On March 16, the Durango Herald editorialized:
"...the board must look to how it and the district got to where they are. What is needed is openness and real public involvement..."
One month into the new order, we seem to be crashing into another iceberg. Underneath the surface is a narrative of 1500 comments we will never see, made by our neighbors - DHS students, parents, and teachers - discussing leadership at the high school, the district office and the school board level.
The superintendent, 9-R legal counsel and a committee of teachers have persuaded the board that some 70 pages of narrative comments should never reach the public. (read)
Real public involvement means we see ourselves as partners, working on the same page. That will never happen as long as we're viewed as the enemy. Someone or something keeps getting between us and mucking up the communications loop.
A strategic plan was approved a year ago that will take DHS from "Great to Greater." We know there are great things going on with faculty and students in many departments. We are proud of them, but we know there are also problems. Now it sounds like there may be "big problems." The official word seems to be "Trust us." Can we?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
17 comments:
Dear School Board
I am confused by the intent of the statement from the PIO below, taken from the 9-R E-notes on 4/20.
In one board meeting I attended, it was explained that the board had already edited the narratives, so it is rather hard to swallow when the PIO claims you have no plans to edit the narratives. Mr. Matheson was the President then, and Cindy explained on behalf of Melissa (who did not attend) that Mr. Miller had said that Cindy and Melissa need not have redacted (white out) anything as Mr. Miller had wielded his liquid paper to ensure legalities had been met, and Cindy and Melissa were meant to look at the document after Mr. Miller had done his thing (instead of before). Mr. Matheson turned to the superintendent to make sure that an "original" copy of the survey comments and questions had remained, as it was (and I quote) "a public document", and we could not file a redacted copy without the original copy secured. The superintendent smiled, and said that she had an original copy. Then, Cindy, together with Melissa were instructed to go through it one more time, which they were scheduled to have done two months ago.
To turn around TODAY, and claim to the E-note recipients that "the board at this time does not plan to edit the narratives to remove personally identifiable information", smacks of more deceit, and more lies. There were at least 20 people in the board meetings, and to now claim otherwise, is simply dishonest.
Did the PIO mean to mislead everyone? Please explain. This is surely documented on the MP3 recordings, and in the Minutes, the past three months worth of Minutes do not exist on the Board.doc website as of yet.
Anne Spence
From the PIO: 9-R eNOTES: Herald files open records request for DHS survey-
"The Herald requested the comments "with the exception of comments that inherently identify the author of the comment." However, the open records law does not require the district to edit a protected document to create a public record. The board at this time does not plan to edit the narratives to remove the personally identifiable information, and therefore maintains that the narratives remain a confidential document that cannot be released to the public."
Now that you've got me going, what could possibly be so bad that it's best we never know the details?
I like the PIO reasoning, that the "district critics" will jump on it like a rash. Shame on her for thinking so ill of parents, teachers, students and community members who care enough to want to improve education at the high school by being pro-active and seeking positive change.
Until a few people, who had never attended a board meeting in the past 7 months before, i.e. since the discussion of our board obtaining a survey, that would allow them to assist our high school, teachers and students—showed up two weeks ago to "bully" the board into dropping their plans of publishing the survey, as the board had always stated they would do from it's inception (with the exception of removing identifying names, so that nobody was hurt, offended, overjoyed (with the praise), or able to sue for defamation, etc, etc)—our board were on track to release this information at the end of March.
Watching them collapse last Tuesday, or "caving in", for what? For fear of public perception? They have been through the ringer in the past few months, and all for naught, because we are right back to where we were. Fear and intimidation still rule the roost.
For some reason, a few people don't want the information out....up until two weeks ago, I had no intention of reading it, nor did I care for thinking about it. We took the survey at the end of November. If they had simply published it, I doubt very much anyone would have read it, but this hullabaloo will be their undoing.
We have witnessed the lunacy, of time spent and money wasted right through to March, and now, here we are in April, and "God forbid" the information falls into the wrong hands! It's bureaucracy gone mad. It's PARANOIA creeping out of the creaky floor boards and it's morally and ethically wrong.
The only reason at this point, that I care anything for reading these comments, is because "they" are covering something up, plus of course, it is a public document. The survey cost $5,000.00 with Incite, and goodness knows how much the legal bill will be.
In my opinion the superintendent NEVER wanted Incite to do it, despite us riding on the back of a similar survey they did for Farmington School District, thus saving us $15,000 (as Farmington had paid $20,000), and we got to take a piece of the work already done, and mold it to what we wanted to know from our high school. The superintendent wanted the PIO to "find" a survey taker, and didn't want the board to use the local company, and in my opinion, that meant it would be an Administrative thing, as opposed to a school board thing, and the information could have been sanitized for public consumption.
Well, this is not how we teach our children to behave, and I will not stand by and watch whilst the truth is swept under the already dirty rug. Truth. Honesty. Transparency. This is how we will have the best school district possible. Putting out false information, and detracting from problem areas will not help us solve anything. Fear and intimidation will not make our teachers happy. Some have already lost the "joy of teaching", and it is time we supported them to seek the change their Strategic Plan Project speaks about.
Drop by Durango High School, to request a copy of the "Strategic Plan Project". A document created by Durango High School's Committee for Strategic Change, which as of May 2006, consisted of over five hundred people hours. A lot of time, effort, hard work and thought was put into this document.
The #2 Strategic Issue: "The Committee for Strategic Change identified communication as an issue that interferes with the creation of our vision based upon trust, encouragement, openness, and honesty".
It goes on to speak about embracing transparency. In this regard, I totally support the Durango Herald in requesting the information that is being hidden.
If you have a student at DHS, do something special for your teacher's next week! Hug a Teacher! Take cookies! Or truffles from Rocky Mountain! Books from Maria's! Tell them you support them! Let them know we care.
I'm not at all surprised. It's the same thing over and over again. Dr. Barter rules the district and will continue to do so and she has no intention of releasing the true information.
9-R can't be trusted.
Well, that's why the Durango Herald are so great. By requesting the information, I don't see how the district can withhold it.
I'm not sure where the figures on the survey come from? Are they correct? See page 2 of the survey that isn't a survey.
2305 students???
1288 parents?
17% of students is 402 respondents? Not if there are 1470 or 1510 students at DHS.
I thought there were about 1470 or 1510 students. If they each had two parents, that would take us to 3020. Of course divorce comes in to play, and some parents have more than one child at DHS.
Me thinks the survey results are skewed. Darn it. 7 months, and we can't even get numbers and percentages right. Nothing new there though.
In reference to the Herald's report of the District's refusal to release the redacted version of the verbatim comments in the survey (http://www.durangoherald.com/asp-
bin/article_generation.asp?
article_type=news&article_path=
/news/07/news070426_1.htm), which said, "The school district said in a letter it is 'unable to provide copies of the 'comments' because we have been unable to completely redact personally identifiable information regarding students and employees."
Maybe the 9-R attorney won't bill the district for the hours he spent making the document legal and comments unidentifiable? He told the School Board he had done his job to legalize the document, Board member, Cindy Brevik said that she and Melissa Youssef had done their redaction, and the Board announced the comments would go on the web in "two or three weeks".
Then a group of teachers crept out of the woodwork and complained, and everyone turned tail and ran.
Will they change the minutes and the MP3 to suit this new idea that the attorney and two Board members did not do what they said they did?
I move for a NEW school district attorney, when we get a NEW Superintendent.
What is wrong with these people? Why are they so determined to HIDE the truth?
What are they AFRAID of, that somebody is going to see?
Given that the School District Attorney and the School Board said they had legalized the document in a Board meeting a few months ago, and that they would publish it, prior to the teachers attending a recent meeting to complain, I find this whole thing to be unjust.
"More than 80 percent of respondents to a survey administered last fall indicated they were satisfied overall with Durango High School teachers' performance." (PIO e-notes)
Daft bint, she's madder than a box of frogs.
If everyone was so damn happy on the survey, why were they so afraid to publish?
Oh yes.....um.......we were all identifiable. NOT TRUE.
"They cannot take away our self-respect if we do not give it to them"—Mahatma Gandhi
or
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act"—George Orwell
The PIO should go work for Oil & Gas.
She could tell the people that having an oil well outside their bedroom window would be esthetically pleasing, would increase their well water supply, induce health and wellness, would be silent and unobtrusive, etc, etc.
Do you think the people would believe her?
Do you remember School District 9-R's transportation override with the price tag of 40 cents per year? Well, the survey is just the same.
The results are skewed, because there are not 2305 students, as quoted on page 2 of the survey, and I'm not sure about the number of parents quoted at 1288, even allowing room for death, divorce, and having more than one child, the numbers don't add up.
402 students, is not 17% of the number of students in our High School. There are 1503 students at DHS according to the school's website, although I don't know if that includes the 60 from Grace Academy and all the home schooled/shared schooled students. If so, did they get to take the survey?
If you require any further evidence that those responsible for the "great to greater" racket are in the collective grip of advanced mental illness just consider the opening sentence of the 9-R e-notes Friday.
Taking advantage of the link to the Freedom of Information Act request template ( http://www.durangoschooltalk.org/issues/FOIA.htm ), yesterday I made my own FOIA request of 9R that they release the numerical survey results, exclusive of the comments. Since 9R's only argument for not releasing survey information was based on issues with the text of the respondents' comments, they should have no legal basis for not releasing the numerical portion of the results. We'll see.
I want to get the numerical data so that I can process it into a series of graphs that are more informative than those on the 9R website. These improved graphs could then be published on the SchoolTalk site for everyone in the district to view, and so people can form their own opinions. The graphs on the 9R website throw away a lot of information, and I would like people to get an easily-interpreted view of more of the survey information. I'll keep you posted on 9R's response.
The words in parenthesis are written by the PIO in an email sent to 179 people. The comments below each, are thoughts.It seems to me the PIO wants to have her cake, and eat it. – Anne Spence.
"A further analysis of the data indicates that 63 percent of all respondents rated the high school administration at 4 or higher; 37 percent rated high school administration at 3 or lower."
How many rated 4 or lower?
"When analyzing data like this, it is clear that the mid-point represents a positive mid-point rather than a negative mid-point, because the majority of responses were higher than the "average" rating."
Huh? So the middle is not really the middle....
"That represents 22 percent and 24 percent respectively with 54 percent rating high school administrators between 3 and 5 * or average."
I thought four was average. How did average get all the way down to three?
"In fact, the staff's overall rating for Durango High School administration was 4.43 *well above average and higher than students and parents rated the high school administration."
Goodness, 4 is average and 4.43 is "well above average". I would think that 6 would be well above average.
"The staff's overall rating for central office administration was just below average at 3.89."
Let's see, the scale was 1 - 7. That makes 4 average. It seems to me that if 4.43 is "well above average", then 3.89 must be well below average, not "just below average". You can't have it both ways.
For anyone keen on figures, the survey is based upon there being 2305 DHS student responses.
DHS website says there are 1503 students.
Thus the survey is skewed. I've told everyone, but nobody seems worried.
Strange that. 802 errors should set alarm bells ringing.
Post a Comment