- Standing room only at Wednesday's School board Meeting -
- Restructuring testimony was the subject of the day during public comments -
Digital photos by Dick Kauffman

1. Testimony of Stephanie Bevers:

I just wanted to say that I'm for and against restructuring for the simple fact that the preschool through second will not get to know any of the older children or older people or younger, they'll be with the same kids for the first 12 years of their life and won't have a chance to intermingle to know how to actually live in society today. But I am in favor of the teacher moving ahead from 1st to second because that gives the child more of a bond with that teacher, they know who they are and a better chance at learning. Thank you.

2. Testimony of Tamela McColley:

I'm here to speak also on the restructuring plan. I reside at -----and the mother of 2 children that are in 4th grade at Houghtaling. I was one of the polite speakers at Mr. Martin's meeting on January 21st and I presented written testimony at the January 19th forum and verbal testimony at the January 20th meeting. I have copies available of the written testimony if they've not been distributed. I'm here to ask this board to hold public meetings, to encourage ideas and opinions from the residents of this district, and to endeavor to incorporate community views into the draft implementation plan. It is my contention that this draft plan is not one. It may be a draft alternative to a part of a plan, but it is not a draft plan. There is no standing plan with alternatives, analysis or socioeconomic impact studies provided for this process. There has been no public forum provided to this community, no public hearing and there is no plan. I simply request a public process be instituted. Reasonable requests should be granted by reasonable people. It is unreasonable to bring forth an arbitrary implementation plan and to begin it in this community without proper process. Some have, but it's my opinion that most of the members of this board haven't afforded that the parents of this community have a right to due process in connection with this restructuring or by that expression that parental opinions are of any real value. I can not refer to this policy document as our draft plan because it is not. I respectfully ask that this board institute a public process for the restructuring for the Ketchikan elementary schools that will allow for public participation and input. I've heard the Superintendent talk the talk, this board however must walk the walk. You have an obligation to this community to establish a public process to provide for public review and input. You have an obligation to follow local laws and procedures dealing with public meetings and to review pertinent documents related to this restructuring process. And above all, you have an obligation to hold yourself up to the high standards set by the bylaws of this board. I'm presenting some documents for your review that I hope board members take the time to read. One is entitled 'Rethinking Educational Change With Heart and Mind' and the other is entitled 'The Restructuring of an Urban Elementary School-Lessons Learned as a Professional Development School Liaison.' The PhD. who wrote the second paper and acts as a professional development school liaison states that a 3 to 5 year time line for the institution of this process within the school system is not unreasonable. I believe that would be from the time of starting with an approved plan, and I stress an approved plan. This author also states in his conclusion that restructuring urban elementary schools is a process that works best when there are adequate resources to provide participants with the skills, knowledge, and understanding necessary to facilitate the change process in their own building. Change is a uniquely human activity that places extraordinary, personal and professional expectations on teachers. It can not follow a top down approach, nor can it be planned in a linear fashion where new accomplishments are expected as everyday occurrences. I apologize if this is not the proper forum with which to bring forward this information for consideration; however, at this time I have been allowed no other opportunity. Does any one have any questions? Thank you.

3. Testimony of Stacey Heverly:
--On Behalf of the Valley Park PTA

I am the Vice-President of Valley Park PTA and I have a resolution of the Valley Park PTA.

'The Valley Park PTA is concerned about any reconfiguration, or restructuring decisions made or being made without adequate information about the impacts and alternatives being provided to the school board, parents, the staff and the public in general.

Therefore, the Valley Park PTA resolves that the PTA supports informed decision making which
1) defines the goals, 2) identifies specific steps required to achieve these goals, 3) evaluates alternatives in a comparative format, 4) involves members of the public and educates those affected as to the impact, and 5) provides a method for evaluating the success and failure of the selected alternative. Thank you.

4. Testimony of John Hill:

Good evening. My wife and I live at ----- with our two children who attend Valley Park Elementary School. The purpose of my comments this evening is not really to get into the issue of philosophical differences we may have on restructuring at least as proposed and as I understand it. Really the purpose of my comments this evening is to talk about the process we've used to get to the decision which apparently has already been made. Largely again, philosophically or educationally, I guess I have some concerns with respect to the apparent emphasis on standardization in this restructuring and the affect that that has on our educational system as a whole. But, nonetheless, my concern again is with the process we followed or not followed to arrive at the decision, which again has apparently been made. The other purpose of my comments this evening is to forward to you the document which was approved by the Borough PTA Council at their meeting on January 12th. I have copies here for your review and what I will be covering this evening. As I reflect back over the last couple of weeks, and it really has been a difficult couple of weeks I think for me and for others, it seems that the bulk of the discussions that we have had so far really are not discussions about why it is, where we want to go and how we want to get there, but really have been discussions used to justify and backfill, if you will, the decision that has already been made rather than the conduction of a process that allows us to consciously reach a good decision. In other words, at least in my opinion, we've gone exactly opposite. I heard somebody refer to it the other day as the educational equivalent of the roadless initiative, is that we have a decision that was made in an apparent vacuum that's now been brought forth and is being pushed forward with great speed and we're using faulty science, a short-circuited public process to make sure that this thing goes through. And finally I guess what I'm really driving at is the concept of ownership that such a process would deliver. Ownership of, I think,educational reform, or ownership of anything really is a very important concept. Cause with ownership comes the notion of responsibility. With ownership comes the notion of protection. What people own, people are willing to protect. And I guess up to this point, I feel that, at least in my experience over the past couple of weeks, this is not a sense of ownership in the direction that we are going. And of course, my fear is that without that ownership we will not have anything to protect and we will not have anything to invest in, and therefore I don't expect we'll reap the dividends we would hope to. The process that I would like to present this evening is called 'Inventing Tomorrow Today' and it's a proposed process for the restructuring of schools in the Ketchikan Gateway Borough School District. Again, this proposed planning process was adopted by the Borough PTA Council. It begins in March of 2000, the School Board approved a motion stating quote, and this is from the approved minutes,the "Board approve(s) the restructuring of the elementary schools and that planning begin in September 2000, with realignment of teachers in the spring of 2001, and reassignment of student in 2001." Nothing in that motion suggests that the direction we have presented before us was that that was the intent of the Board. Again, I've looked at the minutes and that is not clear to me. It seems to me that the purpose of the motion was to allow a planning process to occur. The action was to allow adequate time to consider the complexity of such a change in the district, provide information and to solicit input from those involved in the change and to build the public and teacher support necessary for the success of the restructuring program whatever form was ultimately chosen. At this time, now late January of 2001, this process has now just begun. Again, a process which was expected to have begun back in September. There appears also to be a lack of understanding by those who the changes would affect most, including parents, teachers and children about what the restructuring program is, why it is important, whom it would affect, when it would be implemented and how it would be achieved. Some of this has been covered over the last week. But again, my sense of it is that it is a process of back filling quickly as opposed to following a logical process.Therefore, at this time, it is critical to establish a well-organized planning process to carry forward the direction of the school board to restructure the district's elementary schools in some form. Restructuring in the broadest sense of educational reform, could mean, among other things,the physical relocation of students, combining of grades, or changes in curriculum, staffing or training depending upon the analysis of specific alternatives.

The principal goal of the proposed planning process that follows is informed decision making at all levels of school government in the Ketchikan Community as it affects the proposed restructuring or reform of district schools. The levels of government include parents and children, teachers and school staff, the school board, and the superintendent's office and district administration. The proposed process will be predictable and inclusive of all parties. It will lead to decision results that are justifiable, analytically sound, and cost effective with respect to the use of the public's resources. Finally, the purpose of the planning process will be to guide the community towards a desired academic and physical future based upon community values, assets and projected needs. The plan would be implemented through capital improvement planning, the district's annual budget, changes in educational policy, or other changes.

A process for development of the restructuring plan could be directed by the superintendent's office with oversight from the school board and participation from district constituents. It is expected that the preparation of the plan would be a long-term, on-going process and that, as such, the work could be incorporated into regularly scheduled meeting of the school board. The plan would be published at each step for public review and comment. And I emphasize that in each step it would be published. We have to have something to hold and to read. The process would allow for a comprehensive and inclusive approach to analyzing the district's needs and all for the development of specific policies designed to meet those needs. (At this point, Mr. Hill's testimony was interrupted by acting board president Pickrell because there were other people who wanted to come forward to speak and lengthy staff reports on the agenda. Suggested he stay for the comment period at the end of the meeting to continue.) And I wrap it up here. Basically the parts of the proposed plan are analysis of district assets and values, existing conditions analysis, establishment of plan goals, establishment of plan objectives, identification of alternatives, evaluation of alternatives, and finally a selection and implementation of preferred alternatives as the process has been followed. Thank you very much.

Read the full text of the Borough PTA Council's Proposed Planning Process for Restructuring Schools in the Ketchikan Gateway Borough School District referred to in this testimony.

Page 2          Page 3            Page 4          Page 5           Page 6          Page 7         Page 8
      

Sitnews                      E-Mail Sitnews