Comments on: A New Deal for Portland Public Schools

By: Wacky Mommy

Wacky Mommy — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 15:27:39 +0000

Humboldt Parent, hear hear! Several people have asked me lately about the new charters — not one has asked me about the neighborhood schools. Everyone loves something shiny and new, I guess. Until it doesn’t work.

I should wear a button that says, “Ask Me About Our Neighborhood Schools!”

By: Humboldt parent

Humboldt parent — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 07:11:01 +0000

As long as enrollment is declining, PPS should not approve any new charter schools either. Charter schools divert enrollment from existing neighborhood schools, which then become targets for closure. In the Jefferson neighborhood PPS has approved at least three charter schools (Village Waldorf k-8th,Trillium k-12th, SEI 6th-8th), while closing three neighborhood schools (Kenton k-5, Applegate k-5, Tubman 6-8).

And another group recently submitted an application for a Montessori charter school in N/NE that would open in 2008. (www.theivyschool.org)

We have enough charter schools. I agree that the school board needs to focus more on making sure every neighborhood school is first-rate.

By: Humboldt parent

Humboldt parent — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 01:18:30 +0000

Wow! Thanks for the debate about a New Deal for PPS and changes to the Portland Schools Foundation funding distribution. It’s ideas like these that will make great schools possible for all our children, not just the privileged few.

By: Himself

Himself — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 21:27:18 +0000

Thanks all for the comments. I’m going to publish a second draft soon, incorporating Nancy Smith’s thoughts about magnet schools. Constructive criticism like this is exactly what I’m looking for!

By: Zarwen

Zarwen — Sat, 21 Jul 2007 03:38:17 +0000

Thanks, Steve, you really nailed it. Why indeed! No wonder VP didn’t hold back in giving those schools the same cavalier treatment. What is most egregious and disgusting is that there are PARENTS on the PSF board making these decisions. How would they feel if their roles were reversed?

By: beaumontwilshireresident

beaumontwilshireresident — Fri, 20 Jul 2007 22:55:51 +0000

Splitting hairs, but I would advocate for the 2/3 (or more) to go into the bucket for other schools and the 1/3 (or less) to go to the school raising the funds.

By: Steve Buel

Steve Buel — Fri, 20 Jul 2007 22:47:50 +0000

Beaumontwilshire resident, Bingo! No grants from The School Foundation, divide the one third up fairly between the “have nots” and let each school decide how to best spend the funds with no restrictions. Why should some people sitting up in the West Hills decide how the money should be spent at Lents grade school in the way out Southeast. Heck they probably have never even been there. Why should they have the control? I would be much more willing to trust the judgement of the principal, the teachers and staff and the parents in that neighborhood about how to best spend money at their school. After all, it is not a fortune anyway.

By: beaumontwilshireresident

beaumontwilshireresident — Fri, 20 Jul 2007 22:30:44 +0000

It was a parent on the Alameda Site Council that gave me those percentages relating to monies raised at their auction. I didn’t get it from an official source, so sorry if I didn’t have it 100% right. Still, the point I was trying to make was: I think the ‘wealthier’ schools are able to raise a good deal more money than the economically disadvantaged – so why not make most of the money go into a ‘bucket’ that gets divided equally between all of the schools? Would this not be more equitable? I don’t agree with applying for grants. If the school raising the money can use the money for whatever they want, then so should the other schools receive an equal share for whatever they want.

By: Nancy Smith

Nancy Smith — Fri, 20 Jul 2007 20:47:20 +0000

Steve: I absolutely positively agree with your New Deal; this is one of the best posts I’ve ever read!

Magnet schools could still be offered, however, for very specialized programs without harming neighborhood schools, as long as neighborhood-school to neighborhood-school transfers are eliminated (assuming all neighborhood schools have equitable curriculum opportunities) and there is complete equal access to magnet programs for every PPS student.

Please submit this as a guest column to the Oregonian!

By: Himself

Himself — Fri, 20 Jul 2007 20:22:20 +0000

Regarding sharing of fund raising money, I believe this only applies to money used to hire certified teaching staff.

In other words, if a PTA wants to raise money to hire a music teacher, they’ve got to tithe a 1/3.

If they want to raise money to build a playground or higher non-certified teachers for an after school enrichment program, they keep it all.