Warning: Use of undefined constant THEM_TEMPLATEURL - assumed 'THEM_TEMPLATEURL' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /home/chairmanmao/webapps/wpmulti/wp-content/themes/panorama/functions.php on line 5

Warning: Use of undefined constant AP_LAYOUT - assumed 'AP_LAYOUT' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /home/chairmanmao/webapps/wpmulti/wp-content/themes/panorama/functions.php on line 38

Warning: Use of undefined constant AP_LINKCOLOUR - assumed 'AP_LINKCOLOUR' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /home/chairmanmao/webapps/wpmulti/wp-content/themes/panorama/functions.php on line 39

Warning: Use of undefined constant AP_HOVERCOLOUR - assumed 'AP_HOVERCOLOUR' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /home/chairmanmao/webapps/wpmulti/wp-content/themes/panorama/functions.php on line 40

Warning: Use of undefined constant AP_HEADERIMAGE - assumed 'AP_HEADERIMAGE' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /home/chairmanmao/webapps/wpmulti/wp-content/themes/panorama/functions.php on line 41

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/chairmanmao/webapps/wpmulti/wp-content/themes/panorama/functions.php:5) in /home/chairmanmao/webapps/wpmulti/wp-includes/feed-rss2-comments.php on line 8
Comments for Life on the San Carlos School Board https://board.olbert.com occasional ruminations on being a school board trustee Sun, 18 Dec 2011 08:36:19 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.0 Comment on One Door Closes by Diane Masetti https://board.olbert.com/2011/12/17/one-door-closes/#comment-6876 Sun, 18 Dec 2011 08:36:19 +0000 http://board.olbert.com/?p=594#comment-6876 Mark:  I have enjoyed reading your blog for the good of the San Carlos School District and will most definitely subscribe to your new blog.  First time that I can remember the public having an avenue to become well informed about City Council activities!  Congratulations!  Diane

Comment on Wellness Policy Debate by admin https://board.olbert.com/2011/06/25/wellness-policy-debate/#comment-3285 Tue, 28 Jun 2011 22:00:21 +0000 http://board.olbert.com/?p=558#comment-3285 We’ll have to agree to disagree. You still get to exercise your right by parenting your child so as not to eat food you don’t want him/her to. All parents have to do this because they cannot be with their child 24/7.

IMHO, living in a pluralistic society requires that we accept the right of others to do things that we do not wish to do ourselves, provided they don’t harm us in the process. Someone else over-indulging in snacks does not harm me — it’s only when I choose to follow their lead that I may be harmed, and in that case I’ve chosen to take the risk.

Comment on Wellness Policy Debate by PM https://board.olbert.com/2011/06/25/wellness-policy-debate/#comment-3283 Tue, 28 Jun 2011 21:55:01 +0000 http://board.olbert.com/?p=558#comment-3283 I think Seth’s argument is spot on – bringing it into class treads on my right to restrict my child’s intake of fat and sugar, particularly in the classroom.  Without being too over the top about it I also question the necessity and propriety of conducting in-class birthday celebrations that consist of anything more than an acknowledgment of the child’s birthday and a rendition of the birthday song.  Think about it:  between the distraction of cake, etc. plus the time to consume and clean up afterward do we as parents and educators really support missing that 15-20 minutes of teaching time?  I think kids and parents alike will get on just fine if the celebrating in the classroom is kept to a minimum.

Comment on The Impact of Charter Enrollment Preferences by Heather_mom https://board.olbert.com/2011/03/01/the-impact-of-charter-enrollment-preferences/#comment-1587 Mon, 21 Mar 2011 11:04:53 +0000 http://board.olbert.com/?p=541#comment-1587 Chris’ comments seem very politically motivated to me.  I’m sure it’s not politically savvy to be seen as a school that filters out the working class.  But, that’s exactly what SCCLC does with their high volunteer requirements.  And, it seems they’re attempting to redirect blame for this by saying, “I would but they won’t let me.”  CLC doesn’t roll out the welcome mat to these families. And, they don’t come.  No surprise.

Comment on The Impact of Charter Enrollment Preferences by admin https://board.olbert.com/2011/03/01/the-impact-of-charter-enrollment-preferences/#comment-1319 Wed, 02 Mar 2011 04:57:21 +0000 http://board.olbert.com/?p=541#comment-1319 I understand. But all that means — if one believes as Chris apparently does, that CLC should be more “diverse” — is that one needs to work harder at attracting a broader range of applicant (BTW, CLC does a lot of things already to make it easier for parents to volunteer, which I applaud).

It can be done. Whether it should be done is up to the school’s leadership, which has to balance a lot of different priorities.

I just don’t want the District held up as the reason why more progress towards the goal hasn’t been achieved.

Comment on The Impact of Charter Enrollment Preferences by admin https://board.olbert.com/2011/03/01/the-impact-of-charter-enrollment-preferences/#comment-1318 Wed, 02 Mar 2011 04:53:15 +0000 http://board.olbert.com/?p=541#comment-1318 This is a reply to Mark, but I couldn’t place it “in thread” because the discussion got too deeply nested.

No, it’s not about money (at least on the District side; I can’t speak for CLC). And please remember I’m not arguing that CLC should accept more socioeconomically disadvantaged kids. Chris apparently believes that it should…but also believes the District is making it difficult to do what he wants to do. Which is wrong — the District is not the one who made in district students a priority. The state did that. So he should blame the Legislature :).

The rest of my posting isn’t trying to urge CLC to do more outreach. All I’m saying is that if Chris and the rest of CLC’s leadership want to bring in more socioeconomically disadvantaged kids there are things they can do.

Comment on The Impact of Charter Enrollment Preferences by eileen https://board.olbert.com/2011/03/01/the-impact-of-charter-enrollment-preferences/#comment-1317 Wed, 02 Mar 2011 04:37:09 +0000 http://board.olbert.com/?p=541#comment-1317 One more thing, the audience you end up with at a charter school is self selecting. Just as the majority of parents at Castilleja and Menlo are wealthy, the parents at charter schools are willing and able to put in the time and commitment to keep the school running. At SCCLC, I believe it’s 80 to 120 hours a year and we pitch in for field trips. It’s not for everybody.

Comment on The Impact of Charter Enrollment Preferences by Mark https://board.olbert.com/2011/03/01/the-impact-of-charter-enrollment-preferences/#comment-1316 Wed, 02 Mar 2011 04:21:52 +0000 http://board.olbert.com/?p=541#comment-1316 I would be shocked if the data did not bear that out. I remember discussing this exact information with a board member (Eric Van Der Porten) several years ago, (as a Heather parent), when times were good, or at least better than they are now, and there was less in district fighting, (I remember you as an advocate for CLC at that time and admired you for it BTW). I believe that this is really the case as Heather had low historically low enrollment (people did not want to drive up the hill) and thus the space for the OOD kids and thus it made sense for the district and Dr. Wool.
Eric also discussed with me how the number of kids in the district is essentially a flat number with little to no variance, so I am concerned about this sudden shift of the status quo, is this about money…again? Not sure how I would feel about supporting a measure for parcel tax for the district when the district wants to create spaces for non San Carlos Residents at a San Carlos School. If you want to keep the OOD kids together, why send them to Charter anyway just move more to Heather to keep them together like you say?

Comment on The Impact of Charter Enrollment Preferences by admin https://board.olbert.com/2011/03/01/the-impact-of-charter-enrollment-preferences/#comment-1315 Wed, 02 Mar 2011 04:05:25 +0000 http://board.olbert.com/?p=541#comment-1315 It isn’t that two schools are preferred, it’s that the District believes the interest and well-being of the Tinsley children are best served by having them all attend one elementary school and one middle school. Currently those schools are Heather and Tierra Linda (so that the kids can stay with their Heather classmates as well).

I think the API data, to the extent it’s accurate, is pretty clear: proportionally fewer socioeconomically disdvantaged kids attend CLC than the rest of the District. It’ll be interesting to see if the actual headcount you get from the District confirm that.

Comment on The Impact of Charter Enrollment Preferences by admin https://board.olbert.com/2011/03/01/the-impact-of-charter-enrollment-preferences/#comment-1314 Wed, 02 Mar 2011 04:00:46 +0000 http://board.olbert.com/?p=541#comment-1314 This is a reply to Mia, but I can’t post it “in thread” because the nesting is too deep…

LOL! Talk about an oddball redirect. Nowhere in the posting did I even talk about District or CLC finances.

If I had to blame any one thing for the California education funding crisis, I’d probably pick a couple of decades of laissez-faire economic theory run amok :).