The retiring superintendent met with her privately and presented her with three numbered envelopes.
“Open one of these each time you run into a problem you don’t think you can solve,” he said.
Things went along pretty smoothly, but six months later, enrollment took a downturn and she was really catching a lot of heat.
At her wit’s end, she remembered the envelopes. She went to her drawer and took out the first envelope. The message read,
“Blame the politicians.”
The new superintendent went to the school board and tactfully laid the blame at the feet of the state legislature, the governor, and federal government mandates, painting them as uncaring politicians.
Satisfied with the comments, the parents and the school board rallied behind her and the problem was shifted away from her and onto the politicians.
About a year later, the test scores in the district started dropping precipitously.
Having learned from her previous experience, the superintendent quickly opened the second envelope. The message read,
“Create a strategic plan with a blue ribbon committee.”
This she did, dazzling the school board with her judicious use of edu-jargon and the promise of 21st century learners. Things again were better.
After another year of still lower enrollment and stagnant test scores, the superintendent once more came under the microscope.
Again the superintendent went to her office, closed the door, and opened the third envelope.
The message said,
“Prepare three envelopes.”
So since 2 of the Board candidates have "paired" themselves...we only need to make 1 vote for Board. Really, Ms. Reese was so tight with Tacy and her gang, do we really think it will be about the kids for her or just backing Dr. Burdick????
ReplyDeleteRegardless of any relationships, Ms. Reese is a true conservative (although not necessarily a starve the schools of all funding libertarian).
ReplyDeleteWe have enough board members that are in the hip pocket of the Adminstration. We do not need anymore.
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone remember Ms Reese and her last attempt at being a board member? Ms Workman is clueless when it comes to the issues facing this district.
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone else have a problem with the way that Reese and Workman are running together? Are we supposed to believe that this was their idea? I kind of doubt that. What better way for the current board members and the district to get rid of Susan Clancy, the only person left on the governing board who ask questions and cast votes that are not always popular. Fool the voters into thinking Reese and Workman must come as a pair and there's no vote for Clancy. I think its a slimey move. Will Reese and Workman always think and vote the same on governing board matters? Will they sit in the same big black leather chair at governing board meetings? Its childish and most people see right through it. I wonder what's the next trick they'll pull.
ReplyDeleteI am not sure about Ms. Workman but at least Ms. Reese has a positive attitude. There is so much negativity surrounding the district and few people are supportive of the administration. How about voting for the people who will support positive changes for our children's education.
ReplyDeleteMs. Reese definitely has my vote.
Clancy always is the attention grabber. She must think her little tirades make her look important. I don't know who she is trying too impress but as a voter I feel her late appearance at the forum last evening was very disrespectful to the audience, the other candidates and the chairperson. This is typical of her antics in the board room. If she was trying to make an impression, she certainly made one for me. Out with Clancy and my vote is for Reese and Workman.
ReplyDeleteFor the record, Susan Clancy was the last of the three candidates to show up, but she was not late. She apologized for being the last to show up, explaining that the severe weather the area experienced that evening had been a problem for her. She lives in Cave Creek, where the washes run with heavy downpours like we experienced that day. Glad to see that @4:53 pm is voting for Reese/Workman for all the "right reasons."
ReplyDelete4:53 Were we at the same forum? Since when is timeliness more important than integrity? Both Reese and Workman struggled answering even basic questions "How many board meetings did you attend in the last year?" How about "why did you leave the board Mrs. Reese?" Go back to the minutes of the meetings prior to her departure if you care to know the real reason she left. To raise her grandchild was not even close to the whole truth. Do your homework. Mrs. Workman's reponse to why she choose to move her son to a school outside of the district was reason enough to lose my vote. She stated he needed a smaller class environment. Isn't that what the community, board and administration just put as there number one priority. Isn't that why we closed a middle school? How can I elect someone who doesn't believe in CCUSD enough to at least give the middle school a try. That is a direct slam to what is going on at STMS. I understand why parents make choices to meet specific academic needs for their children. But I don't want them sitting on my school board. I don't understand how you can put children first in a district that wasn't good enough for your own child.
ReplyDeleteTo 4:53 Sorry you feel I am an attention grabber,I called them ahead of time due to the rains to explain I may have a difficult time getting there. That I may have to go the long way around to get out. Sure enough that is what happened. I know families up here who wanted to attended and could not get out of their property.
ReplyDeleteWhen we assume... By the way 6:00 was optional I had quite a day that day with the storms around my property and car. Susan Clancy
This whole thing is just a joke and now its even getting illegal. The principals are asking the PTOs to endorse Reese and Workman. The IRS would not like this, because non-profits are not allowed to do this. I'd think the principals would know this but I guess not or they don't care that they are giving bad direction to their PTOs. Worst of it all is that Ellie Gaines at BMES did the same thing and wants her PTO to endorse Reese and Workman too. That is so ridiculous because Susan Clancy is the only person on the governing baord with a connection to BMES I think. Doesn't she have grandchildren or kids in her family that go to that school.
ReplyDeleteWhy would we vote for someone who could not handle the term the first time, while I do not always agree with Ms Clancy I will recognize her efforts to be informed, ask questions, and offer alternative solutions... and her service to our community...I do agree with 4:53...you should have a horse in the race to be in the game!
ReplyDeletemy previous post referenced the wrong comment i was agreeing with 11:15 not 4:53 sorry for the error
ReplyDeleteCave Creek Education Association has endorsed Reese and Workman.
ReplyDeleteI don't know what type of pressure is being brought to bear on pto's by Principals. As private citizens, off of school property, the Principals have every right to share their opinions about candidates according to election law. They just cannot do so on property.
Ms. Clancy should not be penalized for being late given the weather and the situation with where she lives. Kudos to her for making it a priority to get to the meeting. It must have been very difficult for her.
Also, Ms. Clancy should not be penalized for asking questions and speaking up. However, there have been times where one could question whose best interests she has at heart - her constituents or the kids? Some of her decision making has clearly tilted towards populism with voters rather than what is best for the children. This is not to say that she is anti-children. She most certainly is not, but sometimes her efforts to protect the voters do not serve the kids.
There is no way of knowing whether you have children or not if you are posting anonymously on this board. Hence, you will each have your priorities. For some of you it will be kids, kids, kids. For others of you it will be taxes, taxes, taxes. I think you should look for the candidates who will not foolishly spend your money, but who will also stand up for spending for the kids when it is necessary. While I'm sure that in some peoples minds, Ms. Clancy fits this bill, I am not so sure that she always understands the budget implications for the students of all of her stands. Hence, she becomes perceived as obstructionist by many of the teachers and people with kids in school.
FYI, the law that prohibits non-profits from endorsing candidates applies to PARTISAN races. Folks that keep pulling the illegal card enjoy seeding complacency in our community, just as blogs of this nature serve to cast our incredible schools in a poor light.
ReplyDeleteNon-profits are allowed to endorse non-partisan races AND legislative ballot issues, so long as their activity stays below the activity threshold defined by law. PTOs exist to support their schools and classrooms. Governance of our schools is paramount, especially during a budget crisis. I'm happy to hear that PTOs may consider endorsing GB candidates as the primary parent counsel for their school.
If it's true that the principals are exerting their influence to get the PTOs to endorse a governing board candidate, it's actually kind of pathetic and sad. I think the law involving such matters can be interpreted to suit people's needs or interests. In this case, it seems to be a matter of following the letter of the law versus the spirit of the law. That is a decision that PTOs should weigh very carefully, as IRS guidelines in this area do seem relatively clear about the risk to a group's 501(c)(3) status for involvement in activity that supports or opposes any candidate running for public office. The IRS regs, while they seem to sanction general education efforts, don't say anything about partisan versus nonpartisan contests. They do, however, state quite clearly that a nonprofit engaging in any political activity that directly or indirectly supports or opposes a candidate for public office will lose its nonprofit status. Another concern that I have with this issue is that it's really not fair to push the PTOs into this type of activity. It's one thing if a PTO feels strongly about an issue or individual -- both Reese and Workman are connected to HTES, so one can rightfully assume that many HTES parents will get behind them -- but I feel that it is wrong for the PTOs, district wide, to be used this way to serve the district's and the governing board's goals. Our PTOs work very hard and they shouldn't be mishandled or disrespected in this way. Also, what happens to the PTO or school that endorses a governing board member when that governing board member does not win? Is the PTO and school then possibly alienated? Inequity is running rampant in this district right now, do the PTOs really need to deal with more of that? It just seems like the PTOs are being abused in this instance and should not be pressured or influenced by the district or admin in this way. It's very sad, and when you add it all up it's no wonder that people are just turning their backs and walking away.
ReplyDeleteHow great the board will look with 5 hand picked bobble heads...people will continue to exit, scores will continue to decline, overrides will continue to fail...But you'll have a board and a superintendent who all agree on ignoring the wishes of the community and driving the district into the ground.
ReplyDelete5:48 isn't it the board members job to represent the constituents...after all that is who elected her.
ReplyDelete5:48 here.
ReplyDeleteFrom the CCUSD board policy manual:
B. Board Relationship with the Community:
A M S N
¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ (1) The Board recognizes that the citizens have entrusted them with the educational development of the children and youth of this community.
¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ (2) The Board recognizes that the community expects their first and greatest concern to be in the best interest of each and every one of the young people without distinction as to who they are or what their background may be.
¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ (3) The Board enacts policies supporting the efforts of the administration in helping the people of this community to have the facts about their schools, to the end that they will readily provide the finest possible school program, school staff, and school facilities.
Of course the constituents play a role. However, the priority of the board member as I read it is the education of the students.
I think there has become a distinction around Member Clancy. Because she does ask many questions, some perceive her as difficult. I do not and was actually surprised to find that I like her despite what I have read or heard about her (some of you make her out to be a monster - she is not). What I have questioned with Ms. Clancy, is her ability to grasp some of the budget consequences for the students. For example, I am not sure that she understood for quite a while (I think eventually she did grasp it) that by taking away k-3 spending/not supporting it, the money would have to be made up through redirection of M&O funds. Hence, students k-12 would be impacted.
Clancy is a politician. Her boardsmanship is all about self-image and how well she can posture herself in the community... and she is relatively skilled at that.
ReplyDeleteShe clearly does not understand the budget even at a rudimentary level, and for having served so many years I find this inexcusable.
It's very easy to say "Don't close a school at any cost..." because it makes people feel good and follow her. Very difficult to suffer the consequences of not doing so and losing teachers and services this community values.
Clancy is divisive and unable to grasp even the most basic financial information. For example, she attacked STMS during a presentation on tax credits and made a malicious comment... "Sonoran Trails had better get on the stick... look at their number compared to DAMS." The report she was commenting on was EXPENDITURES, not REVENUE... proving to me that she is indeed divisive and places her personal agenda among "her constituents." above understanding what is being presented to her as an elected board member.
Susan Clancy uses the dias as a personal soap box from which to launch her own popularity contest. She loves to listen to herself speak and that's why she asks so many questions. She needs to go.
I'm voting for Reese/Workman
October 8 at 4:57pm. I have been at many of the board meetings. I have listened to Kent Frison do his presentations and it is the most confusing process that the State of Arizona has come up with in regards to budgets. I think you are confusing questions and passions with something else. Each of the Board Members that voted to close DAMS because of money lied. The money was there (they paid for all day KG) they just closed it. I think the majority of us just really wanted to the truth. For years and years, we have put up with "less" for our kids because it was Cave Creek. A nice small District. There have been excuses and excuses for what the "old" schools did not have. Meanwhile, new school after new school got new buildings, new technology. We need to have Board Members up there asking "why" to everything that Dr. Burdick brings forward. That is their job. It is not to be "yes" people. I will vote one time, for Susan Clancy and I am sharing that with my neighbors who NEVER attend the board meetings to hear and know the truth. Asking questions should never be the problem...not answering them is the problem. That makes Dr. Burdick the problem and the Board members in her hip pocket the problem....Sorry Casey, David and Mark!
ReplyDeleteDear 6:16a - You are so right about the State of Arizona budget process being confusing. I think that is why even Member Clancy is sometimes confused. It is actually overwhelming unless you take the time to go item by item through the books at the district office (then still overwhelming, but abundantly clear that the funds are apportioned correctly).
ReplyDeleteRubberstamping is not the board's job. However, I believe you are incorrect about the decision on DAMS vs. all day K. The decision to close DAMS affected one school population. The decision to continue all day K affected the entire elementary district. Ultimately, what was needed for the greater good of students was what it would come down to. With the research all indicating that early childhood education is a necessity, it would have been hard to circumvent all day k to keep DAMS open.
Asking questions is not the problem. What Ms. Clancy has demonstrated, however, is that she puts constituency first, not students first as her priority. Plus, she makes mistakes with regard to her understanding of the complex budget issues.
I would disagree with you about your endorsement. I think that the teachers very clearly spoke up this time when CCEA endorsed Reese/Workman. I think that anybody who is questioning who to vote for should have a discussion with the schoolteachers to find out why Reese/Workman was endorsed rather than Clancy. We always talk about the teachers and the classroom separately from "the district." I think that they are pretty good arbitrators of what is best for the students.
Well said 6:16 I am only casting one vote as well.
ReplyDeleteThe DAMS/All-Day K decision outcome will not be known for years. However, we were told it would "keep enrollment at Kindergarten" and at BMES, the kidnergarten enrollment FELL by 40 students. In addition, closing DAMS affected EVERY School in the district by causing them to re-structure the curriculum. 6th graders DO NOT have the same opportunities they had last year. Did you see the Republic's article today on test score evaluations of 6th graders at elementary vs 6th graders at middle schools?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.azcentral.com/community/scottsdale/articles/2010/10/08/20101008scottsdale-district-6th-graders-better-middle-schools.html
Interesting. CCUSD made the WRONG choice in the closure and that will become apparent very soon. They also need to address the major issues at BMES or the north families will be completely without schools soon. First they suffered for years with no funding support and schools falling apart and now they are going to lose enrollment due to some very bad leadership and no one is listening.
Whoever has the big mouths down south are being heard but no one listens to the parents up north. In the nieghborhoods across the street from BMES tehre are several streets where NO ONE goes to CCUSD schools. That trend is only going to continue...all-day K or not.
BTW, no one was ever ELIMINATING all-day K. It was still available at a SMALL fee. AND those who could nto afford it would have been provided scholarships. So, again....why close a school for that?
Oh well....folks believe the district was "saved" by the closure.
I know my kids were saved because we looked outside the district and found challenging classes, engaged students and a committed, focused principal in CLEAN buildings and NEW technology that actually works. Thank you CCUSD for forcing us to consider other alternatives. I only wish we had done so sooner.
PS I am not even voting in the board election. What is the point? With the bad leadership at teh top of the district does it really matter who the board members are? Their only REAL job is to hire and fire the superintendent and when they decided to renew the contract for THREE years even after some had been warned that the test scores were not going to be good when they were unembargoed the next day, that shows they don't care about the students they just care about "getting along".
We deserve better!!! Luckily for our family we found it -- outside of CCUSD.
I second that 4:56!
ReplyDeleteAnd if you care to ask the folks at Black Mountain it appears our all day kindergarten is filled with open enrollment students...One could argue that the open enrollment helped and another could argue we have all day babysitting for people outside of the district, what will happen next year when they can return to their home school with busing and less driving etc...On the other hand we closed a school that forced a hundred + local students to seek their education outside the district...We also know now that they had the money they said they didn't Free all day kindergarten came at the expense of DAMS
ReplyDelete9:04 am is missing the point that the parents of the children don't agree with the decisions that the district is making in regard to our children. Member Clancy represents me and so should the rest of the board members. I don't feel that the district or the boards decisions are in the best interest of all children in the District. I am the parent and I will still be the parent when they are all but a memory. Representing what is best for the children as stated in the School Board members policy book does not give Deb Burdick free reign to do whatever is on her personal agenda. If you want the community to support your overrides and your agenda include us in your research. I did not hire Deb Burdick but I did vote for many of the people on the board who no longer represent my view unfortunately I will have to wait to show Casey, Dave and Mark they will not get my vote in the future
ReplyDeleteI'll third that 4:56....
ReplyDeleteA board that supports a superintendent who seems to be ignoring the serious issues at BMES is complacent and should not be supported by any PTO -- ESPECIALLY BMES PTO.
ReplyDeleteI understand David Schaefer has sent an email endorsing Reese and Workman. Really? And Susan Clancy is inappropriate? How is her vocal support of DAMS remaining open any less appropriate than board members running Op-Ed pieces stating why it should be closed?
Really, this is just ridiculous. We need someone to come in here and show people how to be PROFESSIONALS! What a JOKE!
4:56pm I live across the street from the main campus. Out of the five houses on my street there are eight school age children, only one attends a School within the district. We all drive/carpool our children out of the district (and not together) We all bought our homes because of the proximity to the District but found the district lacking in addressing the education we wanted to see. If I was a board member I would perhaps knock on a few of these doors, ask some questions, look for solutions. Not our board though, they rely on Deb Burdicks "research" which is actually ignoring anyone who doesn't agree with you.
ReplyDeleteTeachers, folks. Do not pay any attention to blog screamers (those who use capital lettering to get attention) or any of us anonymous posters. Talk with the teachers (aka the frontline) and get their opinions before you cast your vote. If there is any sentiment against Ms. Clancy, it started way before the DAMS issue and there are many good reasons that some want her off the board. This is nothing personal. It really has to do with her priorities.
ReplyDeleteI am so sorry 4:28AM ON Oct 11th. Our teachers are just puppets to the Principals and Dr. Burdick afraid for their jobs. That is he environment that has been grown here. They are too afraid to say what they really want to...I have been told that first hand from teachers.
ReplyDeleteI do not know which teachers you speak with, but I have heard the exact opposite from teachers within the district.
ReplyDeleteThe teachers at BMES won't even leave their classrooms for fear of some type of ugly encounter with their principal. That's what we parents are seeing and hearing at BMES.
ReplyDelete4:28 a.m.
ReplyDeleteAll you have to do is read the past board dockets and you see a clear picture. Susan Clancy raises concerns and the rest of the board criticizes her for doing so. Half the last board retreat was spent creating rules to keep Ms. Clancy in line. When the closure of DAMS was on the docket, this is what they focused on. It is really pathetic.
It is clear that dissention is not wanted at all--whether or not it helps the district/administration come to some better solutions than they might have otherwise--or at least allows them to be challenged on their opinions.
I guess, to be honest, if I thought the leadership at the top were better I might be a little more supportive of an aligned board, but since I think the CCUSD administration AND board members need to really listen now and then to some other sides...rather than stubbornly stick to their initial views and run from dissention, I think there needs to be another voice. My only drawback with Ms. Clancy is her connection to the Sonoran News. That pathetic publication is not worth the paper it is printed on...
This blog draws the most negative, uneducated readers and is written by the most negative, uneducated writers.
ReplyDeleteWhy don't you all spend time in the schools and see what really goes on, instead of criticizing everything you THINK goes on?
11:11pm - I think it is possible that some schools tell a different tale. But, it would certainly be nice for those whose schools are not working well to spend some time with parents in the other schools to find out what is working, what is not. I do believe that part of the problem in this district is that some parents at some of the schools exert a more negative force than at other schools.
ReplyDeleteGreat Homecoming Parade this weekend. Thanks to all the business that support CSHS activities.
ReplyDeleteSome really creative floats and what great weather. Sounds like the student council has a tremendous week of activities. Beat Saguaro!
Interesting how the CCEA is endorsing Workman and Reese and not Clancy, who voted not to close DAMS, when the CCEA President is a former DAMS teacher who was very prominent at the school and a huge Ann Orlando. So much for loyalty. I guess he likes his job as an English teacher better than teaching video.
ReplyDeleteOct 11 11:11pm, you are making a huge assumption that we are not involved...I would put my involvment at my children's school and District level up against yours. In fact, the most negative post that I have seen is yours. I would not assume if I was you. You know what happens.
ReplyDeleteOct. 12 at 5:2am, I think the first responsibility goes to the District Office in the case of BMES. Very positive and concerned parents and teachers went to the Administration about Elie Gaines, but the Administration did nothing. Now this year is even worse than the first 2 years. BMES was a shining star in this School District under previous leadership, what is the difference? It wasn't the parents?
ReplyDelete11:11 p.m. There are several on this blog who have spent YEARS working in the schools, on district committees, in the classroom and still continue to work within the district. However, after those many years of often sounding just like you and criticizing those who dared raise a voice of dissention, they have realized that the direction the district is heading is south (literally and figuratively) and it's not good. It would be really wonderful if the board would take a good hard look at itself and the Dr.s Burdick and Miller and honestly assess the mistakes they have made instead of spending time worrying about what Ms. Clancy is doing and patting themselves on the back. There are some major issues. People have raised concerns, face-to-face with Dr. Burdick, with board members, etc. yet the issues are not being addressed. It is like they are horses with blinders on.
ReplyDeleteWe have seen programs come and go and come again. We saw a completely ineffective elementary Spanish program disappear. Then new parents to the district bemoaned that we did not have Spanish. Well, want to throw money after a bad program where all the kids knew at the end of six years was colors and numbers (could have learned that on Sesame Street) or would you rather see money go to something that actually was affective. Spanish Immersion came in and did it right, but not everyone could have it. I'm concerned the language programs being pushed now are going to be rather ineffective (though they are meeting more often than they did years ago). Most importantly, since they are not really fully funded, I fully expect those programs to be gone in two years...again...wouldn't it have been better to spend money on developing a solid district-wide vertical horizontal curriculum alignign all the special programs STEM, Core Knowledge, etc. with the middle school and then high school's IB and AP? Wouldn't it have been better to have paid some of our amazing teachers to work on that?
As for asking other schools what they do well...the school that is on the quickest downward trend, used to be the shining leader in the district...It was the school parents wanted their children to attend...it was the PTO others wanted to emulate...it is a shell of its former self...Since it falls on deaf ears in the district few are left with any options.
Also--one last comment. The teacher mentioned as being head of the CCEA is no longer the head of the CCEA. The CCEA head is a teacher at HTES who supported the closure of DAMS.
Regardless of who is the President of CCEA, I believe that the CCEA endorsement would only have happened after the teachers were polled and only if there had been a clear majority of teachers who recommended Reese/Workman.
ReplyDeleteIn the past, CCEA did not endorse (I had been told) because either they had not left time for polling, or the polling was not conclusive.
It would be helpful for somebody to ask the current CCEA head whether or not teachers were polled about the candidates and whether this endorsement represents a majority view. It would be much more helpful to you to know this information than to go back and forth on who was the head of the CCEA at the time of the endorsement.
BTW, having had a child in DAMS a few years back, I can tell you that plenty of the teachers did not support Clancy after her early 2008 shenanigans.
The language program they have now is a joke. Spanish for K-2 at LMES and K-3 at BMES for example is not a language program. What happens to the kids in 4th, 5th and 6th grade at these schools? Oh, never mind. They just slip between the cracks like so many others. It's a disgrace that no one discusses this honestly with the parents. Instead, they hide behind this FLEX nonsense and try to get everyone to think they hvae some great language program. Ridiculous.
ReplyDelete7:37
ReplyDeleteYou write...
"used to be the shining leader in the district...It was the school parents wanted their children to attend.."
Really? What a bunch of arrogance. It is the same snob-filled rhetoric which fills this blog on a continuous basis.
What I have found is that most of the parents who clutched onto DAMS for whatever reason, are dismayed that their cause was lost (aside from the obvious geography issues--DAMS should have been closed two years prior.)
They are mad at themselves because they fought for something that really wasn't worthy of fighting for in the first place. Now, they find themselves with better elsewhere and can't believe they let their children go to a "sub-standard" school for so long.
All I can say is poor BMES - One reason for BMES slight downward trending last year is most likely the caustic atmosphere surrounding the school which is evidenced in this blog daily. Very few principals would/could withstand that environment without issue.
As for foreign language development, it is on the right track without any extra resident funding. You speak specifically to horizontal alignment and that is what the language program is attempting to do by placing it in all the schools. The early grades only are for three reasons 1)the earlier taught,the less resistance and the better grasp. 2)It is very hard to teach See Jack run in Chinese to a fifth grade who is reading Harry Potter level material and 3)Parents are better about the buy-in at the primary levels and tend to push it up. Curriculum rarely pushes down.
It would be interesting to see if all who attend or attended BMES/DAMS quit blogging, what this site would look like...
675 students at DAMS and 600 students at BMES and you want to disregard their input... that sounds like a great way to get the district back on track. We should elect someone like you to the school board, oh wait you are probably already sitting there!
ReplyDeleteJust connecting dots through the posted threads. It doesn't take much to sum up this blog and its inhabitants. Just like what you tell your kids. It's not all about you and when everyone else seems to be wrong, perhaps the one to look at is yourself.
ReplyDeleteYeah, 3:18pm is right, as a BMES parent all I care about is geography. The "slight downward trending" that 3:18pm refers to doesn't concern me at all. Heck, this year at BMES we only lost 100+ students and an excelling label we'd had for many years. Yeah, you're right 3:18pm, no cause for concern here and, for sure, it's not the principal's fault. It must be all those "caustic" parents at BMES you refer to. Gosh, if only those pesky parents would just go away. I look forward to the future, when my kids can take a bus for 60 minutes to STMS, a performing plus school. Yippee! Thanks 3:18pm for setting me and so many others straight on this one. You are so kind and helfpul, and your thoughts about the language program are so well informed too.
ReplyDelete10 years ago, you heard many of the same complaints about the district that you hear today. It might not have been DAMS/BMES parents back then but there were always a few vocal people who weren't happy and had to let everyone know they weren't happy and why. Do you people really think that Debbie Burdick stays awake at night thinking of ways to destroy this district and ruin your child's education? We have thousands of families in this district and only a small number of those families seem to be unhappy. Maybe the majority of us who think things are ok, might just be right.
ReplyDeleteArgumentum ad hominem. When they can't refute your argument, they attack you.
ReplyDeleteso where is the positive, post away people I would love to cheer I would love to boast about the district I was so proud of, the district I gave my blood sweat and tears to, Please enlighten me post your goodwill, currently all you can do is trash the ones who are dare to speak the truth. I am waiting I promise to acknowledge even the slightest glimmer of light with sincere cheers of glee...We are waiting oh wise ones please share your wisdom with thee!
ReplyDeleteOf course Deb doesn't stay awake at night plotting against our children's education. She just wakes up every morning with a smile on her face knowing she has a contract she did not deserve and it's only three more years till she retires.
ReplyDeletePerception is reality. While there is likely some added "fluff" to what everyone is saying (it's a human tendency), dare I say that every poster here probably does speak some element of truth/fact. I do have a child still in this district --I do care about what happens here. Unfortunately, right or wrong, I feel like our district's future is in a downhill spiral and no matter what we all do /say to keep it afloat, it will continue to fall... It's not just about closing DAMS, or the state of affairs at BMES (so the other posters here say, I do not have first hand info). It's about the entirely of our district. The politics around here has gotten unbearable. We all have to find a way to stop complaining and find ways to improve things around here. If our voices fall on deaf ears (possibly even new ones that may soon be elected), then we fight some more. If that doesn't work, then save yourself (i.e. your kids) and leave CCUSD. Find a happier place.. No one can fight forever without feeling like they are making some positive progress. It all is just such a shame....
ReplyDeleteI would disagree with 9:08's comments about CCUSD 10 years ago. The problems 10 years ago were much different. The community seemed generally satisfied. STMS had just opened, all the schools had good leadership, and the community as a whole seemed excited about the growth potential of the district.
ReplyDeleteThe problems were more about not being able to pay the teachers what they deserved. However, you at least felt valued and appreciated not only by the community but also the administration. You didn't have the politicking or underhanded agendas and ulterior motives that have plagued the district over the last four years. You didn't have the infighting amongst the administration and teachers, and if there was any it was not as blatant as it is now. You knew where you stood, and you were respected as a valued staff member.
So what happened? When did it all fall apart? I'd say it started back in the mid-2000s, which, incidentally, is when Debbi Burdick came to CCUSD. That's when administrators started not to have their contracts renewed for ""vague" reasons such as "not fitting in to the district's vision" or "in the best interest of the district". That's when the witch-hunt against DAMS and its leadership started. That's when disciplinary issues were poorly handled, turning incidences into crises. That's when each school became its own little fiefdom standing against other schools who may have disagreed with them or their principal or even revolting against their own administrators.
CCUSD has become a divided district, and the finger should be pointed at Debbi Burdick for creating such disharmony amongst her staff.
What is wrong with some of the postings (just like the District and Board) since when is it wrong to raise a question with facts to back you up? Questions are not bad (based by facts), not answering them is what is bad...I think if you are happy that is great, I just wonder how long you would be happy if your school's test scores and moral were so bad that 100 students left? I wonder how long you would be happy when you school was closed and your child had to ride the school bus for 60 minutes? I wonder. I am a simple parent,that will not quote or post in words everyone cannot understand. I would just ask, don't post on subjects you don't know directly, on subjects you have not sat at Board meetings, on conversations that you have not heard. Pretty simple, the truth is the truth. The fact those of us left behind at BMES know we lost some good parents & kids, and we know we are going to lose more. That is a fact.
ReplyDeleteWow. Trying to cast an informed vote. Been pretty pleased with education our 3 received/are receiving. Who is most likely to make the positive changes needed and why do you think that?
ReplyDelete6:16am - I'm not sure what you mean when you say STMS just opened 10 years ago. The new STMS opened 5 years ago. I'm not sure when the original STMS opened but I believe it was more than 10 years ago. I think the community today is generally satisfied, like I said before there are a small vocal minority who are unhappy and there always has been. Maybe in your school 10 years ago everything was great so you didn't hear the complaints. I remember many people thought the superintendant at the time was leading us down the road to ruin. There was always a disconnect between STMS & DAMS, before the new STMS was opened we use to call it the haves and have nots Like a previous poster said perception is reality and depending on where your child is or where you might teach, your perception might be way different than mine.
ReplyDeleteAbout the 60 minute bus ride, we live less than 3 miles from CSHS and because our bus stop is one of the first stops, my kids have a 45 minute bus ride every morning and that has been going on for years.
I agree with 5:13am we need to stop complaining and find a way to improve the things we are unhappy with.
So many here think all we do is complain...my complaints are nothing compared to my contributions.
ReplyDeleteLets talk about something positive. Cactus Shadows has a wonderful IB program with only 34 students participating. To measure the success of this program one would have to envision more participation and more colleges accepting the credits earned by the students. One could also note that the same program is available to middle and elementary schools. Question is why are we not creating unity amongst our campuses and years of opportunity by implementing this program the High School so highly recommends (the jewel in the desert)across the board in all of our schools?
ReplyDelete4:21
ReplyDeleteYou are right. The IB program is a jewel. It is being looked at for the MS and an ES. I whole-heartedly support the expansion and my kids aren't and probably won't be involved. It is no different that some of the other intiatives that are in this district. Parents continually bash what isn't here or at their particular school instead of taking advantage of what is right in front of them.
Bring on the positive posting...!
Another positive thing that is going on at CSHS is the Veterans Heritage Project. If you haven't heard about it you should check it out.
ReplyDeleteThanks you for validating my positive post...please note that I am also one who questions the district and is a former DAMS BMES parent...I hope that all will now understand we offer, have offered, and will offer suggestions and support to the district of CCUSD93. We have contributed above and beyond to the success of this district, we are allowed to be disenchanted as well. Embrace us, don't discredit us!
ReplyDelete4:21
ReplyDeleteGood question. I wondered why we were doing CK instead of investigating the IB which we spent so much time and $$ setting up at CSHS ... why not continue the vertical alignment that would provide?
Glad to hear it is being considered...
Also, a question..I head that CSHS IB program credits are only good at in state schools while PV's program credits are accepted throughout the country. Is that correct?
To 7:51 am I don't think any one elected official can do as much good as we as parents can do. They are five people who are controlled by ethics, rules and regulations. As parents we can bring about the most amount of change, we are the voice. But when voices are ignored (good and bad) progress stalls and if the stall lasts long enough you will see a decline...That is what we have here a divided community brought about by others not hearing the message, not respecting others opinions...Personally I am very disenchanted with the district but I am also one who posts goodwill. I am regarded as a trouble maker yet I have worked tirelessly to improve the standards for my own children as well as others. My contributions were appreciated but as soon as I disagreed with what was happening I was shunned...
ReplyDeleteThere was a great positive article on the front page of the Scottsdale Republic today about CSHS, everyone should read it!
ReplyDeleteMs Hatch's Veteran's Heritage Program does deserve applause. Mrs Beforts Disney Planet Challenge also deserves a round of applause. There is no shortage of teachers making extraordinary contributions to the classroom. AND it is unfortunate that these praises are not sung more often and muffled by the negative actions of those on our board and the district administration. We love our teachers!
ReplyDeleteYes 1:42 that is true some credits can be accepted by schools out of state but it is difficult and you really don't need the IB to get into our State
ReplyDeleteSchools. Many of the IB students take the course for the competitive factor, and their GPA an IB class can offer as high as 5 as compared to a general class that only offers a top grade of a 4.
Seems that an AP class would accomplish about the same thing as far as weighted grades.
ReplyDeleteCSHS has an amazing drama program. There are over 150 students participating in the drama club. The arts are one area where CCUSD could shine if they just didn't keep cutting the programs as soon as they start (with the exception of high school drama which they have not yet cut thankfully).
BTW, they are doing The Crucible next weekend. Go see it.
A survey of what the community supports and an administration that would recognize the results would do a lot to heal this district...we are not the enemies here, most of the positive being mentioned here is at the high school level...what about the other 6 schools
ReplyDeleteBe thankful that the high school is on the uphill swing. When colleges look at your kids, it is not their elementary school records that are looked at.
ReplyDeleteso skip elementary school and middle school... just go to High School so you can get into college
ReplyDeleteI want all schools in my district to be held held accountable
CCUSD annual report no need to skip elementary & middle school - you're district is accountable - why do you think the high school has so many accolades
ReplyDeletehttp://tinyurl.com/2ufa2bj
high school has accolades? don't make me laugh so hard. did you miss the article in the paper where it said that CSHS ap test scores are below the national averages and almost 60% of those taking an ap test fail it.
ReplyDeletehttp://tinyurl.com/2ufa2bj
ReplyDelete7:50 pm? You're kidding with this link, right?
Jackie Beazley also noted that most fail the testing (her presentation to the board) but 100% of the children gain the experience...I guess this was the high schools way of validating the program even though the success or lack there of would question the benefit of the program to the students if they are failing.
ReplyDelete12:29 pm - Did you miss the part of the article that said CSHS SAT & ACT scores are higher than the national average? Funny how you didn't mention that part of the article. If all you want to see is the negative, than that is all you will see.
ReplyDeleteSorry, I think I wrote that I was responding to 12:29 pm when it should have been 11:13 am.
ReplyDeleteSorry, my post should have been directed at 11:13 am not 12:29 pm.
ReplyDelete