10/7/98
The Auburn Bulletin10/7/98
Letter: Parent shares observations of recent YRS meeting
The calendar sub-committee presented four different calendars to the full committee Oct. 1. The starting and ending dates, the number and lengths of intercession varied and summer break ranged from 11 to seven weeks in the four plans. There was some discussion as to the amount of remediation and/or enrichment in the intercessions and the affect on summer school. Dr. (Suzanne) Freeman said we would work it out after the switch, depending on the length of breaks. When asked which calendar would be presented to the school board in December, Dr. Martin told a committee member these were "sample calendars." The calendar subcommittee was then asked to come up with "sample calendars" for the 1999-2000, 2000-2001 academic years for dispersal to the community.
The community is going to be bombarded with eight different calendars, none of which are "approved," all of which are "sample calendars." Thus it will be difficult to pin the ACS down on what effect a particular calendar will have if implemented. Discussion on intercession and its costs, affects on summer school were not addressed. The fact that summer school takes six weeks to make up a course, and the intercession breaks would only provide two to three weeks was utterly ignored. Dr. Freeman did reiterate that each extra day costs $80,000, so remediation would have to be "closely examined." Move the target and you can't hit it.
The Summer Activity Sub-committee was asked how many summer camps, churches, activities would be affected if the minimal summer calendar was adopted. They reported there would be a significant reduction in the number of activities children could partake in. Dr. Freeman quickly moved the topic on to the next sub-committee .
The significant reduction in the number of enrichment and other activities children could partake is a very negative aspect of YRE. Why are we punishing the bright kids at the expense of YRE?
The Facts Subcommittee (the committee put together after the full committee rejected Freeman's biased "long" and "short" sheet on Sept. 2) began their report with an argument over which draft represented the sub committee's work. The Facts Sub committee met a couple times after reading and digesting more than 80 manuscripts, 12 of which were unanimously chosen by the committee members to use in their fact sheet. After a long working session, the committee produced a document called Draft 1, which they all agreed to. They debated each word in it care fully and put together a fact sheet to be presented to the full committee that afternoon. After the members of this sub-committee broke up for the evening, the two co-chairs felt the document was too negative and completely rewrote it, adding several items none of the other members of their subcommittee had read or agreed to. The two co-chairs of the Facts Subcommittee also took it upon themselves to include data from other sub-committees (that they wouldn't give to their own committee members) into another document now called Draft 2. At least four members of the Facts Subcommittee stood up and said Draft 2 did not represent the work and information available to its subcommittee and asked that presentation of Draft 2 to the full committee not be allowed. The submission of Draft 2 was outside the agreed upon process.
When this was brought out, Dr. Martin asked for Draft 1, which had not been put together by the co-chairs of the Facts Subcommittee because they brought it to the meeting in complete disarray, and did not include the 12 references that all members of the Facts Subcommittee had agreed to use. Considerable time was spent getting the document for everyone to read. Dr. Martin then asked how the document was put together. Members of the Facts Subcommittee were in complete agreement on how the document was put together and that each word was carefully thought out. However, it was pointed out the Draft 1 document distributed to everyone at the meeting was not what the sub-committee members had left with the co-chairs at their final meeting. It had been changed.
Then, the co-chairs asked if they could present the full committee their personal version (Draft 2) of the facts concerning YRE. Again, the other members of the Facts Subcommittee objected to the release of the Draft 2 because they had no input in the document and it included material from other sub-committees that no one else had seen. Dr. Martin said he "felt he was smart enough to figure out the differences between the two documents" and directed it to be distributed. Draft 2 was beautifully formatted and ready to be passed out by the ACS staff and two co-chairs with time was allowed to read it.
Two comments were made from other members on the Full Alternative Calendar Committee: A) How did you go from Draft 1 to Draft 2 as they take opposing views of the benefits of YRE? and B) Draft 2 reads surprisingly like the fact sheet that was flatly rejected at September's full committee.
Dr. Martin then felt that both drafts be accepted by the Full Committee and offered a vote:
1) Accept Draft 1, 2) Accept Draft 1 and Draft 2, or 3) Reject and send the sub-committee back to come up with another document.
The logical choice is No. 3, however what was left of the full committee (remember, one-third of whom are ACS employees), voted to accept both drafts 1 and 2, completely conflicting documents.
The parents, teachers, community, school board, students and city council are going to get a fact sheet that was prepared and put together by two members of the committee who went behind the backs of the rest of the Facts Sub-committee. Dr. Martin offered to accept and approved the acceptance of both drafts even though a majority of the rest of the Facts Subcommittee objected to its release, and this information is going to be passed on to you as being from the full committee.
Dr. Martin did not like the tone of Draft 1 (neither did the co-chairs of the Facts Sub-committee) and railroaded Draft 2 to be included into the ACS propaganda machine that is quickly picking up steam. Thus, Dr. Martin will tell you there was a "process" and "input," but the process was completely corrupt, and input from members of his own committee was utterly disregarded.
The public input sub-committee then gave its idea of the public input phase of this "nightmare from Samford Street." Here it is. On Oct.12, the one and only public presentation from the ACS will take place at the Auburn High School. By the way, Oct 12 is Columbus Day, an ACS holiday and an important Jewish holiday. This meeting will be moderated by a neutral person, Dr. Terry Ley from Auburn University, who will answer only written and submitted questions from the public. Time and length were not discussed. Publication/advertisement of the meeting was not discussed.
PTAs have been contacted, and will also have parent meetings. I think I heard Cary Woods is scheduled for Oct 13. The rest of the schools will have to schedule a special meeting. The ACS has offered to supply a spokesperson to come and speak to parents about YRE, but PTA presidents agreed to conduct such meetings only if there is an opportunity to have someone outside ACS discuss the "negative" aspects of YRE. The chair of the public input subcommittee did not offer to supply the other speaker.
There is no way the ACS can effectively reach the Auburn public in less than 10 days - period. At the public input meeting there will be no opportunity to ask follow-up questions, and there is no way to ensure your question will be asked. The ACS administration will tell you this is to stop repetitive questions. What if you do not like the answer? What if their answer results in another question? This is not a public forum, and it does not serve the people of Auburn well. Again, the process is corrupt. This needs to be a major point discussed with your friends and in immediate Letters to the Editor. This is a long weekend with many parents out of town and an important religious holiday, which limits the inclusion of a major portion of the community. Hello ... is anyone home at ACS?
Divide and conquer. The PTAs are stuck in the middle, and I sympathize with their dilemma. There was no talk of who would come out to each school, no discussion of who would moderate the sessions (although it was mentioned there would have to be a time limit for each question, I guess too much discussion about a major issue is just a bad idea) and no discussion of who would be the "Con" presenter. The chair of the public input committee told the PTA presidents it would be up to them to find a "Con" presenter.
The survey and polling subcommittee mentioned phone polls of parents, community business, surveys of faculty, students and an independent AEA survey of teachers. No dates, times, companies to conduct, survey questions formulated, methods of collection, distribution, etc. were given. No one on the committee asked any questions. This subcommittee will meet Oct. 13.
Give me a break. The ACS system can mail out class schedules to parents every fall, why can't they mail out a survey? When is this survey, poll, questionnaire going to take place? A decision is slated for early December, and they have not even come up with questions, surveys or someone to do it. Let alone allow time for people to participate, return and ACS to compile the information.
More importantly, I am afraid the "poll" or "survey" conducted by ACS will give parents a false sense of security and they may believe they are having a "say" in the process. After what I observed this afternoon, do not count on it.
The meeting adjourned at 6:30 p.m. without discussion of another full committee meeting next month.
For a few weeks I felt we, as concerned, enlightened parents, could make an impact on this committee, its report to Drs. Martin and Freeman and eventually the Auburn City School Board. After what happened this afternoon, scientific facts and figures are no longer going to work to our advantage.
Write those letters, make those phone calls, tell your neighbors and friends to do the same. The light at the end of the tunnel is not the exit, but rather is the ACS Train bearing down on us. Unless you clamor, loud, long and clear, to the council, the mayor and the public using the above points and the biased fact sheets, multiple, moving, nebulous calendars, yet to be completed polls and surveys, and worthless public forums and PTA meetings, we will be starting school on Aug. 11 next year.
If you do not believe me, the school board meeting that was scheduled for Dec. 8 and was the date at which the school board would vote on YRE was changed.
No other date was given.Imagine that.Move the target.Do you hear a train?
Scott Enebak, PhDAU assistant professor