Author: ijsadmin (Page 10 of 13)

The Board failed on its most important task – hiring a Superintendent who could move the education needle.

September 11, 2017 / ijsadmin

Recently, there has been a great deal of self-congratulating on the part of our School District and Superintendent relating to Jeffco’s 2016-2017 test scores.

Most recently, we’ve seen an article published by the school district relating to CMAS Achievement.

While it is true that these results may be “all-time highs’, let’s be serious. Should we as parents and taxpayers be happy with results that show that barely 50% of our kids meet state ELA standards? It’s even worse with Math where only 40%, or less, seem to be achieving the state standards. That seems to be acceptance of mediocrity, at best, to me.

However, what is even more disconcerting is the comparison of Jeffco scores to those of Eagle County, where our new Superintendent was “Chief Learner” for 4 years and had plenty of time, within a small district, to make a real impact.

I don’t see that impact. In fact, NOT one Grade level or Subject in Eagle has scores better than Jeffco’s, most not even achieving the state “average”. What should we expect in the years to come in Jeffco? A regression to state averages?

What was the Board thinking when they hired someone without a proven record of academic related results? Did they hire a blogger/tweeter over someone who actually has a proven record? Didn’t the Board say that this was one of the most important decisions a Board could make? Did the Board even consider academic results or were they just bamboozled by a smooth talking social media specialist and “visionary”?

This Board didn’t do their job on their most important task!

We needed someone who could really move the needle with our kids. Eagle County’s results don’t indicate we got that. Those results point to the failure of our Board. We have a dire need for change on the Board to really move Jeffco forward.

Has Jason Glass met with anyone who might disagree with him? Quick Answer: No!

September 7, 2017 / ijsadmin

Support Jeffco Kids (SJK) has recently written about how many groups and individuals Jason Glass has met with in his first 39 days as Jeffco Schools Superintendent. Well, Congratulations!

However, do you see any individuals or groups on this list who might possibly have a different perspective on education or the District than him, other than politicians? Has he reached out to anyone that might fit into that category?

I don’t see anyone that might fit into that category on the list that was so carefully curated by SJK.

Let’s start with the great “listening” tour. This tour was held during normal work hours for most working people (except the session late in the day in Evergreen) and during the summer. This conveniently brought out the teachers, stay-at-homes and retirees. Not a lot of working people made these meetings. When I brought this up to Glass during a Twitter exchange he said that he would consider holding meetings that might be more convenient for working people.

He may have considered holding additional meetings, but they certainly didn’t happen. In my opinion, he missed out on getting a different set of questions than he got from the teachers, retirees and stay-at-homes. Was this an act of omission or intentional?

What about the parents of the kid who was threatened at Governor’s Ranch Elementary School last year who would like a meeting with him to discuss? Glass’ schedule is SOOOO busy that he can’t fit these parents in until September 29^th. Really??

Request to meet with Superintendent

When asked if she planned to meet with the superintendent, the mom said she put in a request.

“Dr. Glass has yet to reach out to us,” she said. “We were told the earliest Glass could meet with us was Sept. 29.”

Should we really believe that his schedule is completely booked for over 30 days and he can’t find 30 minutes to talk with parents who have a real issue? I’m sorry, but real “leaders” make time to talk with people who have issues and problems and don’t let those issues fester.

Has he reached out to ANYONE who might not agree with the current District staff and Board? If he really wants to listen he should hear different perspectives. I personally don’t know these people, but has he reached out to anyone from previous Boards (he’s talked to former principals, why not former Board members? Speaking of principals, did Glass reach out to former Wheat Ridge principal Griff Wirth who ran a great school but had issues with the District?)? Has he reached out to anyone from (http://www.eyeonjeffcoschoolboard.com/), Jeffco Students First or people with similar views? Or is it more convenient for him to just wish that the current Board “wins” in November, as he stated during the August Board retreat, so that he doesn’t have to engage people who may not agree with him or the Board?

Glass also knows that I have my own issues with members of the District staff who have blatantly and repeatedly lied to the Board, teachers and parents.

I started with comments posted to his blog on June 2^nd and moved on to emails.

From his 3 Questions for Jeffco (https://advancejeffco.blog/2017/05/24/3-questions-jeffco/) blog I wrote:

“We have Cabinet members who intentionally deceive and lie (and I don’t use that word lightly) to the Board, teachers and parents.
Restore some community trust in Denver West by getting rid of the people there who have forgotten who their real constituents are – the students.
Note: I can back up my accusations of intentional deception and lying with documentation and evidence and would appreciate a meeting so I can give that to you.
Let’s talk when you’re settled in!”

He completely ignored this comment.

I reiterated my accusation in an August 10^th email:

“ I don’t know what xxx told you and I certainly don’t know what he expects to accomplish with another parents meeting. The first one was an absolute disaster as he did nothing other than present inaccurate, misleading and deceptive numbers, essentially lying to the group. He was insulting, and parents and students alike called him out on his lies and attempts at deception. … Why won’t he have a discussion with the principal and SAC? Most likely it is because they will tell him that the numbers he is showing to people are intentionally deceptive and therefore complete lies.”

Don’t you think if someone accused members of your District staff of lying you would want to hear more?

Well, not Jason Glass!

In addition he has delayed and avoided getting people to talk about sustainable funding for the District’s HS GT program. Granted the Board directed collaborative approach to finding sustainable funding was made in February before Glass became Superintendent, but he clearly stated that he had been briefed on the issue during his “listening” tour, very early in his tenure. He now “owns” that issue and shouldn’t try to disclaim responsibility. However, to date the only thing he has done is to delay holding a collaborative discussion to some unknown date in the future, inexplicably tied to another meeting with only one set of stakeholders – the HS GT parents. That’s certainly not my definition of “collaborative” or even “listening” to all sides of the issue. And that’s not even talking about how badly the last District held meeting with the parents went .

He states that he has listened to me on my issues:

The funny thing is, I did check my emails. On July 25^th he said that he was bringing the GT issue up to his Cabinet. Yet, his response to my follow-up inquiry of how the cabinet meeting went was to back track on getting people together to discuss the issue by holding another HS GT Parents’ meeting in September (still not scheduled by the way). And then, only AFTER that meeting get people to talk about the issue.

My question to him was WHY? Why not begin talking now with ALL of the stakeholders instead of just the HS GT parents?

There was no response to those questions.

Once again, it seems to me that he is delaying and avoiding a real discussion on difficult issues with people who may not agree with his views.

Therefore, I don’t count what he is doing as real “listening”.

Glass knows how to contact me via Twitter, email or phone. I’m happy to make time to discuss my issues. Until that happens, count me as someone who isn’t buying the “listening” bill of goods he’s selling and SJK has bought.

If Glass is only going to listen to people who support him and repeatedly delays and avoids listening to all sides of hard issues, can he, or his supporters, really claim that he’s listening?

Not in my book!

Once again Support Jeffco Kids is the pot that calls the kettle black!

September 2, 2017 / ijsadmin

In a recent post (August 28^th) Support Jeffco Kids talks about “Misleading Dark Forces” who purchased the .com of their domain – supportjeffcokids.org.

But wasn’t this completely preventable?

Isn’t this a story more about the “error” the Support Jeffco Kids team made than how a .com domain name was “stolen”?

In fact, using the word “stolen” is completely misleading itself! The .com domain was NOT stolen. It was legally purchased. And, it was only available for purchase because of the “error” of SJK! If SJK wants that domain, maybe SJK should make the owner a monetary offer, similar to what happens every day with countless other domains instead of just complaining.

I also want to point out that it appears SJK allowed someone to legally purchase supportjeffcokids.co too!

I can’t and won’t address the legality of the use of and “false affiliation” claims made by SJK, but the fact is that the .com domain was NOT stolen. And I would think that the owners can do with that domain what they want as long as they don’t violate the provisions of the Colorado Charitable Solicitations Act C.R.S. §6-16-111.

If the owners of the .com domain want to transfer it, that is within their legal rights. People do it all of the time. It is not some “Misleading Dark Forces” making a transfer. The “Misleading Forces” here are SJK for trying to make people believe that a domain name was “stolen” and what people are legally doing is “misleading and dark”. It’s not!

I might want to suggest to SJK that if they want to prevent other people from legally purchasing similar domains (such as .io and .biz) that they go and purchase them.

In addition, I’d be happy to sell them supportjeffcokids.net for $100 if they want it too. They left that one available and I legally purchased it. If they don’t want it, maybe I will just forward it to my blog. Since I don’t solicit any money I don’t think they can claim I’m violating the Colorado Charitable Solicitations Act. And, I’m certainly not “Dark” as I can be easily found.

Note: I was inspired to write this this post because of another post by SJK which included the statement:

“It IS important to correct untruths and spread FACTUAL information online.”

I hope they don’t mind that I’m following their advice to “correct untruths and spread FACTUAL information online”!

Mere months after “budget crisis” and budget cuts, new Superintendent hires “Special Assistant”

August 25, 2017 / ijsadmin

What are we to think when only days into a new fiscal year and just days on the job, the new Superintendent commits the equivalent of a full-time teacher’s salary so that he can “supervise” a PhD Education Leadership resident?

Didn’t the District just have what the Board described as a “budget crisis”? Didn’t the District just absorb $10M+ in budget cuts? Didn’t the District just narrowly avoid closing 4 additional neighborhood schools and cuts to successful student-facing programs?

If the fiscal situation is so dire, where did the money for this “resident” miraculously appear?

I realize there is some “slush” in a $1B budget. But shouldn’t some of that “slush” have been found only a few short months earlier, before successful programs were recommended for reduction?

Why didn’t the District staff find that “extra” money then? Or is the new Superintendent such a financial wizard that he could identify it after only a few short days on the job? How did he find this money at the beginning of the fiscal year before under-spends could be identified?

I don’t know the answer to that, but I do know that the optics of this immediate “hire” are not good. This “hire” makes me wonder the following:

Why does the new, highly paid Superintendent need a “Special Assistant”?
Where is this money really coming from? The response to the CORA request I filed stated it is coming from the (already reduced by $54,000 due to budget reductions) Superintendent’s Admin budget, or other unspecified accounts at management discretion. This means it is coming from some still unknown budget line.

Why should we ever trust the District/Board when they say there is a “budget crisis” if they can come up with the salary for one teacher equivalent just days into a new fiscal year? It makes me wonder where else they are “hiding” money.
What value is this “Special Assistant” really going to provide to the District, above and beyond staff that is already on the payroll and familiar with the District?
Why did the new Superintendent agree to this?

I’m sorry, but when the District keeps saying that they’re no longer going to fund successful and life-changing student-facing programs such as the District’s HS GT program, yet can miraculously and instantaneously find money for the Superintendent’s “Special Assistant”, I don’t think you can trust any future “budget crisis” or proposed budget cuts!

School counselors need to educate themselves on military opportunities and their responsibilities relating to House Bill 17-1041

August 11, 2017 / ijsadmin

The Colorado Legislature passed House Bill 17-1051, CONCERNING MEASURES TO INFORM STUDENTS OF EDUCATION OPPORTUNITIES LEADING TO JOBS, during its last legislative session.

This bill requires, among several other things, that public schools explain to parents and students the educational opportunities available through military service:

22-32-109. Board of education – specific duties. (1) In addition to any other duty required to be performed by law, each board of education shall have and perform the following specific duties:

(oo) (III) At a minimum, each public school shall ensure that, in developing and maintaining each student’s ICAP, the counselor or teacher explains to the student’s parent or legal guardian, by electronic mail or other written form, and to the student:

(A) …

(B) …

AND

(C) THE SKILLS AND EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES AVAILABLE THROUGH MILITARY ENLISTMENT. IN DISCUSSING MILITARY ENLISTMENT WITH A STUDENT AND HIS OR HER PARENT, EACH PUBLIC SCHOOL IS ENCOURAGED TO PROVIDE TO THE STUDENT INFORMATION CONCERNING THE MILITARY ENLISTMENT TEST.

As an Army veteran with over 14 years of active duty service and another 14 years in the Reserves I would agree that the military can provide numerous opportunities. The best thing is that the military doesn’t expect any experience and provides the necessary job training. In addition, not only are many technical skills transferable to civilian jobs, but the military also teaches soft skills that many people never learn.

It’s true that the military is not for everyone. But it’s also true that the military could be a great option for many people who don’t know about the opportunities military service can provide. This is what I think is the purpose of the bill – ensuring information gets to the people who need it. The big problem though is that the counselors responsible for implementing this bill may not know the opportunities themselves.

For example, a generation ago, it would have been rare for some member of a family to have not served in WWII, the Korean War or in the Vietnam conflict. Currently though, there are only approximately 22 million living veterans in the US out of a population of 320 million, less than 7% of the total population.

For this reason, counselors themselves need to take the time to learn and understand what opportunities military service can provide. The Army isn’t just about the Infantry, just like the Air Force isn’t just about pilots. There are numerous support skills needed to keep each of the services functioning, skills that are directly transferrable to the civilian sector or even staying in the service and making it a career.

For example, in addition to Infantry, Armor and Artillery positions, here are some of the other Advanced Individual Training schools available in the Army that may not come immediately to mind:

Adjutant General School – Learn the skills needed to become a human resource specialist
Aviation Logistics School – Learn how to maintain Army helicopters
Department of Defense Fire Academy – Learn fire protection and emergency medical care
Engineer School – Learn skills such as building bridges and roads
Financial Management School – Learn how to provide finance and accounting support
Military Police School – Learn law-enforcement skills
Ordnance Mechanical Maintenance School – Maintain Army equipment
Quartermaster School – Supply Soldiers with food, water, petroleum, repair parts and ammunition
Signal Corps School – Learn communications technology
Transportation School – Learn how to operate and maintain trucks, material-handling equipment and watercraft.

In addition, the military teaches invaluable soft skills such as:

Leadership
Strong work ethic
Organization
Management
Communication

As for my own time in the Army, I never expected to stay in past my initial commitment. However, 14 years went by pretty quickly as I was presented with new opportunities for interesting assignments and additional schooling. Plus, I had the sense of service in doing something I felt was important. I’m glad I served.

Counselors need to do their jobs and not just “check the box” to comply with this law. They need to educate themselves on the military opportunities available and then pass that information on to HS students. The service is a great way to jump start a career or get money for college. And, don’t forget that the military academies and ROTC are also ways to pay for college.

Board Members court Wheat Ridge only when they want something

August 4, 2017 / ijsadmin

I recently saw where the three Board of Education members up for re-election were going to hold their kick-off rally in Wheat Ridge. My first reaction was “REALLY”? In Wheat Ridge?? What a slap in the face!

These same Board members have shown nothing but apathy for learners in the Wheat Ridge articulation area. They have shown absolutely ZERO leadership in developing a long-term sustainable funding solution for the District’s HS GT program at Wheat Ridge HS, causing uncertainty and anxiety among the students, parents and Wheat Ridge HS. They essentially approved a back door cut of $50k to WR and the HS GT program with the recently approved Alternative Pathways BFO. They essentially put Pennington and Stober Elementary Schools at the top of the list for closure. They pulled money from hard earned reserves for new schools, but let the entire Wheat Ridge articulation area languish and deteriorate with one of the worst Facility Condition Indexes in the entire district.

And they want to launch their re-election campaign in Wheat Ridge? I don’t know about anyone else, but that certainly feels like they’re saying to Wheat Ridge, “We only care about you when you can do something for us.”

For transparency, the Board’s and District’s actions speak louder than words

July 24, 2017 / ijsadmin

The Board can deny, disagree with or ignore the lack of transparency with the recent Alternative Pathways BFO, but that doesn’t mean there wasn’t a lack of transparency.

On June 9^th I wrote a letter to the Board regarding transparency issues with the changed Alternative Pathways Budgeting for Outcomes (BFO). Specifically, the wording of the BFO budget document was revised from the original posted in the May 4^th Board Docs. Then, instead of posting the new document in the June 1^st Board Docs just like every other financial document that was going to be discussed and voted on at that meeting, the changed document was reposted to the May 4^th Board Docs. This essentially “hid” the changes from the public who may have wanted to comment on the changes during the Board’s public comment. To compound the transparency issues, the document retained the original date and signature of April 14^th which was clearly false as the changes were made sometime after May 4^th.

When I brought these transparency issues to the attention of the Board in my June 9^th letter, the response I received was:

“In regard to your note of June 9, I would disagree with your assertions that there is an attempt to hide information from the community.”

Really? Is that the best response the Board could come up with to a blatant transparency issue? They couldn’t even counter the facts. Guess what – “Perception = Reality” and in this case my perception is that this was a blatant attempt to hide information as I had previously written to the Board and publicly commented on this BFO at the May Board meeting.

Actually, my assertion was that “hiding these changes in the May 4^th Board Docs was deceptive in nature and violated all Board stated intentions of transparency.”

Disputing “attempt to hide information” does NOT dispute my assertion of a lack of transparency, which this clearly was.

In addition, the April 14^th, 2017 signed date on the document is false. Where’s the transparency there?

I even wonder whether this is a legal document since the date does not reflect the actual date of the changes.

The Board says that they are all for transparency, but by ignoring and refusing to take corrective action on the non-transparent changes to this BFO, their actions certainly speak louder than their words.

Should I embrace or be insulted by being labeled “Community Critic” by Jason Glass?

July 7, 2017 / ijsadmin

Or, should we all be more concerned when the new Superintendent, with the stated goal of bridging the divide in the community, 2 days into his position, labels someone with potentially different views than his “community critic”? This is what is most disappointing to me. If he truly wants to listen to all sides, then no one should be a “critic”.

In his blog, Jason Glass labeled me “community critic” while posting a twitter exchange we had regarding the Profile of an Ideal Jeffco Graduate.

Since I prefer to think of myself as a GT and education advocate, I was insulted when I read that label.

Yet, Dictionary.com defines “critic” as:

noun

a person who judges, evaluates, or criticizes.
a person who judges, evaluates, or analyzes literary or artistic works,dramatic or musical performances, or the like, especially for anewspaper or magazine.
a person who tends too readily to make captious, trivial, or harsh judgments; faultfinder.

Initially, I applied definition number 3 to the label. However, my wife counseled that definition number 1 may be applicable. The truth is, I don’t know what definition Glass applied to me. However, I do think that someone who loudly and proudly touts his 2 master’s degrees and PhD would understand that the word “critic” is ambiguous enough to mean different things to different people.

I would also think that someone who touts Deliberative Democracy would treat participants in his conversations with civility and respect (“Conscientious”) and labeling participants doesn’t necessarily meet that criteria.

The bottom line is that I’m extremely disappointed in Dr. Glass in his labeling of me as “community critic”. Am I the only “critic” in the community? I think not. Was his intent to intimidate anyone else with different views to keep those views to themselves for fear of also being labeled “community critic”? Again, I don’t know. But, I will say it is not going to intimidate me. Actually, it will have the opposite effect.

Therefore, I’ve decided that I’m going to proudly embrace the label, and role, of “community critic” until such time as we can truly and freely have real conversations about education issues in our district. The district is divided, and it will remain divided until both sides feel that they are being listened to, middle ground is found and compromises made. 5 – 0 votes with no real and meaningful discussion aren’t going to get us there. And, being ignored, as I feel I’ve been for 5 months after suggesting that a collaborative committee be formed to discuss sustainable funding for the District’s HS GT program, certainly doesn’t get us there either. The only thing that does is turn couch potatoes, like myself, into GT and education advocates and “community critics”.

Let the criticism continue!

Kevin Carroll’s meeting with the HS GT Community was Horrendous

July 6, 2017 / ijsadmin

I laughed when a Board member recently told me that Kevin Carroll had told the interim Superintendent that a May meeting with the District’s HS GT community “went well”.

I was at that meeting. I don’t know whether Kevin Carroll is delusional, from another planet or wanted his boss to believe something happened that didn’t happen. But calling what transpired during that meeting as “went well” is far from how the GT parents and students would characterize that meeting.

Maybe if you want to define “went well” as having the opportunity to present a completely misleading and intentionally deceptive set of SBB numbers to the HS GT community, but from the first question onward, “went well” is not how I would describe that meeting.

Maybe Kevin doesn’t quite grasp the concept that there is a high probability that GT students have intelligent parents. Maybe Kevin doesn’t understand that these parents are not going to be fooled by some attempted slick presentation and they will call him out for attempting to intentionally deceive and mislead them with a set of SBB numbers that don’t match the reality of what actually happens at a school. He was called out for that attempt by a parent.

But, that’s not all.

Kevin was called out by a student for his continued attempts to mislead and deceive everyone he talks to about how the HS GT program is similar to “the other 15 GT programs in the District” with regard to services, educational opportunities and support when it isn’t. The student told Carroll that the elementary and middle school GT programs he attended were just advanced learning programs, and that the high school GT program was the first time he had ever experienced social-emotional support and the autonomous learner model.

Kevin even upset my meek and mild-mannered “on-the-spectrum” daughter, who also has ADHD, with his comment that money earmarked for the high school GT program might be better spent on students “who have real needs.” Really, Kevin? And you oversee the GT program? And Special Education? Do you understand who is in the GT program and what it does? Do you not realize that with their high probability of co-morbid developmental and mental health challenges, and with their different way of thinking and feeling, gifted students have “real needs” as legitimate as those of special education students? He should be fired for incompetence for that comment.

Kevin was told straight up by one parent that he wasn’t trusted, nor was the District. After his presentation, it was easy to see why.

Another parent asked why, if the program is such a success, the District would seek to pull money from it instead of investing more into it like a successful business would. No answer to that question.

Kevin was also called out for making this presentation without including the school’s School Accountability Committee, and doing it at a time when the school essentially didn’t have a principal to refute his numbers. That felt pretty sneaky. I guess that’s one way to ensure only one side of the story gets told.

The parents and students at that meeting weren’t fooled by Kevin and his misleading, manipulative and deceptive SBB numbers, and trust me, they let him know that.

For him to go back and tell his boss that the meeting “went well” is just another in a long line of statements by Kevin Carroll that just aren’t true. We don’t need or want Cabinet members like Kevin in our District!

To put it simply – this meeting couldn’t have been much worse! And the high school GT community deserves better.

Good riddance, Terry Elliott

July 1, 2017 / ijsadmin

It’s a great day in Jeffco knowing that Terry Elliott has left the District. You’d be hard pressed to find anything he has done that is either ‘Innovative’ or ‘Effective’ as one would be led to believe from his title ‘Chief Effectiveness Officer’ in charge of the Innovation and Effectiveness Team.

He’s certainly no friend to the District’s highly successful HS GT program either. From putting program de-funding in Phase 1B (certain to be implemented) of the Cabinet’s January 26^th proposed budget recommendations, to not taking a collaborative approach to finding a sustainable funding solution as interim Superintendent, to a back-door cut to the program with an Alternative Pathways Budgeting For Outcomes (BFO) recommendation, it seemed he did everything in his power to hurt the HS GT program. In addition, he refused, or ignored, multiple invitations over multiple years to visit and get an understanding of the program.

The District is better off today. Good riddance!