Re: Rochester City School District's (RCSD) announced, Initiative to address structural inequity within special education, and cultural competence
Primary tabs
It is nothing short of amazing that RCSD parents of African American and Hispanic students, and their allies, can read newspaper reports (such as the one below) without "exploding" and making organized, concerted demands for real, measurable change now!
The article highlights numerous, blatant contradictions, practices, and policies that are, or at least should be totally unacceptable. The very first, and most blatant contradiction is that, if there is a "new initiative that aims to cut the number of [so-called] minority students placed in special education programs who do not belong in them, [and] to reduce the number of suspensions" —- among the first to know about the so-called "new initiative" should have been RCSD parents, especially those who are directly affected.
Parents should not have to learn about such "initiatives" via the newspaper or other media.
It is, or it should be totally unacceptable for RCSD leaders to continue engaging in practices such as hiring expensive, outside consultants to study deep-seated, ongoing, historic issues and problems within the District —- without even so much as informing those who are most directly affected, and those footing the bill, i.e. RCSD families and other Rochester taxpayers.
The idea that a group of outsiders are going "to study the problem and develop a plan to correct it" —- without consulting with RCSD parents, and presumably with RCSD educators, or at least the majority of them, and/or other community members —- is ludicrous on its face, and is par for the course within the RCSD. It is in fact, a classic example and large part of why critically important issues are frequently not adequately addressed and/or resolved, i.e., the sworn-declaration on the part of nearly everyone in the District, particularly at the top levels of leadership, that they value collaboration, but routinely operating in manners that makes it crystal-clear that the declarations are mere rhetorical, publicity stunts.
On top of this unprincipled and unacceptable practice, the "researchers" who have been conducting the studies have the unmitigated gall and audacity to report that "they found that in many cases, school staff did not efficiently communicate with parents about the needs of their children." Is this not a classic case of the "kettle calling the pot black?" Unless these so-called "researchers" have a lot more to report vis-Ã -vis that which is highlighted in the above referenced article (below) —- then we know right now that someone ought to be demanding a refund.
Based on conclusions from so-called "research", which has apparently produced information that we have known for decades, the District now "wants to train staff in ways to manage student behavior without punishing them and how to be more empathetic to their students' cultural backgrounds and home situations." This idea should be stopped in its tracks. Not one more single penny should be spent on this very old, piece-meal, "snake-oil" approach toward addressing/resolving deep-seated issues of structural inequality and cultural competence, or the lack thereof.
As parents and candidates for Rochester Board of Education, we call on the leaders of the RCSD to face the parents, families, and taxpayers of this community, and explain answers to questions such as:
- Who, specifically, will train staff, which staff will be trained? What is the time-line for training? How much will it cost and what is the source of funding?
- What are the evaluation methodologies and tools that will be used to measure effectiveness and success? How is "success" defined? Are RCSD leaders willing to show parents the training and evaluation materials that will be implemented this Fall?
- What, specifically, do phrases such as "finding more effective ways to use data to drive instruction for students and identification for special education programs" really mean? Which data exactly will be used? Will this entail paying more consultants and/or more teachers for performing non-teaching functions? How much will it cost and what is the source of the funding?
Even though she does not have a record that we are aware of, which would support her claim of concern —- we support the idea, which is articulated via a quote in the article (below) that was attributed to Gladys Pedraza-Burgos, i.e., "there's this [pervasive] perception that we know what's best for others without including them in the conversation." It's good for Ms. Burgos and other high-level District officials to talk-the-talk, but now it's time to walk-the-walk.
Contact: Howard J. Eagle: heagle@rochester.rr.com or (585) 752-1426
