong as a board member.

[Terry]

I hope someone steps up too, Marian, and challenges Trudy directly on some her policy votes. She represents Zone 6, which includes Mt. Tabor and portions of outer Southeast and Northeast.

Only new faces on the board can clean up the "huge mess for which our children are now paying a huge price."

[Zarwen]

"New faces" are unable to get the backing of CPPS, Stand for Children, the Oregonian, and other groups that ultimately, through endorsements and donations, end up picking the Board members. Anyone who wanted to mount a serious campaign in Zone 6 (or any other open zone) this year needed to have started two years ago, just to get some name recognition.

My point is that whoever may want to run for Zones 1, 2, 3, and 7 in 2011 had better start NOW!

[Steve R.]

Zarwen's right... the key is name recognition, which is most effectively acquired by purchase.

Anybody jumping in the race now better have either pre-existing name recognition and credibility, or a pile of cash -- at the very least enough to put three glossy mailers in the mailbox of every voter in Portland -- and enough free time to work 40-60 hours a week between now and the election.

For most people, a volunteer position on a governing body with an insufficient budget and almost no revenue-raising authority simply isn't worth the time and expense.

[Terry]

I agree that name recognition, endorsements and a early start are all important, but I disagree that a volunteer position on the school board is inherently an unattractive proposition.

Consider that when I ran in 2003, 22 candidates vied for the four available positions. And how many people applied for Dan Ryan's vacant seat? Wasn't it four? No, I think it was five.

The point is, someone, anyone, has to step up an challenge Trudy for the Zone 6 seat. Win or lose, it would send a message to the district and the board that complacency and the status quo and business as usual aren't good enough.

The transfer policy is a good place to start. But I don't need to tell that to you, Steve.

Doesn't Sue Hagmeier live in Zone 6? She's got name recognition. Somebody ought to contact her.

[MeltonNANNIE25]

It is understandable that cash can make us independent. But what to do if one does not have cash? The one way is to receive the mortgage loans and commercial loan.