The mayor's original op-ed is attached to this letter.
Mayor Fung, you have finally revealed your true feelings and opinion of the administration, principals and teachers of Cranston Public Schools. You place into doubt the success of all our students, especially those students graduating in two weeks. Many of our graduates will be attending the finest colleges/universities in the country, some will be attending career and technical schools, enlisting in the military, entering the work force or transitioning to our 18-21 program. They are moving on to these other opportunities as a result of their Cranston Public Schools education.
Do you forget your accolades and public recognition at public events, such as honors nights or graduations, when you praise principals, teachers and students? Or, are those remarks insincere? Recently at Hugh B. Bain Middle School, your fellow Classical High School (a public high school) alumnus, Principal Tom Barbieri, received the RI Middle School Principal of the Year award. Mayor, when the presenter was praising Tom for improving test scores and building a school based on trust and respect, did you notice the five (5) prominent banners in front of you that proclaim Bain as a High Performing school for five straight years? You praised Tom and Bain Middle School at that ceremony. Empty rhetoric again?
So let’s be honest.
In 2009, the Rhode Island Department of Education (RIDE) ended a ten year practice of ranking schools. At that time, sixteen (16) of the seventeen (17) Cranston elementary schools were High Performing schools, most of which were classified as High Performing and Improving. At least four of them were classified as Regents Commended schools. (Unfortunately, one of the Regents Commended schools had to close due to our present funding problems.) Based on our test scores and the latest indicators used by the RIDE, sixteen (16) of our seventeen (17) elementary schools continued to reach Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). This means our test scores are steadily improving according to indicators determined by RIDE. It appears to me since the performance rankings were eliminated just one test cycle ago in 2009, we continued to meet the latest indicators, which correlate with the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) requirements. Also, I need to correct your editorial regarding our middle schools. Last year Western Hills Middle School met AYP and was “Commended”.
In your op-ed you compare us to South Kingstown and Portsmouth, which I, too, recognize as two excellent school districts. However, let’s be realistic. If you asked me to examine comparable districts, according to size, demographics, and budgets, I would start by comparing the Warwick Public Schools’ budget which last year spent over $37 million more on their children than Cranston Public Schools. Did you know that last year Warwick had approximately 150 less students than we have in Cranston? Mayor, it all depends what numbers and what districts that you want to compare. Our population, per capita income and other demographic information indicates we are not comparable to South Kingstown and Portsmouth. According to InfoWorks LIVE! data provided by RIDE, in Cranston, the average percentage of students who receive free/reduced lunch subsidies is 33%. In Portsmouth, that number is 11%. Clearly, you are comparing two very different demographics.
Last month a representative from your office called me to find out how many of our schools are at the poverty level. They explained to me they needed this information from us to help you secure a grant in order to make improvements to open the Budlong pool this summer. Are you that out of touch that you do not know how many schools in Cranston had students who live at-or below- the poverty level? Cranston’s schools poverty level is computed based on the number of students eligible for free or reduced lunch. When 36% or more of the school’s population is receiving free or reduced lunch, the school is considered at the poverty level. Did you know that in the last three years we have grown from seven schools at the poverty level to eleven? Current data states that in just our elementary schools, two schools are higher than 36% poverty, two schools are higher than 40% poverty, three schools are higher than 50% poverty, one school is higher than 70% poverty level, and another school is at almost at 80% poverty level. Garden City, one of the first inclusive suburban communities developed in the United States post World War II, a showcase community, could be at the poverty level next year! Still want to compare us to Portsmouth? Two of our three middle schools, Bain and Park View, are at the poverty level. However, both met AYP. Many of those students tested, which reflects last year’s learning, at Park View were victims of the “historic floods” from last March and were displaced from their homes for several weeks or months. But still, the students and teachers persevered and Park View met its AYP goals.
Despite our incredible struggles with funding, Cranston is still a place where people want to move; specifically to educate their children. Mayor, did you know that this year our student population grew by 393 students at the elementary level alone? While other districts, as well as the state in general, are experiencing declining enrollment, Cranston is growing. Mayor, it all depends what numbers and what districts that you want to compare. Remember, we educate all students, from all places, with any need, who arrive at our doorstep at any time. We do not hold lotteries to select who gets an education, unlike charter schools and mayoral academies.
I will never state that money, specifically family income, is the sole indicator of student achievement; it’s not. However, the reality is, despite the dramatically changing demographics of Cranston and the lack of school funding, 16 of our 17 elementary schools and all three middle school met AYP last year. Schools like Arlington and Gladstone attract often needy families from our neighboring urban districts. Students arrive at school living in poverty, not achieving at grade level and many of them not speaking English. Despite these challenges, our test scores reveal that after three to four years in our school system those students achieve AYP. There is a reason for that; it’s the dedication of our teachers and principals.
It is apparent that you do not find the district credible as you were looking for honesty in your op-ed. For the last year I have been telling the Cranston School Committee, and you that funding for our schools is below the Basic Educational Plan (BEP), the minimum required by RIDE to educate children.
In your distrust of the school department you brought in a hired gun, former Westerly Superintendent, Sal Augeri. You commissioned him to perform an audit to investigate whether we in fact the made cuts outlined in last years’ Performance Audit and to verify if the school department’s claim that you have funded our schools below the BEP. You flew him in from Florida, paid his expenses and about a month later, got your “analysis.” His report, released to the public, vindicated the Cranston Public Schools administration. The audit report revealed that we were right! We are funded far below what is required of the BEP.
I hope in your consultation with RIDE, seeking information to discredit our test scores, you were honest with them, and with the Commissioner of Education, and revealed the aforementioned audit report findings. Did you tell them that you are not providing the funding for the basic educational needs of our children? In fact, Mr. Augeri and Jeffrey Wadovick, CPA, who you also hired to do the financial analysis, state: “The cost to fully comply with the BEP at this point in time is estimated at $3,928,761.” Did you know that the BEP is at the very heart of Commissioner Gist’s administration? I’ll state it again: according to your own “commissioned” report, we are $3,928,761 below the minimum required to educate our children!
So let’s be honest. Your heart and soul is not in working to improve Cranston Public Schools. I find it disturbing that you think you must publically tear apart your city’s own schools in order to rouse interest in a proposed charter school. Perhaps your allegiance is to some school in New Haven, Connecticut. You know the one, the school that you recently invited the RI Board of Regents members to visit.
A couple of months ago you met with the Cranston Educational Advisory Board (CEAB), a group representing all of the school-based parent groups/associations in the city. These engaged parents all have children in our schools and they invited you to their monthly meeting to discuss your mayoral academy. By all indications they were not impressed by your and Mayor McKee’s presentation. In fact, they wanted to know how you are going to fund this charter school in our city, when you are not adequately funding the schools already here! They seemed unsatisfied with your response to that, and other, critical questions.
In all my discussions with you since I have become Superintendent, not once have we ever sat and discussed the educational programs in Cranston. Be honest, you have never discussed one educational goal of our district or our Strategic Plan. You have never inquired or sought to collaborate on what it would take to reach the district’s goals. If you did, you might find that my principals, administrators and teachers are working tirelessly on all the areas that we need to improve, as well as in the areas in which we rank far above other districts in the state. We would tell you of the outstanding work we are doing with the DANA Center in the areas of science and math, the exemplary program we have developed in Response to Intervention (RTI) and our committed efforts to make our schools, safe, respectful environments for all students and staff. We have Physics First in all three high schools, and after piloting the successful Positive Behavioral Support & Intervention (PBIS) program at five schools last year, it will be implemented in all our schools K-8 in September. Last month, hundreds of our principals and teachers attended professional development on Friday night and all day Saturday to prepare for PBIS in the fall.
Let’s be totally honest. Two years ago when you were on the talk radio circuit and were asked what the average per pupil expenditure for Cranston Public Schools was, you did not know the answer; just as you did not know how many of our schools currently service truly impoverished families.
Though you do not recognize the excellent effort of the district’s principals, administrators, teachers and staff, I’ll tell you someone who does, the US Secretary of the Department of Education (DOE), Arne Duncan. In February, the US DOE selected Cranston as one of 150 school districts in the nation to celebrate our extraordinary collaboration and work in education among administration, school committee and Cranston Teachers’ Alliance. Specifically, we were cited for the work done over the last two years in developing a ground-breaking teacher evaluation instrument which we are now piloting. The US DOE flew us to Denver to exchange ideas with the best school districts across the country, all involved in innovative work in public education.
Mayor, I will never profess that as a school district we couldn’t do better. Every day, I along with every teacher and administrator, go to work with the intent of improving our schools. Since I began my tenure as Superintendent two years ago I have done everything in my power to control spending and, as revealed in the Augeri and Wadovick audit, we exceeded our previous Performance Audit projection in savings by $5,084,144.00. All the time I have spent cutting and dismantling excellent educational programs to help balance your budget has taken up the lion’s share of my time, which I should be devoting to my educational responsibilities delineated in the BEP. It’s a shame that we have been forced to dismantle our excellent programs in music, arts, and sports to gain financial savings. Certainly, I hope those savings will not be used to bank roll the Mayoral Academy.
But what is most distressing to me, to state it in more contemporary vernacular, is your public “dissing,” of the hard work and dedication of my administrators and teachers, again, who you lavishly commend in their presence and in the presence of the voters. You remind me of a computer program, depending on the event, the venue or the media outlet; you click on the drop down menu and choose your response.
Finally, in your editorial you make reference to the letter you wrote to me last November. I will now refer to mine, Mayor Fung: “If we intend to make things better in our schools then we all need to sit down and have a conversation.” I’m still waiting. It seems to me that Arne Duncan feels that the School Committee, administration and the Cranston Teachers’ Alliance are doing just that. Thankfully, recent meetings with the members of the City Council have been the most positive conversations in the last ten years. Maybe they, too, are recognizing our work.
I have known you since your days on the Council. We have been together on professional and social basis at many events. I continue to be disappointed that although you meet with your other department heads regularly, you do not meet with the school department.
This op-ed is out of character for me. At every school committee and council meeting I have taken the high road, never once making petty remarks or insults. Above all, I have been respectful. However, I cannot stand idly by as you assail the hard work of our administrators, teachers and students. Once again, I am willing to have that conversation and tell you more of the great things being done at all our schools versus you attacking the district in the media which I found for the most part out of character for you, as well.
Sox
9:35 am on Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Great op-ed Mr. Nero!
Cranston Resident
10:23 am on Wednesday, May 25, 2011
I do not see Peter Nero contesting the statistics that Mayor Fung cited in his letter relative to the Cranston students' low proficiency in major subjects. It does however seem that Mr. Nero is presenting the argument that poverty in the Cranston community is the cause of the students' low proficiencies. It is a poor defense.
The fact is that both of you need to put down the gloves and provide the leadership we all expect from you.
The City is in big trouble financially. The students are in big trouble intellectually.
It is both of your jobs to straightened out the mess we are in. That is what we pay you for.
Stop arguing and get the job done or step aside.
Rob T
11:31 am on Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Cranston Resident, read the letter again. He does address the statistics. And he is not presenting the argument that poverty is the cause, as a matter of fact he states that family income is not the sole indicator of student achievement. He uses those numbers to say that you can't compare Cranston to South Kingston or Portsmouth.
Cranston Resident
12:00 pm on Wednesday, May 25, 2011
I read it again as you requested Rob. I still do not see where Nero contesting the statistics or offering any solutions to the low performance.
You missed my point completely.
My point is that these two bozos should stop throwing numbers at each other, lock themselves in a room together and do not come out until they have a mutually agreed upon plan.
That is what we pay them for.
Rob T
12:11 pm on Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Maybe we are interpreting the information differently... I completely agree with your point and I should have said that in my last comment because that was originally my point in responding, but got sidetracked. It sounds like Nero has been requesting a meeting but Fung has not complied, at least that's the way I read it.
I guess my question is, if the mayor has this plan for a mayoral academy then he must have some of the answers to these concerns, and if he does why not share them with Nero to improve the system we already have? What will be done differently in his academy to make these improvements? Why hold on to it like a secret? Share it with your public schools.
Cranston Resident
1:26 pm on Wednesday, May 25, 2011
That would certainly be a good way to open a dialog.
D2B86
12:48 pm on Wednesday, May 25, 2011
If Mayor Fung requested a meeting with Mr. Nero, I'm sure that it would happen that same day. Needless to say.......Mr. Nero has been the one doing all of the requesting, to no avail. Thank you Mr. Nero for a finely written response to the "low blow" sent out by yet another two-faced politician only interested in his/her own personal gain.
Cranston Resident
1:32 pm on Wednesday, May 25, 2011
More finger pointing? It is your attitude (which I believe is prevalent throughout Cranston's electorate) that is part of the cause of this lack of cooperation. Your kind of "side-taking" feeds into the politicians' obstinance.
Both sides are culpable. Both sides need grow up, put their egos in check, and start a meaningful dialog.
JW
2:11 pm on Wednesday, May 25, 2011
I have a few questions for the mayor after hearing him on Dan Yorke today:
1. The mayor mentioned two hearings on the topic of the mayoral academy (one on Thursday, May 26 6pm at City Hall and another on Tuesday, May 31 at City Hall). Why are these not posted no the Cranston web site, especially since the first one mentioned will be tomorrow evening? Makes me think he does not want an audience.
2. Where would the proposed mayoral academy be located? It sounded like it would be a new building. But it would seem to make more sense to put it in an existing building, such as the Norwood School. Wouldn't that be much cheaper than building new?
3. How would the mayoral academy be funded, especially if it requires a new building?
Cranston Resident
8:47 pm on Wednesday, May 25, 2011
And do you have any questions for Peter Nero?
Rob T
2:29 pm on Wednesday, May 25, 2011
My question is, what will be done differently as far as teaching and learning is concerned? If the mayor has a plan for his academy to improve test scores and performance, why not implement that into the already exsisting public schools?
Joe Richer
2:57 pm on Wednesday, May 25, 2011
I think your question is right on Rob - if the point is that teaching at those schools is done differently...then let's get on it.
Part of me believes this is more about how education is funded and paid for. A successful mayoral academy directly challenges notions about student effectiveness per $$$ spent. Still, this is more of a reason for them to get together - Mr. Nero should be just as interested as Mayor Fung in providing the best education for the least $$$ possible consistent with providing that education.
You are right...if they cannot do this together they should BOTH find something else to do.
Barbara
4:42 pm on Wednesday, May 25, 2011
You're right. Why not implement Mr. Fung's ideas into our already existing schools? I believe the answer is politics and the games grown-ups play.
Barbara
4:35 pm on Wednesday, May 25, 2011
I am truly baffled by this. We have a mayor and a superintendent and they don't discuss the education of our cities' children? Why not? As a taxpayer who contributes to both their salaries, I demand Mayor Fung meet with Superintendent Nero and work together to provide a better education for our cities' children.
Mayor Fung, these are the schools that you have been elected to help improve. How dare you take resources away from these schools and open up your own. Stop advancing your own agenda and do your job. If you so smugly have all the answers to a better education system, why aren't you meeting with Mr. Nero and sharing those ideas? Why do you feel it is ok to put down our schools in trying to further your own? You have a job to do Mayor Fung. Isn't it about time you do it? Isn't it about time you concentrate on the schools we have? Or are you just going to leave those children behind while you open up your new and shiny school? Stop under-funding our schools and work with Mr. Nero to improve them.
Cranston Resident
8:47 pm on Wednesday, May 25, 2011
And what about Nero? What would you have him do?
In Search of Serenity
11:09 pm on Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Cranston Resident-- Are you on the Mayor's payroll??
Cranston Resident
8:05 am on Thursday, May 26, 2011
Hey dopey Proud, Look at my postings, I said several times already they are both cuplable. If you are going to participated, read the postings before you make stupid remarks.
upset in cranston
11:54 pm on Wednesday, May 25, 2011
i think it is sad that our children have to suffer because of the poltics in this city. enough is enough keep politics out of cranston public schools and let the children of this city learn.
Cranston Resident
8:06 am on Thursday, May 26, 2011
Yes!
Informed Parent
12:03 am on Thursday, May 26, 2011
Cranston West High Schools demographics are *identical* to Portsmouth and South Kingstown High School. This is obviously what Mayor Fung was saying in his op-ed and Supt Nero chose to ignore it to try to score a political point.
Informed Parent
12:50 am on Thursday, May 26, 2011
If you take a step back from the politics, you'll realize that all Mayor Fung's op-ed said was that Cranston kids are good enough to compete academically with kids from Massachusetts, across the nation and around the world. That's a sign of respect for our kids and their families. The fact that kids in Cranston and around Rhode Island are NOT competitive with kids in Massachusetts is indisputable and suggests a need to start being bold and innovative. Somebody has to do something! Kudos to Mayor Fung.
In Search of Serenity
12:56 am on Thursday, May 26, 2011
Uninformed Parent: Our poverty level is increasing every year due to the number of foreclosures that Cranston has had. This has been evident in all reported fiscal measures of adjusted rates including free/reduced lunch. The bottom line is that we have schools that have been stripped to the bare bones due to inadequate funding. There aren't enough employees anymore to get the job done correctly! Cranston has cut more than 300 employees in the schools and many of those remaining have picked up the work of several people. Something has to give and all of you who want to teacher bash and point fingers just don't get the fact that you are running this school system into the ground! Tell the mayor to FIX the leaking roofs, the inadequate air quality, lack of ventilation, lack of custodian , fewer assistants to help students with special needs, and much more! He was elected with my tax dollars to better the city of Cranston's schools- not to open his own charter school to benefit students from around the state and paint his name on the door. This is infuriating and you people who think it is anything more than an ego trip have no clue! Take a look inside your local school and see what the STUDENTS are putting up with daily! He must think they are living in paradise to be spending their money and his focus on others!!! It is insulting and I do not want my tax dollars funding a charter school until he takes care of the 11,000 plus currently enrolled students in Cranston!!!
Cranston Resident
8:15 am on Thursday, May 26, 2011
So Proud, are you saying poor children have less of an aptitude to learn than rich kids?
Stop blaming the income level of parents for the poor performance of students.
The test scores show that Cranston students' have lower competence than they should. The whole system is broke and people like you feed into making this whole thing about politics.
When you do that you are as much the cause as are Nero and Fung.
Rob T
8:24 am on Thursday, May 26, 2011
Poor children do not have less of an aptitude to learn, however, kids who come from poorer families often come to school without having breakfast which can be a disadvantage, their parents are often working longer hours which means parental involvement is probably not what it should be, which can be a disadvantage. It's more of an uphill battle for kids who come from poorer families. That's just common sense. Just like kids who come from affluent families don't have more of an aptitude to learn, but their chances are much better to succeed. Maybe because of parental involvement or maybe because their parents can afford a private tutor.
The system is broke and some of it is about politics... either way everyone should be working together to try and figure it out, instead of pointing fingers at the other side.
James Harrison
6:44 am on Thursday, May 26, 2011
"Cranston Resident" is so misinformed of the quality work that the fine educators and administrators in the school department. I agree with "Proud of Them"..It sure sonds like "cranstom Resident is on Mr. Fung's payroll of one of his "groupies".....Before posting such rediculous posts, certan people need to reseacrch their facts, then make jusdgements.... Plain and simple, Mayor Fung constantly underfund the School Department, but yet wants to spend that maney on an acaemy of his own when those funds SHOULD be allocated to the much underfunded education of the children in the Cranston Public Schools.
Cranston Resident
8:24 am on Thursday, May 26, 2011
I didn't state any facts other than both Fung and Nero are bozos. And I do not support Fungs charter school idea. I don't think a person on Fung's payroll would call him a bozo.
What I did say (and you apparently did't read the posts befor making stupid remarks) is that The whole system is broke and people like you feed into making this whole thing about politics.
When you do that you are as much the cause as are Nero and Fung.
That is why we have underfunded schools, incompetent teachers, poor curriculum structure, political back-stabbing, and administrations unwilling to cooperate with each other. It is all nonsense. And people like you are feeding the fire.
All that I am saying is that all the finger pointing needs to stop, on both sides, for the sake of our children's futures. I expect more from both Nero and Fung for the taxes I pay.
Janice Ruggieri
6:55 am on Thursday, May 26, 2011
In reading the application that was sent to RIDE regarding the Mayoral Academy I found an error in their calculations. The statistics that they provided using our middle schools included grades 6-8. Our middle schools have not held a grade 6 classroom in 3 years. What year are these statistics from? What other statistics quoted in the application are incorrect? This needs to be looked at closely.
Rob T
7:27 am on Thursday, May 26, 2011
Informed Parent,
If Mayor Fung has respect for our kids and our families, and he has ideas on how to improve the education in the city, why start a new school and spend more money? Why not share those ideas, and that philosophy, with the educational leaders in Cranston? If we don't like the way the mayor is doing his job are we allowed to start up our own government and have 2 within the city, with 2 sets of laws and 2 different ways of doing things? Maybe we could have the citizens pay their taxes to the city and the "new city" because we think we can do it better than Mayor Fung.
We're all in this together. Both sides need to get together and start putting their ideas on the table.
Don Botts
10:39 am on Thursday, May 26, 2011
Let's say it is determined that an extra hour per school day is required to address the issue of increased families falling under the poverty line. Or requiring 190 days of school instead of 180? What will the union demand in return? More money that we don't have?
Again, if you think this year's budget was bad, wait until next year. Try finding the $9-$10 million in increased pension contributions that will be required due to the State Retirement Board changes (which would still be underfunding the school dept.'s required contribution). I wouldn't hold your breath for any meaningful pension reform from the General Assembly.
I'm not going to speak out for or against the charter school until the funding plan is laid out, including where the start-up costs will come from.
Rob T
11:07 am on Thursday, May 26, 2011
Numerous studies have shown that making the day longer, or the school year longer will not address this issue. I believe the current contract states conditions presently instituted. If schools want to change the hours or school year then those things would be negotiated. My guess is that the union would want what is fair. Which people will see as selfish because most want teachers, police officers, and firefighters to work for next to nothing so their taxes will not increase.
Is that the plan for the Mayoral Academy? Longer days and a longer school year?
Paula McFarland
12:57 pm on Thursday, May 26, 2011
Let's ask the following questions: How is the application only signed by the Mayor when the budget process belongs to the City Council? While the funding will come from other communities – Where does the funding for additional salary, out of town busing, capital, utility and building expenses come from? If our Students are truly the focus of this City then let’s all begin to speak about what can be done to best educate each of them. I would like to see the measurable outcomes on any curriculum that can improve our Cranston Student outcomes and evaluate such programs/Creation of Charter Schools after we test and prove the program with our City students. So let’s begin the discussion as to how we take those Cranston Students that are interested in using such Mayoral Curriculum and create a test pilot and then evaluate with a third party to determine any level of success. But to sell out City, our Students, our neighborhoods short is just wrong. Let’s be honest that the Cranston’s School System does not create poverty – but greed, lack of leadership, foreclosures, taxes, etc. play a heft role in the molding of any City. So I will continue to focus on what is best to improve our City as a whole and will put all my efforts on improving our neighborhoods, family involvement both in our City and Schools, and of course making sure our taxpayers and students are the number #1 focus.
Paula McFarland
1:05 pm on Thursday, May 26, 2011
So instead of our City working on other educational options: I ask that our City start to address the elephant in the room – The pension system not only for today but for our future, as I always thought Cranston was number #1, but tiered systems that gives some and not the many or our young workers holding the pension system intact and not even being able to possibly collect a pension check is wrong . As our current focus is not on the future of our City and that is just a shame.
So let’s start to ask the question on what pensions should look like and what is a secure retirement for both public and private residents of this State, our City and finally: Should you be able to retire from one state or municipal system and then get a job in the one you don't have to get your second pension? Or should you only be entitled to one state or municipal pension?
Cranston Resident
1:29 pm on Thursday, May 26, 2011
HELLO!
Suzanne Arena
10:06 pm on Thursday, May 26, 2011
Powerful, enlighting and engaging letter from Mr. Nero. Bravo!
Hungering to learn more on the funding "Unlike traditional district schools, most charter schools do not receive funding to cover the cost of securing a facility. Conversion schools begin with established capital, namely the school and its facilities. A few states provide capital funding to start-up schools, and some start-up schools are able to take over available unused district space, but most must rely on other, independent means. Recent federal legislation provides funding to help charters with start-up costs, but the task remains imposing." and a FAQ's can be found here: http://www.edreform.com/Fast_Facts/Ed_Reform_FAQs/?Just_the_FAQs_Charter_Schools
Suzanne Arena
10:06 pm on Thursday, May 26, 2011
While I do feel Mayor Fung has been strong in some areas, I do not feel the schools have been a main center of focus, this is what bring and retains families to Cranston. I know of 2 special needs parents that will be moving to places like Texas because of the advancement and emphasis added on education. Emphasis Added is exactly what is missing. Charter schools are known to be advanced and if we structure more of the schools with similar implementation, perhaps we could give our future a reason to grow up and remain here, suporting our community to vision, business enterprise and many of the things that have been cut. I like the points above, utilize an existing school. Mayor Fung, PLEASE sit down and meet with Mr. Nero, his life dedication is our children!
Cranston Resident
10:40 pm on Thursday, May 26, 2011
That's what I'm talkin about! Both men hold vital parts of the puzzle for solving the problem that you illustrated by someone having to move out of Cranston to obtain proper education for their child. That should not happen in Cranston.
It takes humble, intelligent, and courageous leaders, willing to set aside their egos and put the two vital pieces of this puzzle together. An enlightened academic plan and proper funding.
JW
9:52 am on Friday, May 27, 2011
At the Dept of Education hearing last night there was a question about what the lottery for the mayoral academy would really mean, since another goal of the academy is to provide opportunity for low income families. I found that it will actually be a "weighted" lottery, weighing family income into the lottery equation - not a true lottery after all. Here is what it says in AF Mayoral Academies_Narrative.pdf on the RIDOE web site on this particular mayor academy application:
FRL Students: Across the AF network, AF schools generally receive about 50% of their
applications from families whose children qualify for free or reduced price lunch. In NY and CT,
AF has been working with daycare centers and headstart programs to increase this percentage,
but that has not been enough. To ensure that our AF Mayoral Academies admit a higher
percentage of students qualifying for free or reduced price lunch, AF has created a student
admissions preference for low-income students. By applying this preference in the admissions
lottery, AF will maintain or increase the number of FRL students, and ensure that it remains
comparable to the local districts.
AF Mayoral Academies will conduct a blind admissions process requesting only basic data from parents
about prospective students. Achievement First schools do not discriminate on the basis of intellectual
ability, measures of achievement or aptitude, athletic ability, disability, race, creed, national origin,...
Joe Richer
10:17 am on Friday, May 27, 2011
I don't know how a weighted lottery could possibly square with the 14th amendment's guarantee of equal protection.