I don't agree with WTOL congratulating Foley on reforms

Tagged:  •    •    •    •  

I don't think WTOL should be congratulating Foley on the nice move on restructuring the three schools. They should be asking "What took so long?" A year ago I mentioned the district was in violation of the federal law for not making changes at these schools, which was a year late at that time. I also wonder if it was not an issue last year, if we would be hearing this announcement this week. At the time, Foley defended the plans they implemented as enough. While it is good they are actually moving forward on reforms in those schools, we should not give an A to an assignment turned in almost 2 years late. The district cannot wait so long to implement these reforms, especially in 2008. Our world is moving too quick to wait this long.

Read the editorial at:
http://www.wtol.com/Global/story.asp?S=8440362

What do you think?

Your rating: None

Looks like another lovefest

Non-Descript

Chris, I do remember your press conference.

Let me point out that the Urban Coalition has been pushing the Board and administration to make reforms for under performing schools, we even made many recommendations such as school reorganizations, pacing guides and others, since the UC was formed in 2003.

How could you congratulate anyone for doing what is right and more importantly before you even know what the reforms will be? How will this school be staffed that will make it different from before? If it is still staffed based upon some formula agreed to by the labor unions without targeting the educational approach and assuring that staffing is done to meet this objective, just how do you know it even has a chance? The small schools concept at Libbey and Scott is a great idea that was badly implemented.

And I think the move was intentionally held off to get the levy pushed through.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Related content from around the Web