Spokane7
67°
February 3, 2011 in Washington Voices
EV builds on strengths
The East Valley School District’s board of directors is considering a major overhaul in its pre-kindergarten through eighth-grade education system. Much like many private schools, students in those grades will attend community schools through the eighth grade and the district’s two middle schools will be closed. There are also plans in the works for a middle level learning center for students who have shown mastery in their subjects and for those needing extra help.
Some of the plans rely on a $33 million bond.
The board may consider a resolution Tuesday to put that bond on the ballot April 25. It will need a supermajority of 60 percent to pass.
Q. What is the plan in your own words?
A. What I’ve been directed to do is to develop a plan to move the district to a PK-8 system. There are two paths to that. The first path is with a bond. Right now, based on all the numbers we have and everything we’ve looked at and all the due diligence, it looks like about a $33.75 million bond. That bond would allow us to add about 40 classrooms to the district, four competitive-sized gyms and renovate all of our elementary schools.
Q. That’s just on the facilities side. Academically?
A. Academically, there have been several things happening at several different levels. The first thing that’s been happening is at the secondary level. There’s been an awful lot of work going on in the last year at our middle schools. There’s been a lot of work that is setting up to align the curriculum so the kids have more options as they enter high school.
Last year we completely overhauled the math department. The math teachers at the secondary level led that charge, they really took charge of it and they really are the ones who said “this is what our kids need.”
This year we seeing a very pro-active stance with mathematics and we’re seeing more and more opportunities for kids to take advanced placement and higher level courses at the high school.
So that’s one strand. The other strand is that we’re working toward a more robust career and technical education program.
John Savage has now stepped out of his role as vice principal (at East Valley High School) and is spending full time working on vocational programming. He’s actually now housed at East Valley Middle School. He is working on a variety of programs to improve the real connection to the work to work.
Then we have another group of folks who are studying right now what a performing arts strand might look like. They are doing their research and they are meeting and they are talking. That’s not moving as quickly as some folks would like, but it’s in the planning phases. That’s what’s happening at the secondary level.
At the elementary level, and actually at every level, we’ve formed professional learning communities. We need some more work with those, we need some more polish in some places, but the professional learning communities are creating a platform for us to think about how we would teach differently. We’ve got some amazing teachers and how can we use their energies to improve education throughout the system? That’s a long way of saying how we get there from the academic standpoint is we get there by creating systems where teachers talk and collaborate and work together and where we define a common set of outcomes for our kids which we haven’t had for a long time.
We’re talking about learning, we’re talking about achievement, we’re talking about student success throughout the system. If this process has caused nothing else, it’s caused us to do those things.
Q. How will a PK-8 system work?
A. What came out of the research and what came out of all of the work that was done were two things really.
There was this desire for these safe, rather intimate community-centered schools. The idea was that you would have these rather small K-8 schools that almost harkens back to the old days of the one-room school house.
There’s also a good body of research out there that says you have to have a certain amount of collaboration and energy and resources to get the full benefit, for students to get the full benefit of school. Actually, there’s some fairly recent research that says for kids who have some advantage that larger schools may actually be better – financial advantage. Kids who are middle-class to high socio-economic tend to do better in schools that are a little larger.
What we believe is we’ve got to create these systems where there are enough teachers to give kids truly a choice and for the teachers to work together. And so these PK-8s where we would have smaller class sizes but more adults. They would be bigger schools, although under our current estimate they would be about the size of Trent and Skyview/CCS (Continuous Curriculum School) right now. They’re not going to be that much larger and they are going to have three more grades.
When we looked at that we said, ‘all right, now we’ve got the best of both worlds.’ We’ve got these community-centered schools with no transitions where we can create a culture around learning. We’ve got an opportunity for parents to keep their child in a school for eight years, or nine years if you count kindergarten, I guess, to not have to worry about moving.
The downside of that, and the thing that people are very unnerved about and really upset about is this idea that – and I don’t want to discount this in any way – but this idea that kindergartners and eighth graders can’t be housed on the same campus, that we can’t put little kids and larger kids together.
What I want to assure people of is that the schools will be designed, from a physical standpoint, to provide that separation when it makes sense. We build our middle schools right now to separate our sixth graders from our eighth graders. This is a proven model that works in a lot of places.
What really is probably most disturbing about this argument, is this sort of painting of our middle level kids as these little hoodlums who can’t be trusted to be great role models and great citizens. This idea that they are just going to be running amok creating chaos is really kind of beating up on a group of kids who by and large do a really good job. And that’s sad.
The overriding concern is “I don’t want my kindergartner around my eighth-grader.” But yet, when I talk to eighth-graders and I say “Well, so you’d go down and pick on kindergartners?” “Well, no, no, no, I wouldn’t.” “Well, you’ve got friends who would do that?” “Oh, no, no, my friends wouldn’t.” So, what’s the problem? Well, they’re going to hear some cuss words. Well, they might, but you don’t think fifth-graders are cussing?
I really think it’s a legitimate concern but we can deal with it. I think we are not giving our kids enough credit that they can’t. They will be able to manage their behavior in a responsible fashion.
Q. What is the middle level learning center?
A. We’ve looked at this we believe this to be a pretty unique innovation in this thinking.
We have teachers who have been able to move about three or four times as many students to a place of excellence as we have students who are not succeeding. We have well over 500 kids who are truly at the top end, as opposed to about 135-140 who are at the lower end.
We have got to create a system where these kids can get something that’s a little more than what’s offered in the traditional system.
The concept of the middle level learning center is that you could offer some really high-tech labs. We can’t put a really nice fully operating chemistry or laser lab or something in every school.
The idea is that you would have these opportunities for some enhanced learning for kids who have demonstrated they basically have the middle level skills, the basic skills.
On the other end we have kids who are giving it their all and they’re just not quite where they need to be. The idea would be that this center could also provide some enrichment activities for these students. Whether that’s music or arts or whether that’s something that’s a little bit different, we don’t know.
That’s something we have to talk to teachers, we have to talk with parents, we have to talk to kids and we’ve got to figure out what is it that will grab those kids and make it worth doing those extra 10 math problems so they are going to get this reward.
The real elegance of this, assuming we can pull it off in the way we think we can – the numbers at this point dictate that we can – is that at some portion of every school week and hopefully a couple of times a week, teachers would find themselves in a situation where a large portion of their class is not there. That allows them the opportunity to provide some either really high-tech enrichment to kids who need it or some really structured and sound remediation to kids who need it.
This is fairly simple concept, but it’s a fairly complex idea in the implementation. We know the outline but the actual details will have to be worked out as we see what our children need and what the interests and desires are.
Q. Why are you doing this?
A. We’ve run three bonds. The buildings in the East Valley School District are falling down. They simply are.
We’ve got an incredible maintenance and custodial staff and those folks keep the buildings looking like they are operating in great shape.
You know, the other day the doors froze shut at Mountain View and we couldn’t get the kids in and out.
It’s not an issue of “this would be nice to have.” We’re at the point where this is what we’re going to have to have. When we started talking about what the community wanted, we didn’t frame it in the context of a facility; we framed it in the context of “what does the community want for the education of their children?” We started by looking at where we may not be serving children or where we may be under-serving them.
What we found was our strengths and weaknesses. Out of that grew this idea that we have an opportunity to do something that is really, really good for students and families. That we have an opportunity to really change the way that students in the East Valley School District receive their education and prepare for life.
Why are we doing it? We’re doing it because we have an obligation to do the best thing we can do for our children and I believe that this is the best thing for our children right now.
We were 126 votes away from passing the last bond, and it would be a lot easier to go in and just pass the bond and maintain the status quo. Our kids aren’t doing horribly; in fact our kids are doing pretty well. We’ve got more kids succeeding than are failing. We’ve got good teachers. It’s a pretty easy job, now that I’ve got three years in it I can do a lot of it without too much effort anymore. I don’t have to hurt myself to do the job, generally speaking, that we’ve got things lined out. But then all we would have is the same school system that we believe is under-serving 68 percent of our kids either on the top end or the bottom end.
I don’t know how we can do it. I don’t know how we can be satisfied with mediocrity.
Q. If the bond fails, what do you do?
A. Well, then we do it anyway. Then we move forward.
We’ve lost 750 kids more or less in the last 10 years in our brick and mortar. We’ve got to close a school. Somebody’s just got to step up and say, “Look folks, demographics have changed, enrollment has changed, this is not the East Valley that was here 10 years ago.” Something has got to change.
If we ran a bond to fix two middle schools, again, what we would have is one middle school that had about 550 kids in it and is scheduled to have the northwest freeway cut through the playgrounds.
We’d have another middle school with about 300 kids in it that is located in an area where we see no midterm growth. Ten years from now, eight years from now when we get sewer and water and waste treatment and all that, that area may grow, but it’s probably not going to happen in the next eight to 10 years. So, you run a bond to do that and you’ve still got elementary schools that are out of balance with population and are physically collapsing, that are breaking down.
What are the other options? Some folks have said, “Let’s build a new state-of-the-art middle school.” We could build a new state-of-the-art middle school that would cost us about $33 million.
Then we would have one middle school with over 800 kids in it. We would have used all of our bond in capacity we would not have maximized our state matching money, in fact we probably couldn’t build it without state matching money. That’s a little bit of an issue.
Q. Are you closing any elementary schools?
A. There won’t be any buildings closed in the elementary – CCS would occupy all of Skyview, but Skyview Elementary would cease to exist as its own entity.
Q. Why will this create better learning?
A. The change in and of itself, if we just change grades, which is what we’re stuck on, won’t improve learning. What we’re doing is we’re creating a catalyst where change will allow us to get rid of some our old habits that we’re stuck in and will empower our teachers to really think differently about teaching.
The grade configuration is not the magic bullet. It is not the thing that will fix all, but it will create an opportunity for us to build on our strengths and address our weaknesses by throwing away those parts of the system that we’re kind of locked into now.
Q. Do you have any final thoughts?
A. The only thing that I would ask people to do if they are not sure about this is to step back from their own bias and prejudice and look at what this has the potential to do for children and what it could mean for our community. Set aside, whether it’s a dislike for school whether it’s a dislike for me, whether it’s a dislike for government, just step back and look honestly at that.
If folks reach the decision after stepping back and looking at it that they don’t believe it’s good then I absolutely respect that decision and I applaud that. But right now, I just ask that people step back and look at it from that perspective.
Recent stories by Lisa Leinberger
CV students’ mission on Mars includes online Q&A with scientists May 26, 2012
- Cheney senior shows those who can, teach May 24, 2012
- ‘Crazy country kid’ dreams of a future as a pro bull rider May 24, 2012
- Three Springs’ Flores strives to be an example May 24, 2012
- Student-directed play opens next week at EV May 19, 2012
Ladeejay on February 03 at 12:35 p.m.
Q. If the bond fails, what do you do?
A. Well, then we do it anyway.
You are telling us what you are going to do weather we want it or not.
WOW! I thought we live in a democacy. Should we just start calling you KING Glenewinkel now or wait for later.
You can sure talk out both sides of your mouth. In this article you tell people to make their own decision but you tell us at the beginning of the article that you are going to do it anyways. So which is it. Do we get a choice? Not likely. You seem to know what everyone NEEDS. Guess what? You don’t. Did you ever think that the kindergardeners will have to ride the bus with the older kids? No? Didn’t think so. It only takes one “hoodlum” to destroy a small childs life.
You shouldn’t beable to make choices like this if you don’t have kids that it will affect.
This needs to be a front page article so East Valley Residents know exactly what is going on. And get both sides of the story not just a dictator’s.
theothersideofthestory on February 03 at 10:29 p.m.
Great article. Now how about reporting the other side of the story.
1) ” The idea was that you would have these rather small K-8 schools that almost harkens back to the old days of the one-room school house.” It sounds good in theory, but what he forgot to mention is that the schools are going to be bigger than they are currently, not smaller. He also didn’t address the fact that one of these schools has a 50% turnover rate every year. Pretty difficult to create a community culture when 1/2 of your student base changes every year.
(2) “painting of our middle level kids as these little hoodlums” It was actually Glenewinkel’s hand-selected Re-Visioning committee that decided this was necessary to “eliminate middle school behavior”. Apparently the belief is that holding children back and keeping them around impressionable youngsters will inhibit puberty.
(3)”One of the middle schools….is scheduled to have the NW freeway cut through the playground.” What he forgot to mention is this is the middle school that he is planning on converting to his new Middle Learning Center. Interestingly, the other middle school is being condemned. Not because it is unfit for occupancy, but because they have to condemn a building in order to get matching funds from government.
(4) No elementary schools will close, but non-CCS students who currently occupy Skyview will be pushed out of their neighborhood school and forced into schools that are more crowded and further from home. So while CCS (population less than 300) gets an entire building all to themselves, the rest of the children get to attend schools with 600 to 700 students each. Interestingly, a majority of the Re-visioning committee was comprised of CCS parents who have no vested interest in our middle schools anyway. Good for them! They won their very own school!
(5) “What does the community want for education?” The part he didn’t tell you? That the community doesn’t want this. The Re-visioning committee does. Many, many citizens from students to senior citizens have spoken up. 100’s of emails have been sent. The school board ignores the community and GJ talks in circles. The truth is the people that want this are covering their ears and yelling at the opposition without listening to reason.
Finally, I have a few questions.
-How will you build 40 new classrooms and a middle learning center if the bond fails?
-If all this goes the way you want it and the plan fails (as it already has in many other school districts), how will pay to put Humpty Dumpty back together again?
Ladeejay on February 04 at 8:27 a.m.
The lack of response to this article just goes to show that the East Valley School district community is not informed. Again, this is a democracy not a dictatorship. Mr. Glenwinkel needs to listen and not act like a 5 year old with his fingers in his ears screamming “I want it, I want it”.
rjr8806 on February 04 at 9:53 a.m.
Unlike those posting above I believe the district patrons are very well informed. Seems unfortunate that a few make a lot of noise without really looking into the facts regarding the district and the new configuration that the board has adopted.
As a volunteer from the re-visioning process I would encourage all to visit the district web site and review the wealth of research and information that is available. The new configuration was chosen for one simple reason, it works.
The bond proposal is sound. Finally the district is addressing the underutilization of our facilities and bringing the core structure that will educate our youth from kindergarten through 8th grade back to a sound platform.
A few misinformed folks who are very vocal continue to make statements and accusations that simply are not based on the facts. Again, it is all there on the district web site for any patron to see. Take a look and make your own judgement. Visit the schools, take part in the community information meetings, stop by the district office on Pines and visit with the administration, talk to your board.
Will everyone agree on the new configuration, no, but the process that resulted in the move to the new configuration was democracy at its best. The real five year olds are those who now can’t accept the decision that has been made. It is really a shame that they choose to fight rather then work to make the new configuration the best that it can be.
It is great to see that EVSD is leading the way. Please support the bond so the new configuration will be the best that it can be.
jgwinkel on February 04 at 11:28 a.m.
The questions asked by Ladeejay are probably rhetorical but since they are addressed to me I will answer them. There has been much thought given to how we would manage bus transportation. It is doubtful that older students would ride buses with younger students because we just don’t have that much room on the buses. In the event that it made fiscal sense to combine students on one bus we have already committed to adding adult support to monitor behavior.
Please do not confuse the issue of the bond to address the facility needs with the reorganization to address the academic needs of the district. We do live in a democracy. The elected representatives of that democracy have determined, after many hours of public debate that the best interest of the student s is served by moving to a PK-8 system. I might point out that the public did not vote on the current system configuration.
The question that was asked of me was what happens if the bond does not pass. The answer is: I have been directed to move forward with a PK-8 system. The honest and transparent reason for this move is the Board, after doing due diligence, believes in their hearts that this move is best for our children.
When we started this process, this belief was not cemented in the hearts of the Board. In fact, the Board, and I, were not convinced that the grade configuration was the essential element for improving student performance and we saw PK-8 as one of many possible options. Thoughtful people change their minds and through the hundreds of hours of research that was completed the Board reached the conclusion that the PK-8 model is the best thing for our children, in our district, for now and the foreseeable future.
When the Board reached the conclusion that the PK-8 model was best for kids they stepped up and embraced their moral obligation to move in that direction. Complicating the process is the fact that there are a group of people who believe that they can derail the effort to improve student achievement by defeating the bond. While these folks have legitimate and real concerns, those concerns have been heard and in many cases addressed. These people refuse to recognize the group of parents and community members who support this move.
Ultimately, people need to decide if they want to support a bond issue to renovate and improve buildings that have been deemed to be in need of major renovation. The moral obligation to improve student learning will remain, and will be addressed by the Board and administration, whether we have safe and adequate facilities or not.
The Board and I invite anyone with questions or who would like additional information to visit the district website: www.evsd.org, e-mail me at glenewinkelj@evsd.org. or call me at 924-1830 (work) or 928-0519 (home). You may also contact Board Chair Jensen at jensenm@evsd.org or at his home number 489-8206. There will be informational meetings in each of the schools and the schedule of those meetings will be on the website. We will also come to you. If you would like to schedule a meeting for your organization or your neighbors we will arrange it if you contact us.
Ladeejay on February 07 at 12:54 p.m.
There are so many things that I can comment on about your above statement Mr. Glenewhinkle, but lets just stick to one thing.
The question was put to you about what will happen if the bond doesn’t go through and your response was
“Well, then we’ll do it anyways”.
Than you don’t need the bond or the communities support.
TammyJ on February 08 at 12:57 a.m.
Ladeejay and theotherside, as usual, your attacks are uninformed as well as mean-spirited. Ignorant is what actually comes to mind, but that might be considered defamatory. Do you even know what a dictator is? I’ve never heard of a dictator making such an effort to reach out to the community as Mr. Glenewinkel has. In fact, he’s been reaching out to our community for more than a year on the revision issue alone. We all know how hard it is to get folks to volunteer in this busy world we live in. No one has time to participate in one more meeting/committee. However, despite busy schedules, many community members came together and were present at both community meetings and committee meetings. Every meeting and committee was open to the public. Each school had representation that included parents, teachers, staff and even students. There were EV senior citizens involved, as well as other community members. Three volunteer committees were formed: Elementary, Middle School, and High School. I chose the Middle School committee because I have one child at an elementary school, one at a middle school and one at the high school. It’s hard to say exactly, but when I looked at the EVSD web site committee notes, and counted the folks that actually signed in for the different meetings, it looks like at least 130 different individuals were in attendance at one meeting or another, if not all of the meetings. At the very least. I know that I personally missed the sign-in a number of times. For a dictatorship, I’d say that’s a pretty darned good turn-out of volunteers. Many of the parents I personally asked to go to the meetings were simply overbooked and happy to be filled in by those in attendance or on the District web site. Have you ever attended a PTA or PTO mtg. at any of the schools? At the ones I’ve been to, they’re lucky to get 6-7 in attendance.
You may not like his answer, but I don’t know how much more clearly Mr. G could respond to your question than he did. “The question that was asked of me was what happens if the bond does not pass. The answer is: I have been directed to move forward with a PK-8 system. The honest and transparent reason for this move is the Board, after doing due diligence, believes in their hearts that this move is best for our children.” “The moral obligation to improve student learning will remain, and will be addressed by the Board and administration, whether we have safe and adequate facilities or not.” End quotes. The majority of our community that is aware of the facts, agree that overall, the proposed changes are the best way to utilize what we have to work with. So many of our teachers are excited about the proposed changes. I would say they are absolutely qualified and in a perfect position to know what will be best for our children.
Of course continued support from our community will be essential for our school district’s success, whether or not the bond passes. I like to think that the majority of our community members would like to see our School District not only succeed, but excel. Passage of the bond would make that goal so much more attainable. Administration, staff, teachers, parents, and volunteers, can only accomplish so much with the limited resources currently available. No matter how good their intentions are – good intentions don’t pay the bills. With talk of even more state cut backs, given the failing condition of our schools and a system that is not thriving, I fear for the future of our EVSD if the bond does not pass. However, one way or another, I am confident that Mr. Glenewinkel and the board will continue to serve the students of East Valley by moving forward and making the most of what we have.
TammyJ on February 08 at 1:07 a.m.
The dedication of our schools’ teachers, parents, administration, school board and community members has been made very apparent by the level of participation and involvement by so many throughout this past year. (…sounds more like a Democracy to me…just saying…) It just seems to me, that, as a whole, our community would benefit enormously from passage of the bond.
Considering the positive feedback from our community, I suggest that it is the few who are not happy with anything, that have their fingers in their….ears, tirelessly screaming, “I don’t want to hear logic!” over and over, breaking occasionally only to misuse popular childhood nursery rhymes such as “Humpty Dumpty”. Or call those with conviction, who refuse to be bullied into submission, nasty names such as “dictator”. The insults accomplish absolutely nothing other than to draw attention to those who otherwise have nothing productive to offer.
Community involvement has always been (and is) encouraged and welcomed. There is much work to be done, plenty to go around.
Please support the students and community of our East Valley School District by voting in favor of the proposed bond. Our kids really need your “YES” vote.
Ladeejay on February 08 at 12:25 p.m.
There is only one question and I will repeat it AGAIN.
The question was put to you (Mr. Glenewhinkle) about what will happen if the bond doesn’t go through and your response was
“Well, then we’ll do it anyways”.
Than you don’t need the bond or the communities support. That is what you are saying.
Until you decide to answer that question, I will continue to repeat myself.
rjr8806 on February 08 at 9:09 p.m.
Ladeejay,
I can’t speak for the Superintendent but from my perspective your question has been answered multiple times. It appears that you have the notion that the bond is only to implement the new configuration. While a portion of it is intended to facilitate addtional infrastructure to help enhance the move to the new configuration, much of it is slated to bring our existing elementary schools up to current standards and codes.
I challenge you to take a walk through one of the elementary schools with a janitor and ask them to give you a look at what we have behind the walls. The vast majority of our elementary schools have very old and outdated heating and cooling systems. Most have little or no fire supression systems. Take a look at one of the roofs following a snow storm. Amazing how fast it disappears due to a lack of insulation. Look at how many windows are fogged up because they no longer have functioning seals. I could go on an on but I think you get the point. If you own house was on the verge of failure would you not take steps to preserve it? Four years ago independent bodies rated the schools are being in dire need of remodel. Should one believe that they have gotten better since then?
Our existing facilities are old and tired. You may not agree but I and many others believe that spending money to protect an investment that has been made by patrons over the years is a wise thing to do. If you read the information that has been made available you would find that that the exisiting infrastructure will be put on a new 30 year platform. These schools will serve, yours, mine and future generations of students. So yes, our students do need the support of the community.
The new addtions will ehance the assets that we already have and provide opportunities for all students within the buildings, Including those in grades prek-5. I know you do not agree with the new configuration but there are many that do.
I have one question for you. What exactly do you propose we do?
TammyJ on February 08 at 11:38 p.m.
Because Ladeejay has no intention of taking part in a mature, logical conversation, there is no response that will satisfy the very contrary blogger. I hope that everyone following these posts can see that Ladeejay continues to misquote and twist facts beyond recognition. Between all the meetings I’ve been to, blogs I’ve followed, articles I’ve read, and conversations I’ve had - I have NEVER heard ANYONE say that the communities support was not needed or wanted. Especially not Mr. G. In fact, just the opposite. Ladeejay and friends may not like the plan that has been proposed, but so many of our community members, teachers, staff, etc… involved in the process ARE in favor of the proposed changes. Not getting one’s way is not a free pass to misquote and demean anyone that doesn’t agree with you.
Why do I comment in response to this blogger that can’t stick to the facts and refrain from name calling and character attacks? Because after 16 years of failed bonds, our school district is sinking what little funding they do have into money pits. The maintenance of underutilized, outdated, and failing buildings is draining the funds that should be spent on educating our children. I think it is a huge disservice to our children to turn a blind eye and not put forth our best efforts to educate voters on the FACTS. I have been in this school district for over 9 years now. Until Mr. G. was hired by EVSD, the leadership, was unfocused at best. He is the 4th Superintendant since I’ve had children in EV schools. Our schools have suffered in many ways due to the neglect, confused agendas, and lack of consistently strong, focused leadership. Mr. Glenewinkel is the first Superintendent that I know of to really put himself and his career on the line in order to do what is best for the students of EV. He has become an active member of our community and cared enough to LISTEN. For those efforts, I am very thankful. I really believe that with his leadership abilities, and commitment to our students, EV will continue to grow and thrive beyond previous expectations. But, this is not a campaign to elect a superintendent.
It is a campaign to pass a bond that is long past due and will assist in providing a healthy and safe learning environment for our children. A bond that will help our schools be the best they can be.
My response to the posts by ladeejay and theotherside, is in hopes that our community members that have not been involved with our schools or this process, will look beyond the negative rhetoric and threats from those who are not getting their way. Those that would argue because they enjoy the drama. Some folks just seem to crave the notoriety and attention gained from their negative antics. The rest of us would like to move forward and be part of the solution rather than part of the problem.
I hope our community will search for the truth, and see that the success of our schools depend a great deal on their support. I hope our community will stand behind the EVSD bond, our children, and our schools. Our East Valley School District needs you now, and will continue to need your support and encouragement as the proposed changes to our education system are implemented.
Ladeejay on February 09 at 2:14 p.m.
Let’s get past the whole name calling issue.
The question still hasn’t been answered.
In the above article, the reporter askes the question.
“Q. If the bond fails, what do you do?” (direct quote)
Mr. Glenwinkles response is “Well, then we do it anyways”. (direct quote)
I’m not talking about other meetings at other times, I’m talking about this article.
He never answered the question and neither have the other people who have responded to this article. It’s a very simple question. I don’t understand why everyone has to justify the need. I’m not talking about the need, I’m talking about the fact that he says that they will do it if the bond passes or not.
If they have the money to do it without the Bond then why do they need it? That’s what I’m getting at. It’s not an issue of if the schools need the physical work to them. He said that they don’t need the bond. Then why try so hard and have so many problems if they don’t need it to do it? It’s that simple.
TammyJ on February 09 at 2:29 p.m.
He simply does NOT say that “we don’t need the bond”. Not in this article or any other. Good try, tho.
rjr8806 on February 09 at 6:19 p.m.
Ladeejay,
You didn’t answer my question.
Ladeejay on February 10 at 1:55 p.m.
TammyJ please read the artical and question again. I didn’t say that he said “we don’t need the bond” what he said was “Well, then we do it anyways”.
The question is put to him 1/3 the way through the article.
rjr8806 - now you know how it feels when someone doesn’t answer your question. Frustrating isn’t it?
I never said the schools didn’t need repair. They all need repair. That was never the issue. That is what you are reading into my response. It was his respones to the question that I wanted him to address.
Again, he was asked by the reporter
“Q. If the bond fails, what do you do?” (direct quote)
Mr. Glenwinkles response is “Well, then we do it anyways”. (direct quote)
That is meaning he doesn’t need it to make the changes. That’s the statement I wanted him to address.
By the way rjr8806, developmentaly a K-4 & 5-8 split would be more benificial to children than putting them all together.
TammyJ on February 11 at 1:15 a.m.
“Well, then we do it anyway. Then we move forward” (not anyways). Ladeejay, I don’t have the patience to go over the process again with someone that enjoys being contrary. The outcome of all of the meetings, research, etc… was the final proposal from the board. Taking all issues (what is best for our kids, building condition, funding from the state, fiscal/moral obligations to tax payers, everything) into consideration, the board members elected by the EV community, in good faith, have determined what direction our EVSD will be moving in.
I am so tired of reading and re-reading the article and your posts, looking for something that simply isn’t there. And on Feb. 09 @ 2:14 p.m., contrary to your last post, on the third to the last line, you said, quote, “He said that they don’t need the bond.” You aren’t even sure what you yourself said. You are the one saying we don’t “need it to make the changes”. No one else. Saying we will go ahead with the new configuration because it’s what our school needs is not saying we don’t need the bond. You can not put words into someone’s mouth.
The tax payers are being asked to vote for a bond because our schools are not a fit environment for our children to learn in. Throwing money at a building that is not only underutilized but out of date and sub-standard is simply not a responsible way to manage tax payers’ dollars. This has nothing to do with re-configuration. Re-configuration of grades is “…because we have an obligation to do the best thing we can do for our children and I believe that this is the best thing for our children right now.” This is, in fact, a quote from J. Glenewinkel that can be found in the above article.
The bond will be used to bring our educational institutions up to standard. Without the bond, we will not be able to do that.
If we didn’t need the bond or our community support, we would be doing it right now. Without asking voters to pass a bond. If we didn’t need it, we wouldn’t qualify for the matching state funds.
As far as the best configuration for our school, that all depends on the implementation of the plan. PK-8 would be my choice after much of my own research. However, if another configuration had been chosen, like the one you chose, because of my involvement with my children’s education, I have no doubt they would thrive in alternative settings. However, I believe they will do even better in the chosen configuration. I guess I’m lucky that the board listened to many and did their own research, coming to the same conclusion as I.
Judging from your infantile, obsessive efforts to insert your own spin into what Mr. Glenewinkel has said, as well as your inability to understand simple concepts, I have one question for you,
Does your mother know you are playing on her computer?
Ladeejay on February 11 at 12:50 p.m.
WOW! You are the one taking this personally. Not I. So then you are accusing me of doing what you are doing right now. You seem to think this is a personal attack on you. Your insinuation that I am a child really shows your own lack of intelligence and inability to understand another person’s point of view.
I was simply pointing out to Mr. Glenwinkle, that he was being very unclear in the interview. What he said makes it sound like they don’t need the bond. By the way, the head of the Political Science department of a local University, also pointed out the same thing when shown this artical. It is an unclear statement that leaves room for interpretation.
A configuration of K-4 is a developmental stage that would promote learning without some of the other problems that would go along with a K-8 system.
rjr8806 on February 11 at 4:06 p.m.
A K-4 configuration does not address several issues that were identified during the re-visioning process. First, research is fairly conclusive that transitions have a negative effect on students both academically and socially. One of the great features of the prek-8 model is that students will only make one transition during their time in the EVSD.
The other issue that a K-4 configuration would not address is the under utilization of district facilities. It has been layed out before so I wont address the issue again.
Frankly with the decision to move to the prek-8 configuration now behind us it seems we should be focusing on how to make sure that the implementation goes as smoothly as possible. Personally I believe that those who have expressed reservations need to be involved during the implementation process. Many of the concerns they have raised could likey be addressed if they choose to participate. Re-hashing the decision to move to the prek-8 at this stage of the game seems to make little sense. As with any decision some will not agree but not much one can do about that either.
Though others may disagree I believe that focusing on a single sentence from one interview seems a bit of a waste of time. I’ve sat through many meetings, presentations, etc… and I believe the superintendent has been very clear on his position and the need for the bond.
TammyJ on February 12 at 2:04 a.m.
Karin, what you call an “insinuation” was actually an observation. I stand by that observation. I take the education of our children very seriously and do not appreciate your games. Do not flatter yourself – your opinion of me matters not. I do have a problem, however, with your insecure efforts to draw attention to yourself at the expense of a truly worthwhile cause. Quite honestly, although PK- 8 is the configuration I believe is the most promising, no matter what the configuration, I would fight just as hard to get the bond passed. What you can’t seem to understand, is that the bond is about getting our children’s schools up to standards. It’s about having them be in a building to learn, in a classroom, where they don’t have to waste time and be distracted moving from one room to another because the one they’re supposed to be in is way too hot, way too cold, or way too noisy. It’s about replacing heating/cooling systems that are dying dinosaurs, forced to perform way past their intended life span. It’s about making sure that our schools are capable of supporting the demands of technology our children will learn and depend on when it’s time for them to leave us and become productive members of society. Finally, passing the bond will allow us to make sure the buildings our children learn in are safe, healthy, economical. If these basic needs are not of importance to you, by all means, vote “no”. It’s just unfortunate that your vote and your efforts against the bond may force the rest of us to accept less than adequate standards for our children.
I do have to ask, if you really have always voted “yes” for bonds related to education, and you voted “yes” last time, what has changed the way you will vote this time? The only two things I can see that have changed is that #1, our buildings are even older now and in worse condition, and #2, the amount of money being asked for from tax payers has decreased significantly. Seems like two very good reasons for our community to vote “YES” for the East Valley School District Bond.
RJR, you have an amazing ability to stay focused and not be provoked by those who do not share concerns for the success of our EVSD. Your posts remind me to stay on task and not loose focus. Thank you
Ladeejay on February 17 at 6:49 p.m.
TammyJ, - I’m not sure to whom you are addressing the above statement, since I don’t see anyone who has posted on here with the name of Karin. I’m assuming you are addressing myself. Sorry to spoil your ASSUMPTION, but my name is not Karin, it’s Jennifer.
It’s a pitty you can’t see other people’s point of view as a possibly valid concern. I have very young children and I don’t want them going to a school with older children. You may not see it as a problem, but I do and so do a lot of VERY influential people within this community. I guess we will have to see what finally happens in the end.
TammyJ on February 18 at 1:33 p.m.
LadeeJay, I meant to address you. Other people’s points of view were not only listened to - IT;S HOW THE PLAN EVOLVED! It just doesn’t happen to jive with your, or Karin’s, points of view. However, the concerns have always been considered valid and will continue to be proactively addressed. The Superintendent, Board, and Committee Members have often shared concerns and have always been sensitive when researching and addressing them.
There are also many influential people in our community and others that support the PK-8 configuration and the Bond. The WA Policy Center has found the PK-8 model to be not only viable, but very successful and beneficial to all involved. I have not spoken to a teacher that is not in favor of PK-8, and I’ve made a very concentrated effort to ask many. I’ve asked many, because it is a very important issue and I want to make sure I see the entire picture clearly.
You see, it was in considering “other people’s points of view” that I myself came to the conclusion that EVSD is acting in the best interest of the children in our community by moving forward with the proposed changes. I appreciate your concerns, and I hope our SD will do everything in their power to make sure the fears do not become a reality. Because of the way they have addressed other challenges in our schools, I believe they will. The new configuration will encourage parents to stay involved in their neighborhood schools throughout the mid-level years. It will make it more possible for parents of multiple children to participate, because their children will attend the same school for longer periods of time. I have 3 children in 3 different schools and welcome the prospect of being able to do more at one school, and combine, rather than divide my efforts. I hope that concerned parents like you will stay involved, helping to ensure that our children are thriving and their schools are successful.