Three Mikes and Still No Cigar

three-cigarsIt seems Dallas ISD Superintendent Mike Miles and Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings have added another Mike to their roster of ill-informed and murky dealings.

Without the knowledge of school trustees or city hall politicians, Rawlings’ city hall Office of Economic Development, with input from Dallas ISD’s Chief Innovation officer Mike Koproswki, just submitted an application to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, dubbed the” Promise Zone,” that would send federal dollars off into the same Broad and Teach for America inspired rat hole that currently constitutes Dallas ISD under the reign of Superintendent Mike Miles.

The third Mike is a former Broad intern from Tennessee where Broad and TFA just had big strike-outs with a statewide reconstitution district. Koprowski, with not a single credential to certify him to practice public education in the state of Texas, was recruited to Dallas and awarded a salary of $165,000 a year at the age of 30 with only two years of education experience in Tennessee’s current failure of a state reconstitution district. Why transport experience in failure across state lines?

The state of Tennessee has finished enough of its experiment with education commissioner Kevin Huffman (ex-husband of Michelle Rhee and former TFA public relations expert) and Chris Barbic, former CEO of YES charters, to know they have a grand failure on their hands. Huffman resigned a couple of weeks ago before he could be booted out of office. Koprowski worked for Huffman in Tennessee. Forcing the lowest performing schools in Tennessee into a state reconstitution district (based on the total failure of reconstitution in New Orleans) has resulted in a backlash of Tennessee parents, superintendents, and politicians, but not before Huffman awarded a no-bid six million dollar contract to TFA and not before Barbic was sued over a crony deal involving his former charter, YES, being awarded charter contracts in Tennessee.

So why bring Koprowski to Dallas ISD at a huge salary when Dallas teachers are currently buying paper and toilet paper for their campuses due to the shortage in supplies? Is this yet another Broad crony hire? And why didn’t Koprowski inform Trustees before assisting Dallas City Hall in writing the Promise Zone application? Does the Promise Zone designation buy loyalty for Miles by greasing the palms of local nonprofits?

The Promise Zone initiative was announced by President Obama in 2013, touted as a way for the Administration to “partner with local leaders to create jobs, increase economic activity, improve educational opportunities, and reduce violent crime”. For communities selected, the federal government will “partner to help the Promise Zones access the resources and expertise they need. To date, there are twelve federal agencies working in close collaboration to provide resources and expertise to urban, rural, and tribal Promise Zones to expand economic mobility and opportunity in their communities.”

In other words, federal largesse to a favored few.

A read through a portion of the Dallas Promise Zone application finds it rehashes two former failed grant applications; the Obama administration’s Race to the Top, submitted to open a $30 million stream of federal funds to Superintendent Mike Miles’ Imagine 2020 initiative, and the School Zone, a public/private partnership in West Dallas that was denied a Department of Education Promise Neighborhood grant. It’s hard to determine from the application language exactly what Koprowski or Rawlings understands about Dallas poverty, Dallas public schools, or even basic American capitalism, but the same institutions are involved—SMU, UTD, and a group of nonprofits whose efforts have not improved school ratings but have at least generated reams of data for the university researchers.

In another repeat, someone at Rawlings’ office continues the mantra espoused by Rawlings that high poverty in Dallas, Texas is caused by bad schools. As the application states, “…disinvestment and higher poverty rate is [sic] a function, in part, of the poor condition of public education in the Promise Zone.”

We can only wonder if the mayor of Dallas has ever visited Uptown, currently thriving, as it sits adjacent to North Dallas High School, one of the lowest rated high schools in the state. We can only wonder if the mayor noticed that all the construction and new restaurants and retail adjacent to the Margaret Hunt Hill Bridge on Singleton are thriving even though Edison Middle School and Pinkston continue to fail under the leadership of Superintendent Miles and his Imagine 2020 failure.

Private capital dollars follow potential profit, Mayor Mike. Welcome to reality. There seem to be huge amounts of business capital pouring into West Dallas and North Oak Cliff without any improvement in the schools. Business capital investment is predicated on profit outcomes, not quality of schools or federal nonprofit dollars. New York City’s Harlem Zone is a philanthropy zone that cannot be repeated in Dallas with federal money.

As if to make a bigger muddle out of the correlation between failing schools and capital investment in a neighborhood, the writers of the Dallas Promise Zone application then state that building Townview in the middle of blight in East Oak Cliff had no impact on the neighborhood. The authors failed to mention Obama and Irma Rangel, both South Dallas success stories, have also drawn no investment into their respective neighborhoods. So why blame poverty-filled public schools for the dearth of private capital investment?

On the other hand, Kessler Park real estate values continue to climb at the same rate that residents’ call for the firing of Mike Miles continues to gather steam. A coalition of these parents and the White Rock parents is in the making. Unless the Mayor of Dallas wants to see more middle class flight from Dallas public schools, on top of a failed bond election, cutting Mike Miles loose needs to occur sooner than later. Miles’ name appears nowhere on the Promise Zone application, probably prescient of the fate of the application when the feds do a simple Google search on Miles. If Miles is toxic, why ask for federal money for his failed initiative?

If the Mayor wants in-migration of middle class parents to Dallas, there needs to be safe, middle class housing which is absent in Dallas. But the Promise Zone plan wants more funding for Miles’ failed initiatives and schools of choice which are not neighborhood schools.

And why ask the feds for a million dollars to fund yet another layer of DISD middle management for the Promise Zone rather than address churn in teachers and lack of campus supplies in Dallas schools? Is there no end to the Broad model of stripping campuses of every dime while loading up on high-priced managers?

But, wait, next on the menu of illogic for the Promise Zone are “choice schools” which as mini-magnets, are supposed to lift up neighborhoods and attract capital investment. If choice schools are placed in the Promise Zone and pull out the most able students from low-rated neighborhood schools, what is the long-term plan for Roosevelt, Pinkston, South Oak Cliff, Madison, and Lincoln? Exactly what is the vision for these schools other than more teacher and principal churn based on Miles’ failed initiatives? Or is their failure assumed? Where do poor neighborhood students in the Promise Zone attend school?

The Promise Zone application is nonsensical. Asking for federal dollars when the justification for the grant is based on faulty logic, a failing school superintendent, and a mayor who can’t analyze the flow of business capital in Dallas neighborhoods is unrealistic.

Three Mikes and still no cigar.

Posted in Teachers Rule

Home Rule in Dallas ISD: Where Are We Now?

Home-rule-commissionThere’s not been much mainstream news coverage on the home rule initiative in Dallas ISD lately. The paid shill using a D magazine blog site platform continues to push the Support Our Public Schools agenda, painting all home rule opponents as quacks and special interest groups, but that doesn’t really count as press coverage.

Mayor Rawlings is on a re-election bandwagon, and while he was outspoken in his support of home-rule at first , now he rolls that initiative into a generalized goal of “achieving academic excellence.” He does, however, take full credit for bringing Superintendent Miles to Dallas.

Miles made the rounds early on in the process, recruiting business leaders’ support for home-rule, before he concentrated his efforts on disrupting the district under the current rules.

Trustee Mike Morath, who is credited with starting this mess, continues to insist it is the cure for all ills in DISD, and, when pressed for details, obliges with convincing explanations of why November elections, trustee recall, and other adult issues would make for better outcomes for students.

A quick google of Morath’s public comments, which appear to be passed verbatim to SOPS spokesmen and the group’s hired journalist, show them to be for the most part based on flawed or biased research. Sometimes the only connection between the SOPS claim and the research is the title of the study.

Not content to misquote scholars in order to support their platform, SOPS has no qualms about advocating for charter provisions which are illegal or flat-out impossible under current law, as if a home-rule district is somehow exempt from all law, not just Education Code.

But who fact checks this stuff?

Matt Haag of the Dallas Morning News ran a series of articles last spring fact checking SOPS claims. His verdicts ranged from half true to false.

One group formed in response to SOPS is Our Community Our Schools. A coalition of parents, community members, activists and leaders, organizations and faith-based groups representing over 50,000 Dallas residents, they have worked to not only educate the community on the threat home rule poses, but to find solutions based on community input. They held meetings in all areas of the district and compiled their findings in a soon to be released report. The Executive Summary can be found here.

Another group organized in opposition to home rule is Stop The TakeOver. Spearheaded by former State Representative and DISD trustee Harryette Ehrhardt, this group of attorneys, former city council members, teachers and administrators, parents and community activists has studied the home rule issue in depth, both from a legal and educational standpoint.

Their findings have been compiled into a notebook, organized in a question and answer format, which was distributed to the Home Rule Commission as part of Stop The TakeOver’s public presentation to the commission.

The notebook has been made available on the Dallas Friends of Public Education website and can be found here. A few quick takeaways, especially in comparison to the latest pre-made charter which SOPS presented to the commission:

Student achievement: Dallas does no worse than comparable urban districts. In some ways we are better.

November elections: Not possible under current law. Be sure and read the November elections rebuttal at the end of the notebook. Pretty much outs SOPS as con artists.

Trustee recall: Only home rule cities can do this, not home rule school districts. Home rule cities and home rule school districts are not comparable. This is a crucial misconception SOPS relies on.

Non-voting student trustee: Well, we can already do this. I hope the student trustee has a homework pass, as the last board briefing ran 9 hours.

Change in governing body: Dallas is organized under a 1973 law which requires 9 single member districts, home rule would not and could not change that.

Enforcement of the charter: The law creating home rule districts doesn’t nail this down at all. Sounds like nobody’s in charge.

The most disturbing page was the one in the Resources section detailing the issues leading to litigation that home rule would present. Together with the uncertainty for bond ratings and budget oversight, it is clear home rule would be a morass of court actions, attorney general opinions, board disagreement, community disillusionment, and uncertainty.

Don’t forget the expense of all that litigation.

The notebook runs about 100 pages. It’s worth a read.

The home rule commission will have to decide in the coming months whether to write a home rule charter for Dallas ISD voters to consider in an upcoming election, make a list of recommendations, or do nothing.

The commission members were appointed by your trustees and district staff. They have been actively soliciting community input for the last few months. It is important that you educate yourself on this issue and make your voice heard.

It’s a busy time of year and many issues need our attention, including the inane testing of our children, the continuing loss of great teachers and even a lack of toilet paper in our schools.

Take the time to educate yourself on home rule and consider yourself warned. A lack of attention now will come back to bite us all in the future.

Tagged with: , , , ,
Posted in Rotten in Denmark, SOPS, Teachers Rule

A Possible Solution for Dealey Montessori and Other Dallas ISD schools

disd-this-is-a-testThe parents of students at Dealey are rightfully outraged, as the parents of all children at DISD elementary schools should be. Their children are being used as guinea pigs and their school is being dismantled in order for the district to continue its grand experiment called the “Teacher Excellence Initiative,” a.k.a. Pay for Performance.

The district has admitted that the ACP tests are not used to inform the teachers in order to better instruct their students. The scores are being used solely to evaluate the teachers. Two weeks of instructional time are lost each semester in order to feed the beast of TEI, and children are watching movie after movie in order to remain quiet while other children are testing. Due to the fact that teachers are being rated on the ACP scores and this will, in turn, reflect on the principal, pieces of the treasured Montessori program at Dealey are being ditched in order to concentrate on test preparation.

Many more problems regarding the ACPs need to be discussed, but there are some solutions which have been proposed. Nitpicking about the actual tests is counterproductive. The TEI should be opposed and replaced with a true research-based teacher evaluation plan, but that will be a lengthy battle and will not help Dealey preserve their Montessori program right now.

One solution which should be considered by schools such as Dealey Montessori, which have strong faculty and parent groups, is the in-district open enrollment charter school option, made available by the Texas legislature in 2013 through Senate Bill 2.

This bill granted any school district in Texas the legal right to grant an open enrollment charter to a school within the district boundaries. This charter is similar to an open enrollment charter granted by the State Board of Education, except that it does not count against the current state cap on the number of charter schools and the charter school is directly accountable to the board of trustees of the district rather than directly to the TEA, as is a regular charter school. A school district can have up to 15% of its students in these charters, or an entire feeder pattern can become an open enrollment charter school. Of note, the rules are different for this kind of in-district charter than the those previously allowed, under which Gabe Allen Charter School in DISD was developed many years ago.

There are two ways to achieve an open-enrollment in-district charter:

1) The board of trustees can vote to grant a charter to an entity which presents a charter proposal to the board.
2) A school can vote to become an in-district open enrollment charter school through a majority vote of the parents of current students and faculty. The principal does not have to be a part of this process. This is then presented to the board of trustees and they must vote to approve the proposal.

What are the advantages for a school or feeder pattern to do this?

1) They gain the freedoms granted to a charter school: they can choose their own curriculum and programs, they manage their own finances, they decide upon their own teacher evaluations and pay scales, they control the hiring of all faculty, decide their own professional development, and only have to participate in the state mandated testing schedule. They do not have to administer district mandated tests. (Bye, bye, ACPs!)
2) They continue to use their school building and facilities, unlike a charter granted by the SBOE which has to rent, build, or purchase a building.
3) Their board is responsible to the elected board of trustees for their student achievement. This is unlike an open- enrollment charter granted by the SBOE, which is responsible to their appointed board and ultimately to the TEA, which rarely gets involved. Only recently have poorly run state-granted charter schools been held accountable by the TEA for poor performance and financial problems, and even now, only a few have actually been closed down.
4) The new in-district charter school has a 10 year performance contract with the board of trustees, during which time they must show that they have met the agreed upon academic goals.

Dealey already has a fantastic Montessori program in place which has been successful for decades. The faculty has been fairly stable and many parents have had multiple children attend the school. The established community, continuity, and stability of the school create an optimal environment for becoming an in-district open enrollment charter school. The time to do it is now, before a critical mass of Montessori-trained teachers leave.

There are many other schools in DISD which might want to consider this option in order to preserve the integrity of their school and prevent the loss of faculty and programs due to interference from the DISD administration: Charles Rice Learning Center, Stonewall Jackson Elementary, any of the magnets and academies, Lakewood Elementary, Woodrow Wilson High School, Lincoln High School, and Dade Middle School, to name just a few. An IR (Improvement Required) school, which does not qualify for the new “School Choice” program being pushed by the DISD administration, could vote for an in-district open enrollment charter if the parents and faculty wanted to try innovations which they felt would increase student achievement and yet were not supported by the administration.

Parents and teachers are often accused of just whining and complaining. This is a proactive solution which should be explored. Obviously, this will require a lot of work on the part of the faculty and parents to bring this about and could not be done on a whim. However, nothing good comes without great effort, and it seems that preserving an established and beloved school would be well worth the time spent. Generations of students would benefit from this work. Other schools, and perhaps whole feeder patterns, should consider this option as well. Dallas ISD could be on the cutting edge of true local control and could become a model for other districts, and the beneficiaries would be the children and the entire community.

Dealey parents: Speak now, or perhaps forever hold your peace. The time is now.

Note: The DFPE website has 2 articles which discuss the planning process and other details regarding the process of a school becoming an in-district open enrollment charter school: Redesigning Schools and The Conversation We Need to Have.

Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Teachers Rule

Disruptive Change Rains Down on Dealey

ena-myersIt looks like yet another set of DISD parents didn’t get the memo: Mike Miles is to be both overpaid and obeyed. No questions asked; no opposition brooked. His way or the highway. Dealey parents seem to be getting that message now, though.

They probably thought that their child’s school was safe from the disruptive, testing-obsessed tentacles of Mike Miles. After all, Dealey is a high-performing Montessori* magnet school in leafy Preston Hollow, filled with high-performing students who are cherry-picked from a huge batch of applications. STAAR test scores at Dealey (in all subjects tested) are very high.

But at the beginning of the year, when Miles’ hand-picked new principal, Ena Meyers, greeted the families, they sensed that things were changing…and not for the better.

Right off the bat, Dealey parents were aghast at a sudden and strict enforcement of the dress code policy regarding, of all things, socks. I guess since it’s Dealey, if you need disruptive change and socks are all you’ve got, socks are what you what go with.

Of course, socks were nothing compared to what came next. Word got out that 3rd graders would lose their weekly time in the science lab because of the STAAR Science scores for the previous year’s 5th graders (and, possibly, 8th graders). How yanking 3rd graders out of the lab would help last year’s 5th and/or 8th graders remains unclear, but the change was made anyway.

At this point, it might be helpful to know just how bad those Science scores were last year. It looks like Dealey’s 5th Grade pass rate last year for the Science STAAR was 96.3%. In other words, 96.3% of the 5th graders passed the Science STAAR test. This was up from the previous 2 years (91.5 and 89.8). 2 kids did not pass.

And these are the scores that triggered pulling 3rd graders from their weekly trip to the science lab? A 96% pass rate? Dealey parents are not buying it, and rightly so.

In response to the flurry of parent emails, Ena Meyers scheduled an evening meeting in the library, so parents could hear “her” vision for Dealey. The parents’ vision was not mentioned.

The meeting was held Tuesday, December 9th and approximately 300 parents showed up to get answers, not just hear about some stranger’s vision for their children’s school.

Sadly, being Dealey, the parents were completely unprepared for the Miles Method the rest of us are used to when it comes to meetings. If they expected answers or dialogue, they were mistaken because, like in the USSR, that’s not how this leadership regime rolls.

For starters, the meeting was scheduled from 5:30-6:30 pm on the same evening as the orchestra concert, which began at 6:30. Is there any better way to limit the length of a meeting with pesky, unhappy, taxpaying parents like a concert or program starring their own children?

Then there was the agenda, which clearly outlined a time for a Welcome, time for Meyers’ (and the AP’s) “Heart and Vision” sharing, followed by a Q&A time. True to the Miles Method, however, the Welcome/Heart and Vision parts ate up 50 minutes of the allotted 60 minutes for the meeting. Approximately 3 questions were asked before the principal reminded everyone that the orchestra concert was, conveniently, about to begin.

The saddest part was when a parent, who clearly does not understand what the presence of Mike Miles in DISD will mean for her child, asked Meyers to “fight for Dealey,”—to fight the emphasis on test scores and testing and teacher pay tied to testing and test-driven curriculum.

Meyers replied that she doesn’t like the word “fight.” She communicated that in DISD now, test scores equal pay. What she didn’t say was that Miles hired her and that she most likely agrees with his approach and his methods. Check out this YouTube video of Meyers praising the test-based TEI system in front of the board. I’d expect Meyers to fight for Miles before she would fight for less testing, Dealey parents. Talk about the fox guarding the henhouse.

This question came after Meyers’ comment earlier in the evening that good test scores are needed for admission to high school magnets. A couple of parents wondered if this mention was intended to be a sort of scare tactic forcing them to accept Miles’ test-mania or run the risk of their child not being accepted into a high school magnet.

Often we ask, “Has it come to this?” It looks like at Dealey, it has. Unless Dealey parents want their kids at Spruce, they’d better toe the testing line and kiss the science lab goodbye. **

*Dealey uses the Montessori curriculum in grades K-6 and a standard curriculum in grades 7-8.

**Meyers said that in January, after all of the ACP test scores come back, the science lab issue will be revisited. 5th and 8th graders, the fate of the science lab for 3rd graders depends on you…and your very unlucky teachers.

Tagged with: , , , ,
Posted in Administrative Policies, Giving Grades

Teach for America: The Gift That Keeps on Giving

disd teach for America tfaTeach for America is about teaching, right? Say TFA and you think recent college graduates dedicated to social justice, fighting social inequities daily by teaching society’s neediest children.

But you would not be seeing the entire picture.

Teach for America is a $400 million “non-profit” that exists not only to save children, but also to steer public policy, and public dollars, to corporate reformers, primarily through the promotion of market-based solutions: charter district reform, deregulation of teacher education, and merit-based pay.

TFA is also, through its spin-off organization Leadership for Educational Equity, working to place alumni in administrative jobs and in elected positions, utilizing a powerful network of foundations, educational institutions and related organizations, legislative policy groups and individuals who are at the forefront of charter school reform efforts.

In 2011, TFA founder Wendy Kopp spoke on a Seattle radio station, saying that people often misunderstand the function of TFA. “We’re a leadership development organization, not a teaching organization” she said. “I think if you don’t understand that, of course it’s easy to tear the whole thing apart.”

This leadership phenomenon that TFA creates is so noteworthy it has even spurred a UT Dallas based research study by The Texas Schools Project into “the different career trajectories [of TFA members ] relative to ordinary teachers who are not part of the program” , headed by reformer economist Eric Hanushek, who, by the way, is on tap to study Dallas ISD’s Teacher Excellence Initiative program.

Nowhere is the TFA career pipeline more evident than in Dallas.

A Dallas Morning News analysis found over two dozen current administrators have ties to Teach for America and partner organizations Teaching Trust and Commit!.

The list of former TFA corps members include the head of Human Capital Carmen Darville, Deputy Chief of Staff Justin Coppedge and his wife Lauren, Lindsay Coshatt, director of the Teacher Excellence Initiative, Ashley “Not Non-elected” Bryan, Director of Planning and Special Projects, Courtney Egelston, Personalized Learning Manager, and a host of others including urban specialists, onboarding coordinators, principals, and a couple in something called talent acquisition.

This doesn’t begin to include the former TFA’ers working for KIPP, Uplift and Commit! And we are not talking chump change salaries. Justin Coppedge makes $133,900 as Deputy Chief of Staff. Not bad, considering he was in the classroom 3 years ago.

And let’s not forget to include Miguel Solis, elected to the Dallas ISD school board in 2013 with the financial help of Dallas Kids First PAC and the Dallas Regional Chamber’s education PAC Educate Dallas. Solis taught in a Dallas middle school as a TFA recruit in 2011.

For years Dallas ISD has been accused of cronyism in their hiring, with jobs handed out according to church and sorority affiliations. What we are seeing now appears to be same song, different verse.

With all the TFA connections inside the district, including the hand in glove relationship the district has with TFA chair Todd Williams of Commit! and SMU’s Teaching Trust, is it any surprise TFA is bringing their new recruit training program, the Summer Institute, to Dallas next year?

The board was presented with a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) establishing the ground rules for TFA’s use of district facilities and students for the next three summers to train new recruits. An MOU can best be described as a gentleman’s agreement; we’ll do this and we expect you to do that.

The problem with this arrangement is that DISD does most of the giving and TFA does most of the getting.

The district has to provide classrooms, auditoriums, library space, parking lots, audiovisual equipment, photo copies, custodians, cafeteria workers, air conditioning, 50 teachers of record, 4 principals, 1 executive director (all of whom have to go to TFA training beforehand), and 1,600 guinea pigs.. er … students.

What does TFA give DISD? Umm, well, something called Toolkits, but that’s only for Corp Members. There are also a few lines about the possibility of providing some training for DISD teachers, even allowing them to shadow Corps Members, assuming said teachers don’t abscond with TFA “intellectual property.”

Ms. Bryan also described the teacher prep materials and training and the lesson plans the recruits will be delivering in the summer school classroom. She said that these materials would/might be available to DISD teachers.

Odd that TFA will be sharing teacher guidance and lesson templates when the district has just spent two years of professional development instructing teachers on the Miles Method of classroom instruction and the detailed lesson plans required. Seems like it should be the other way around, if these recruits will be in DISD classrooms.

Hmm, maybe they won’t. That’s not in the agreement. Maybe they’re training for KIPP and Uplift.

Ms. Bryan told the board she estimated the agreement’s value to the district to be in excess of $1,000,000 in human capital! That’s a conservative estimate, she said, counting the salaries of the eighteen TFA staffers at Summer Institute, plus the value of the recruits, who each teach an hour a day.

Basically we are, like Mike Miles gushed at the board briefing, supposed to thank TFA for this opportunity.

Trustee Nancy Bingham was equally excited at the prospect of TFA recruits “tag teaming” with summer school teachers, saying who wouldn’t want two for the price of one?

Several trustees seemed to envision a classroom scenario in which veteran teachers would be assisted by energetic Corps members, with the recruit circling the room, checking worksheets and offering guidance.

That, unfortunately, doesn’t appear to be how this works. Former recruits and mentors describe a process in which the teacher of record sits in the back of the classroom and observes. Sometimes if things get out of hand they hold up signs with suggestions written on them; “Johnny is asleep!” They aren’t supposed to interact with the students during practice teaching.

So, Nancy, what is the advantage here?

Kids are taught by a well- meaning yet inexperienced newbie, using a Toolkit, and the veteran teacher sits on his hands in the back row and watches. Recruits only teach 4 weeks, one class a day, so the regular teacher, who monitors four recruits, has to bookend the schedule. Is there continuity in the lesson plan?

Remember these are the kids that failed classes during the regular school year, so they come with a wide array of problems. It is a challenge for even the most experienced teacher to sort out these kids and determine what their needs are, then coax, demand, and connect with each one to get them over the finish line.

Instead, we are practicing on them.

TFA claims to have $30-40K invested in each recruit placed in a classroom. Funny, the recruits don’t see any of those funds. They aren’t paid for summer training time. Once hired, their salaries are paid by the district.

DISD doesn’t see any of that money either. We pay TFA $3,000 per recruit when we hire them.

Not only does DISD pay for the teachers, principals, and other personnel during Summer Institute, they provide the facilities for free also. DISD charges everybody else $40-75 an hour to use a classroom, almost twice that on the weekend.

Churches pay, but for Wendy it’s free.

What a deal!

And if we’re lucky we’ll get another high-priced fresh faced administrator as part of the bargain, too!

Where do we sign? We can’t let an opportunity like this pass us by!

Tagged with: , ,
Posted in Rotten in Denmark
Recent Comments
  • Loading...
WELCOME

CONTACT US
E-MAIL DISDblog

STATISTICS
Friday, November 7, 3:00 p.m.
Unique Visitors: 162,361
Visits: 757,128
Page Views: 1,528,393
Avg. Duration: 00:03:14

User Metrics
38.40% male
61.60% female
3.80% 18-24 yrs
14.66% 25-34 yrs
28.39% 35-44 yrs
23.71% 45-54 yrs
21.74% 55-64 yrs
7.70% 65+ yrs

Affinity Category
5.54% Movie Lovers
4.97% News Junkies
4.63% TV Lovers
3.84% Technophiles
3.69% Political Junkies
3.67% Avid Readers
3.59% Music Lovers
3.37% Travel Buffs
3.25% Sports Fans
3.10% Cooking Enthusiasts

COMMENTS
You may make comments with your privacy completely protected! Click HERE for Detailed Instructions with Pictures

NOTES
We know words are powerful and ideas even more so. Profanity isn't really necessary for emphasis or a substitute for passion here. Thank you.

Foundation for Empowerment (FCE) released 3 papers:

1. Disruptive Change: Mike Miles and the Crisis In Dallas ISD, which has been prepared with consultation by education academics, extensive research, review of data and education literature, and meetings and interviews with people of Dallas holding varying and sometimes conflicting points of view;

2. Digging Into Data and Evidence: Mike Miles, Dallas ISD, and Trickle-Down Education Report, by Dr. Julian Vasquez Helig, Lindsay Redd, M.A. and Dr. Ruth Vail; and

3. The Challenge of Disruptive Leadership in Dallas ISD, by Decoteau J. Irby, Ph.D. and Matthew Birkhold, M.A.

"You will see from these papers that, after much research and discussion, we believe the current Superintendent lacks the pedagogical, leadership and integrity qualities necessary to lead Dallas ISD and recommend the Board terminate his contract."

Citizens wanting to speak at regular board meetings and briefings must sign up by calling Board Services at (972) 925-3720 no later than 5 p.m. on the day before the meeting.

Contact the Superintendent and Trustees:
3700 Ross Avenue, Box 1
Dallas, TX 75204

Superintendent Mike Miles
milesfm@dallasisd.org

Lew Blackburn, 1st Vice President
District 5
Term Expires 2016
lblackburn@dallasisd.org
(972) 925-3718
Oak Lawn, West Dallas, Wilmer, Hutchins and portions of East Oak Cliff

Miguel Solis, Board President
District 8
Term Expires 2014
miguelsolis@dallasisd.org
(972) 925-3721
Love Field, Northwest Dallas, and Central Dallas

Eric Cowan
District 7
Term Expires 2016
ecowan@dallasisd.org
(972) 925-3721
North Central Oak Cliff and parts of West Dallas

Nancy Bingham
District 4
Term Expires 2016
nbingham@dallasisd.org
(972) 925-3722
Southeast Dallas, Seagoville, Balch Springs

Elizabeth Jones, 2nd Vice President
District 1
Term Expires 2015
elizabethjones@dallasisd.org
(972) 925-3722
Northwest Dallas, including North Dallas, Addison, parts of Carrollton and Farmers Branch

Mike Morath
District 2
Term Expires 2014
mmorath@dallasisd.org
(972) 925-3721
North and Near East Dallas

Dan Micciche, Board Secretary
District 3
Term Expires 2015
danmicciche@dallasisd.org
(972) 925-3722
Northeast Dallas

Joyce Foreman
District 6
Term Expires 2017
email coming
(972) 925-3722
Southwest Dallas

Bernadette Nutall
District 9
Term Expires 2015
benutall@dallasisd.org
(972) 925-3721
South Dallas and parts of Downtown Dallas, Pleasant Grove, Deep Ellum, Uptown, and East Dallas

"Republics are created by the virtue, public spirit and intelligence of the citizens. They fall when the wise are banished from the public councils because they dare to be honest and the profligate are rewarded because they flatter the people in order to betray them." --Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution, 1833