Sat. Oct 1st, 2022

Susan Mercer, the President of the Santa Ana Educators’ Association (SAEA) has sent out an email to her members regarding the placement of six schools in the Santa Ana Unified School District (SAUSD) in the California “Persistently Low Performing” schools list. 



Once a school gets on this list, the school district has to take incredible measures to get back in compliance with the state.  These include changing school administrators and reassigning teachers.

Here is Mercer’s email message:

On March 11, the California State Board of Education added an additional thirty-eight schools to the 188 “Persistently Low Performing” schools identified during the prior week. Century, Valley and Willard were identified during the first round and Santa Ana High, Saddleback and Sierra were added to the list last Thursday.

Despite not receiving Race to the Top funds, the new legislation has put huge pressure on all teachers. I have experienced first hand teachers blaming other teachers. During this difficult time of uncertainty we need to stand united. The blame needs to be placed where it belongs: the California Legislature who is trying to tell us how to do our jobs without any understanding or knowledge of teaching or the needs of our students.

Last week the SAEA Executive Board had an emergency meeting to discuss this issue and the Bargaining Team met for two full days to review and analyze the impact of this legislation on Santa Ana teachers and developed plan of action. On Monday, the SAEA Board of Directors will review the plan, revise it and if approved, will present it to Rep Council on Tuesday.

CTA is reviewing the legal implication of this legislation and the impact the different models will cause once implemented. (Below is the email I sent last week describing the different models.)

In addition, on Friday, SAEA met with the District and reiterated the need to work together. On Tuesday, I will be meeting with Jane Russo, Superintendent, and Juan Lopez, Associate Superintendent to discuss the District’s plan and time-lines.

I want to reiterate what I said last week. You will hear many rumors: they are only that…. rumors. At this point no decisions have been made regarding what model will be implemented, if or how transfers will occur, length of the duty day, etc. As of now nothing has been decided.

SAEA will keep you informed and be assured we are working hard to protect and defend you and your rights during these challenging times.

Susan Mercer
President, SAEA
_____________________________________________________________________

And here is a previous note from Mercer:

Last Friday, March 5, District Administration had an emergency meeting with the staff at Willard Intermediate, Valley High School and Century High School to inform them that the State of California has identified these schools as a Persistently Low Performing.

The State of California identified and labeled one hundred schools statewide as Persistently Low Performing. The complete list will be made public during the week of March 8th.

For the 2010-11 school year, these hundred schools, including the three in Santa Ana, need to implement one of the following corrective action models:

1. Turnaround: includes replacing the principal and 50% of the teaching staff.
2. Transformation: includes replacing the principal and increasing instructional time.
3. Restart: school closes and reopens as a charter school.
4. Closure: school closes and students are enrolled in other schools.
The District, SAEA, site administrators and staff will be working together in the development of a plan to be submitted to the State by June 1, 2010. As of now we don’t know what the plan will look like.

You will hear many rumors: they are only that…. rumors. At this point no decisions have been made regarding what model will be implemented, how transfers will occur, length of the duty day, etc.

SAEA will keep you informed as things develop. Please check our web site for updates sateach.org

If you have additional questions please call me at 714-542-6758 or email me at saeapresident@hotmail.com.

Susan Mercer
President, SAEASanta Ana Educators’ Association
2107 N Broadway, Suite 305
Santa Ana, CA 92706

By Editor

Art Pedroza started Orange County's first political blog, the Orange Juice, back in 2003. He now publishes the top civic blog in Orange County - New Santa Ana, plus other blogs including New Anaheim, New Fullerton and the Irvine News Blog, as well as the OC Politics Blog.

26 thoughts on “Teachers react to placement of 6 SAUSD schools on low performing list”
  1. We cannot be start blaming each other…This is exactly what the Obama administration wants for us to do. We need to now unite up against this idiot and protest to let him know how we feel. Blaming will divide, standing together will make us stronger. Its time to for us to worry about what Obama is going to do to us.

  2. Dave, that is a great point. The teachers don’t deserve so much blame!

    There are a lot of reasons these schools are failing. For one thing, Russo is inept, as are many of her administrators.

    However, with the ruin of the economy many parents are working two jobs. They aren’t able to help their kids with homework.

    And Santa Ana leads the County in single parent families.

    It doesn’t help that we have over 200 liquor licenses and only one library, and one satellite library on the west side.

    We also need to replace the entire SAUSD School Board as soon as possible!

  3. “SAEA will keep you informed and be assured we are working hard to protect and defend you and your rights during these challenging times.”

    Interesting that this is the only statement of action in either of Mercer’s statements. Nothing about working to improve student performance.

  4. anony~ So what that she didn’t mention student performance! Susan Mercer is not a student performance monitor. I for one, am glad she is focused on teachers, that’s what we pay the union to do. Does that mean she doesn’t care about students? Of course not! Why are you trying to find fault in something that clearly isn’t necessary?

  5. I would have to agree with SAteacher. It is not the union’s responsibility to improve student performance. Teachers care about student performance and one of the reasons they are able to focus on that is due to the fact that we have an organization outside of SAUSD to protect us. It is a sad fact that the trend today is to solely blame the teachers and the more this continues, the more we will need the union. I personally know that Susan has made several suggestions to the district regarding student performance, all upon deaf ears, she has no power to change educational policy, so let’s quit blaming the union for things they have no power to change. The fact remains that the district is our employer and they continually focus on small issues while completely ignoring the big issues that affect student performance (attendance, parent education, student accountability and discipline).

  6. When you look at our high schools, you need to ask “In what ways are they low performing?” Santa Ana H.S. has graduates at Harvard, Cornell, MIT, Stanford, USC, Occidental, and all the UC’s, and majoring in everything from physics, engineering and biochemistry to English literature and political science. Most of these are college upper division or grad students, not new freshman doomed to drop out. Students CAN get an education here that prepares them to compete with America’s best. The problem is the disturbing number of students who reject the educational opportunities that definitely exist here, and will fail to graduate.

    What I most fear in this latest panic for reform of our schools is that our school and district leadership will continue their long practice of not asking classroom teachers about the day-to-day problems we actually face that limits effective instruction. They pretend that they already know our difficulties, and I’m afraid that a new round of ineffective school reforms will be imposed on us, and we’ll continue on as always.

  7. Will anyone have the nerve to question whether the number of students in Santa Ana’s fundamental schools have anything to do with the lower scores in the non-fundamental schools? There is considerable brain-drain, or motivated student drain at least. Imagine what would happen if everyone went to the neighborhood schools…

  8. Please, take the time to read the following and pass it on to everyone you know. We having been sending the message out to repeal No Child Left Behind/ ESEA since 2002 and no one wanted to listen and now it coming back to haunt us. Unless, we unite and take positive action and write to your Assemby Representatives, Congressional Representatives and Senators.They are having congressional hearing this week in Washington, DC. If we do nothing they believe we don’t care. Let’s, prove them wrong and stand united.
    Robert C. Chavez

    Once more in mainstream media, the great Diane Ravitch tells with authority what NCLB is and does. Read and enjoy the sweet satisfaction of redemption because evidence now public shows that we have been right all along. As they say, truth shall set us free!

    In the same breath that I express my appreciation for Diane Ravitch conversion, let me indulge on expressing my admiration and deep respect to those defenders of public education who said the same years ago and showing unusual courage and academic integrity remained loyal to their principles. Without access to mainstream media and facing criticism from so many, these unique individuals managed to warn about, report, and exposed what was being done to public schools in America. Among them, Susan Ohanian, Jim Trelease, Alfie Kohn, Jamie Mackenzie, and the late Gerald Bracey to whom we all a great deal of gratitude for fighting misinformation from day one. For the last five NEA has had their websites linked in section called “Setting the Record Straight” (you can access it here if you want to see why I think they deserve being recognized. http://sites.nea.org/topics/defend.html . Of course there are hundreds of others individuals who in their own way and within their means have worked as well. To all of those a great deal of gratitude.

    Despite what happens in the future, Diane Ravitch’s revelations have given me a great deal of satisfaction and happiness and hope. Her statements revalidate having chosen such a wonderful profession as being a public educator. It is a wonderful privilege to be educated and equally important is to be and agent to educate others.

    Grab a cup of coffee and enjoy.

    Who wins, who loses, who cares?

    In solidarity,

    Sergio Flores

    latimes.com
    Opinion
    The Big Idea — it’s bad education policy
    One simple solution for our schools? A captivating promise, but a false one.
    By Diane Ravitch

    March 14, 2010

    There have been two features that regularly mark the history of U.S. public schools. Over the last century, our education system has been regularly captivated by a Big Idea — a savant or an organization that promised a simple solution to the problems of our schools. The second is that there are no simple solutions, no miracle cures to those problems.

    Education is a slow, arduous process that requires the work of willing students, dedicated teachers and supportive families, as well as a coherent curriculum.

    As an education historian, I have often warned against the seductive lure of grand ideas to reform education. Our national infatuation with education fads and reforms distracts us from the steady work that must be done.

    Our era is no different. We now face a wave of education reforms based on the belief that school choice, test-driven accountability and the resulting competition will dramatically improve student achievement.

    Once again, I find myself sounding the alarm that the latest vision of education reform is deeply flawed. But this time my warning carries a personal rebuke. For much of the last two decades, I was among those who jumped aboard the choice and accountability bandwagon. Choice and accountability, I believed, would offer a chance for poor children to escape failing schools. Testing and accountability, I thought, would cast sunshine on low-performing schools and lead to improvement. It all seemed to make sense, even if there was little empirical evidence, just promise and hope.

    Today there is empirical evidence, and it shows clearly that choice, competition and accountability as education reform levers are not working. But with confidence bordering on recklessness, the Obama administration is plunging ahead, pushing an aggressive program of school reform — codified in its signature Race to the Top program — that relies on the power of incentives and competition. This approach may well make schools worse, not better.

    Those who do not follow education closely may be tempted to think that, at long last, we’re finally turning the corner. What could be wrong with promoting charter schools to compete with public schools? Why shouldn’t we demand accountability from educators and use test scores to reward our best teachers and identify those who should find another job?

    Like the grand plans of previous eras, they sound sensible but will leave education no better off. Charter schools are no panacea. The nation now has about 5,000 of them, and they vary in quality. Some are excellent, some terrible; most are in between. Most studies have found that charters, on average, are no better than public schools.

    On the federal tests, known as the National Assessment of Educational Progress, from 2003 to 2009, charters have never outperformed public schools. Nor have black and Latino students in charter schools performed better than their counterparts in public schools.

    This is surprising, because charter schools have many advantages over public schools. Most charters choose their students by lottery. Those who sign up to win seats tend to be the most motivated students and families in the poorest communities. Charters are also free to “counsel out” students who are unable or unwilling to meet expectations. A study of KIPP charters in the San Francisco area found that 60% of those students who started the fifth grade were gone before the end of eighth grade. Most of those who left were low performers.

    Studies of charters in Boston, New York City and Washington have found that charters, as compared to public schools, have smaller percentages of the students who are generally hardest to educate — those with disabilities and English-language learners. Because the public schools must educate everyone, they end up with disproportionate numbers of the students the charters don’t want.

    So we’re left with the knowledge that a dramatic expansion in the number of privately managed schools is not likely to raise student achievement. Meanwhile, public schools will become schools of last resort for the unmotivated, the hardest to teach and those who didn’t win a seat in a charter school. If our goal is to destroy public education in America, this is precisely the right path.

    Nor is there evidence that student achievement will improve if teachers are evaluated by their students’ test scores. Some economists say that when students have four or five “great” teachers in a row, the achievement gap between racial groups disappears. The difficulty with this theory is that we do not have adequate measures of teacher excellence.

    Of course, it would be wonderful if all teachers were excellent, but many factors affect student scores other than their teacher, including students’ motivation, the schools’ curriculum, family support, poverty and distractions on testing day, such as the weather or even a dog barking in the school’s parking lot.

    The Obama education reform plan is an aggressive version of the Bush administration’s No Child Left Behind, under which many schools have narrowed their curriculum to the tested subjects of reading and math. This poor substitute for a well-rounded education, which includes subjects such as the arts, history, geography, civics, science and foreign language, hits low-income children the hardest, since they are the most likely to attend the kind of “failing school” that drills kids relentlessly on the basics. Emphasis on test scores already compels teachers to focus on test preparation. Holding teachers personally and exclusively accountable for test scores — a key feature of Race to the Top — will make this situation even worse. Test scores will determine salary, tenure, bonuses and sanctions, as teachers and schools compete with each other, survival-of-the-fittest style.

    Frustrated by a chronic lack of progress, business leaders and politicians expect that a stern dose of this sort of competition and incentives will improve education, but they are wrong. No other nation is taking such harsh lessons from the corporate sector and applying them to their schools. No nation with successful schools ignores everything but basic skills and testing. Schools work best when teachers collaborate to help their students and strive together for common goals, not when they compete for higher scores and bonuses.

    Having embraced the Republican agenda of choice, competition and accountability, the Obama administration is promoting the privatization of large segments of American education and undermining the profession of teaching. This toxic combination is the latest Big Idea in education reform. Like so many of its predecessors, it is not likely to improve education.

    Diane Ravitch, a historian of education, is the author of “The Death and Life of the Great American School System: How Testing and Choice Are Undermining Education.”

    Copyright © 2010, The Los Angeles Times

  9. another teach:

    The fundamental schools that have taken away the top students from Santa Ana’s regular schools is the 8,000 pound gorilla in the room. No one wants to talk about it.

  10. Anonymous~
    What are you trying to say??? Everyone is talking about it except the DO and some board members! I work in one of the first 3 schools that got designated low achieving and everyone I know has an opinion on the two tiered educational system! It’s wrong and it is very “out there” for discussion.

  11. I completely agree that the fundamental schools bring about “brain drain” in the regular schools. Unfortunately, the waiting lists at the fundamental schools could fill another school at the intermediate level and many of the waiting list students will end up in private schools or schools outside the district. The only ones left to attend regular schools are those whose parents didn’t sign up for the lottery at a fundamental school and those on the waiting list who do not have the means (money, education, transportation) to get their kids transferred out of district or into a private school. I’m not sure who wants to deal with this but I agree that it is a big problem. Maybe there should now be some talk of a fundamental high school in the north of the city. At least with more fundamental schools the district stands a chance at keeping the brightest students. It would be a big start for Santa Ana to actually not lose their more prepared kids to other districts. It might also help to look at how fundamental schools operate and find ways to implement their procedures at the regular schools. Unfortunately, that would require the district to start supporting teachers and disciplining students (as well as parents). A teacher can only do so much when there are no school-wide consequences for not doing homework. Parent contracts, student contracts and some actual consequences might make a difference.

  12. SAteacher:

    I don’t mean that teachers aren’t talking about it. Perhaps I should clarify. What I mean is that the District office and the State of California are not looking at how the fundamental schools affect the rest of our schools. If they did, they wouldn’t be coming down on those 6 schools now.

    Is the State aware of this problem? The higher ups couldn’t care less. This has been a problem in this district for years and it has gotten worse with the opening of more intermediate and high school fundamental schools. When Thorpe School opened up, elementary schools like Edison lost many high scoring and GATE students. But NCLB and the State doesn’t look at these factors.

    I have not been to a school board meeting in a long time, so I am unaware if any school board members have brought up this problem. What school board members have brought up this issue? I would hope that they do.

  13. My children went to Santa Ana Fundamental Schools through Junior high. At the time there were no fundamental high schools and we were fortunate enough to get them into excellent out of district schools where they continued to excel. My children were joined by friends and classmates who they themselves made the decision to seek what they believed was a better education. I firmly believe that the study habits they learned at John Muir and later Ray Villa fundamental prepared them for the challenges of college.
    I do not blame the teachers because they do not choose who they teach. I do fault the unions that protect the few bad teachers that give you all a bad name. I don’t blame the parents who do not have the time or education to help their children. But I do blame the parents who won’t miss a Novela, but can’t seem to make a parent night.
    And after all those years of late night homework, after school activities, PTA and fundraisers. I was not going to roll the dice and take a chance on my neighborhood high school (Century) just to help bring up that schools average. I wouldn’t ask that of any parent or child.
    If you want to keep the best and the brightest. Challenge them and bring the parents along for the ride.

  14. Thanks to thinking out loud. This just illustrates the fact that parents who want a decent education for their kids search elsewhere if SAUSD can’t provide what they are looking for. I guess the experience might have been different for you if there were a fundamental school available at the time your kids needed it. I take issue with the idea that the unions support bad teachers, the union is there to support teachers in general and I know of many cases in which the union did not support a teacher who was wrong, those are not the stories anyone hears about though. It is an issue that is used to divide people. The best point made is that the district and the school’s job is to challenge students and not only bring parents along for the ride, but involve them in every step of their kid’s education.

  15. I proudly support the fundamental schools in Santa Ana. As a parent of two children in fundamental schools, it is frustrating to constantly see the blame put on fundamental schools as contributing to the “brain drain” of Santa Ana. The fact is that the fundamentals also have high rates of english learners and students on free/reduced lunch as the other schools in Santa Ana because the lottery system allows a fair chance to all to get into the fundamentals. And yet these students rise to the challenge and are able to perform.

    The district and community needs to give credit to the fundamentals for actually doing what all of the schools in this district should be doing. Parents choose the fundamental schools particularly because there is ACCOUNTABILITY in these schools on the part of students, staff, and most importantly, PARENTS, that contribute to student success as well as consistent systems and high expectations in place to meet our children’s needs. Fundamentals work because they are schools of choice and there is “teeth” so to speak on ways to enforce the rules at fundamentals. There are actually many students and parents that don’t like the fundamentals because they are “too strict”, have “too many rules”, etc.

    I do take offense to the previous posters comment that “the fundamentals are the 8,000 pound gorilla in the room.” On the contrary, the gorilla in the room is the fact that parents and students in our district need to take more pride and value in their education and that ALL students in this district need to be provided with curriculum and supports that set high expectations for ALL. Because we have so many students to “bring up” to proficiency in this district, what often ends up happening (even at the fundamentals) is that students that are proficient or advanced on state standards are being “left behind” to a certain extent. Often times they are excluded from receiving special tutoring programs and other extras because they are already “performing” where they need to be. Even parent education that is offered through this district caters to educating parents on “basics” such as how to check homework, etc, which I agree is a necessity and should be offered however, there is also a need to support us parents who are beyond that. It is frustrations such as this that drive the higher performing students and their families to look to other districts or private schools for a “better” education.

    In reality, there are many variables that contribute to why Santa Ana is a low performing district. And it is ridiculous to place the blame solely on one thing and even more ridiculous to assume that there are some of us parents that want a better choice for our kids. I’ve been a resident of Santa Ana for many years and I do choose to support my city because I also believe that there are good things going on in it and there are many great students at all schools in the district. But until our district decides that “high expectations for all students” needs to be the motto versus “failure is not an option” (which in my home is a given), the fundamental system will continue to be my choice.

  16. Poster “Fundamental Schools are NOT the Problem” is completely right. My child is a senior at a Fundamental High School and I know first hand that these successful students are from the same types of families all over the city. While parent involvement is very important, it is not everything. I know students at this school whose parents are not very involved, yet the students are motivated and succeed because of the atmosphere at the school–a good program, fine administrators, teachers who still love to teach because they have not been beaten down by lack of support or lack of discipline on campus. Kids at Fundamental schools know the rules, know the consequences–the key is that the schools actually enforce these rules. They are pushed, coached, helped to apply to college–and the expectation is that every one of them will go on to higher education.

    Blaming Fundamental High Schools for a brain drain is a red herring. Before these were built, families who could afford it were pulling their kids out of the distict to other districts or private schools. That’s one of the reasons I fought against the year delay in opening the second Fundamental HS–we need more of these schools. These programs work not because the students are better or richer or more motivated, but because the progam is clear, disciplined, and fully supported by administration and teachers,including the enforcement of consequences.

    A conservative friend recently tried to sell me a line that Latino families “do not place the same importance on education” as other cultures. This is completely false (and racist) and I told him so. Any parent knows that good education=good/better job=success, whatever culture they come from. Parents in SA are far from stupid. The problem I see is one of economics–parents who are working 2 jobs, struggling with the language, have little education themselves. How many of them really know the Fundamental schools are accessible by all students? How many of them understand how to get into the lottery? And even if their children get in, there are the struggles with getting them to and from a school that may be well outside their neighborhood. Struggles with knowing what homework needs to be done and following up with their kids. Trying to attend parent conferences during work hours.

    I believe Century was supposed to be “transitioning” to a Fundamental program by grade level a few years ago (an effort I thought was futile). What happened to that? Schools need to fully transform to a new program. Yes, it will be chaos for the first 6 months, kids will be in detention, parents and teachers will be frustrated. But in the long run, SAUSD will benefit from programs that work.

    The School Board and the Superintendant have dragged their feet for too long. With the exception of John Palacios, the Board is perfectly happy to do nothing and dodge the criticism. We need to clean house at the top, get some leadership that will support the teachers so they can do what they do best–teach, not act as baby sitters and wardens.

  17. My kids attend both, fundamental schools and a neighborhood elementary school. I can see both sides of the fence; when the fundamental high schools opened up, not only did they drain the best students, they also drained the best teachers and administrators from other area high schools.

    But I also see quality teachers and administrators at the neighborhood elementary school making their best attempts to get their students to school on time, even going so far as to go to the students house to pick them up! No amount of conferences, meetings or warnings can change parents.

    When the fundamental schools have a “problem” student, they simply kick the kid out of their school, and that kid has to go to the neighborhood school. What consequences do the neighborhood schools have to work with? Can they kick a kid out for excessive tardiness, not choosing to do their homework or for behavioral issues?

    Obviously there are many different factors at play here, with no easy solutions. But putting blame on the fundamental schools is not the answer. We as parents only want what is best for our kids. This is a collaboration effort. Parents must be held just as accountable as teachers, administrators and the students themselves. As it stands, I don’t think teachers are speaking loudly enough. As a parent, I look for direction from teachers. They are only grumbling amongst each other. There is no real outrage yet from teachers or parents, as things keep piling up.

  18. I Believe In Santa Ana posts …

    “When the fundamental schools have a “problem” student, they simply kick the kid out of their school, and that kid has to go to the neighborhood school. What consequences do the neighborhood schools have to work with? Can they kick a kid out for excessive tardiness, not choosing to do their homework or for behavioral issues?”

    Why does this school district have a 2-tiered system? Why does one have an advantage over the other? Public education is based on the concept that a quality education should be available to all students.

    Yes, this is and continues to be the elephant in the room.

  19. SAHS Teacher –

    There are more than 50,000 SAUSD students. How many attend Harvard, MIT, Stanford? And how many students do not graduate from an SAUSD high school? I bet the drop out rate far exceeds those who attend Ivy League schools.

    Get real.

  20. Anonymous, read my post carefully. You’re not reading carefully. Those students at SAHS that sincerely try to succeed here get a first class education and go on to excel at top universities. Unfortunately, well over half of our students do not try and reject the opportunities offered them here. There are multiple reasons behind this lack of motivation going back years before they arrive here in the 9th grade. Also unfortunately, we are saddled with a school district administration that has little understanding of the nature of these problems, nor does it acknowlege the abilities of its teachers to help it find effective solutions.

  21. SAHS teacher posts … “education here that prepares them to compete with America’s best. The problem is the disturbing number of students who reject the educational opportunities that definitely exist here, and will fail to graduate.”

    Yes, it is entirely the students fault.

    There’s a major disconnect and you fail to get it!

    Why is it that the SAUSD teacher generally pines that they are nt responsibility for the chronic lack of underperforming at the schools.

    Your attitude is condescending.

  22. I am a parent-Bring it on.

    Don’t put the blame on Fundamental. It’s too bad there are not more schools that are Fundamental! My kids went to Fundamental schools! My kids will graduate from Fundamental schools! I am a proud parent who stands behind other parents who are for the Fundamental system. We are there to continue to push for these schools. Give me a break.. “The state is not looking into the way Fundamental Schools are effects the rest of the schools” I will say it again: FUNDAMENTAL SCHOOLS ARE NOT THE PROBLEM. I am a parent. I am proud to have my kids at a fundamental school. It’s funny how noe the blame is being put on these schools now. Hmmm. Fix the problem..and the problem is not the fundamental schools.

    1. parentwhoispissed,

      My kids all went to fundamental schools, except for my now thirteen year old.

      It worked out well for my 17 and 19 year old kids. The latter is now in college. The former is an honors student.

      But fundamental schools aren’t for everyone. We need to ensure other parents have good options available too.

  23. Parent who is Pissed –

    Bring it on. What kind of attitude is that?

    The problem I have with fundamental schools is based on how they came about. These school were implemented to cut down on the white flight of 25 years ago. It was a way of appeasing the white parents when the color of the school population started to change. the distinction between the fundamental and non-fundamental schools has a tinge of academic superiority. This was fueled by the former lottery system practiced for several years. And as you know, the CA courts intervened ruling it against the law.

    This is my beef with the two-tiered school structure.

  24. School board member Hernandez addressed the class system of the fundamental schools at last night’s school board meeting.

    Santiago parents are asking Santiago to go fundamental and they want their children to be automatically accepted into Mendez since they reside within the alleged school boundaries.

    This is the problem w/a 2-tier school system in place. Sooner or later parents perceive that attending a non-fundamental school is “inferior.”

  25. Students are lazy and it is getting worse. They refuse to read. They refuse to write. There is no motivating them and there are no consequences that will motivate them. This is true for about one third of the classes. They do not pay attention in class. They do not take notes. They do not study unless they are hand held and spoon fed.

Leave a Reply to Anonymous Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.