11/11/98
The Auburn Bulletin11/11/98
Letter: Fear stifles open communication
Recent PTA meetings were held to discuss the year-round school (YRS) issue. Some Auburn City School teachers voiced their objections and concerns against the current push for YRS.
With this letter, I want to publicly thank those courageous, dedicated teachers for their courage to speak up for their students against the YRS concept. I suspect that for everyone who spoke there are 10 who did not.
Some teachers began their objections noting that they "may not even have a job tomorrow" because of their open objections to YRS. This fear that is perceived among the teachers stifles the type of open communication necessary for Auburn City School to move forward. This is the same fear voiced in 1992, reported by the YRS committee, the last time Auburn City School rejected YRS,
These points kept reappearing at the PTA meetings. They are:
o Who would teach failing children during the YRS intercessions?
o How will a child make up in a short intercession what was not learned in the past nine weeks?
o The intercession interruptions will be disruptive to elementary school classes
o How effective can an intercession teacher be in five or 10 days, with a new class? There isn't time for trust to be established.
o What is the accountability of teachers during the intercession?
o When is the ACS going to support the teacher with addressing student behavior problems?
o This is what causes "burnout."
o Have you looked into Alternative Schools as recommended by the 2020 report?
o One has to wonder why not look into extended year calendar as charged by the Board of Education (March 21, 1997) and why not implement proven ways of addressing at-risk children?
All are important questions, and all deserve answers.
If there are more teachers in ACS who are opposed to YRS, now is the time to speak, since silence can be interpreted as agreement. Write your city council, your school board, a letter to the editorsÛyou can remain anonymous and not worry about repercussions.
Again, kudos for those dedicated teachers that had the courage to speak out and say that YRS was not a sound idea, academically and otherwise.
Deb Enebak,Auburn
Letter: A blessing in disguise
The extensive commentary in O-A News Opinion, Oct. 27, by a 1992 committee member, seems to be a blessing in disguise for the YRS, with the following observations.
1. Even though the 1992 committee determined against YRS and made their recommendations, the high percent age of "at-risk" students at ACS has remained unchanged since then. So a revision is appropriate.
2. Since 1992, the long distance learning has under gone tremendous improvements through the Internet. So the school teachers need not physically attend a University for a higher degree anymore! They do no have to wait for summer schools either. In fact, the YRS hastens the process of continuing education for the school teachers with more breaks, while the 9 month tradition produces more breakdowns during the year due to its fast pace with no brakes'!
3. The "STOP YRS" prompters are repeating and reprinting the same questions more frequently in the news papers to reach out to the "at-risk" readers who might miss them. In this way they are exactly following the basic philosophy behind the "YRS", namely, repetition of remedial courses more frequently, without waiting for the traditional summer in which failed students were put under "usually a tough instructor and a hanging sword!"
4. When I went to the Auburn High School during the "virtual" break of two days after their recent first quarter of instruction, almost all the teachers, including the counselors, were busy attending several conferences, either listening to the parents or to speakers, postponing their grading work to the week end. Many I met, without exception, spontaneously supported YRS and appreciated my letters in the O-A News. A few college professors I met also agreed with me. Do you know that ACS teachers went and tutored kids at home when they could not attend school on medical advice for a few weeks!? Do they not deserve your support?
5. The commentator suggests re-teaching every fall along with a summer school. This amounts to basically admitting the YRS in concept. Under the present calendar, there is no room for re-teaching in fall! Making room for it means reducing the traditional summer.
6. One of the YRS calendars suggests "re(medial) teaching" during the breaks after every 9 week quarter along with a relatively long (2 months) summer, during which a short, one month summer school can be con ducted with creative teachers and surely not the tough ones with their swords as in the (good?) old days. This also will allow the "non-risk" students to enjoy double the summer (2 months) com pared to the at-risk ones.
7. Improved technology since 1992 and deployment of more workers will reduce three months of summer rebuilding and maintenance of structures to two months or less, for the same cost or less, from 1999 onward. The saved summer rebuilding time can be invested during the year for teachers to build, rebuild or maintain the creativity and character of our K-12 kids, full of vibrant life, on whom we ultimately depend for our social security in our old age.
8. With YRS, separated children will have an opportunity to visit their other natural parent more often during the year, with year round travel bargains. It is the higher frequency of visits and exchange of affections that nurture any close relationship more than a longer but occasional visit.
9. Finally, YRF (Year Round Football) practice could have saved Mr. Bowden's job as well as the now "at-risk" AU football performance and reputation!
N.S. Malladi, Ph.D.Auburn