2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

Here here!

posted 3 years, 2 months ago
view in context

Who are these points of consensus between? The CHS PTA?

posted 3 years, 2 months ago
view in context

In addition to the issue of the lack of advanced courses at the poorer performing schools, PPS recognizes that higher performing schools do not offer support courses to meet the full range of student needs.  In the data on HS school plans that PPS released yesterday, it was stated that - "schools such as Grant, Wilson and Lincoln do not offer adequate support courses to meet the needs of students who lack academic preparation. Schools such as Jefferson HS are offering a significant number of support classes, but lack the advanced options and breadth in electives to keep students engaged."

I would also argue that by severely restricting transfers, PPS is moving away from shuffling kids around and creating more cohesive cluster communities where kids walk, bike, or take the bus to their neighborhood school.

No HS in Portland currently meets the comprehensive HS profile and the whole purpose is to bring the high schools up to a desirable level where people will want to send their kids to their neighborhood HS.  The current program is broken - and it is not fair to continue to fund the larger high schools at the expense of the smaller ones.  And that is what this all really boils down to - fairness.  Every student should have an opportunity for a good education no matter what their address.

posted 3 years, 2 months ago
view in context

1.   On “Slowing down” the process:  We need equity now.  Too many schools and students are struggling from lack of support, opportunity, enrollment, course offerings, etc.  It’s taken a year and a half to get this far with the plan, which is too long.  The basic concepts should be implemented immediately.  Communities such as Marshall, Madison, Roosevelt & Jefferson cannot wait any longer.
2.    Transfers: Eliminate or severely limit transfers.
3.    Boundaries: Adjust to give each school a stable enrollment of students.
4.    Course Offerings: Robust course offerings and additional support to all our schools.
5.    Focus schools: Let them happen as student / community demand necessitates.
6.    School Closings: If we have to close a school, make time for adequate community input to make sure all options are considered.

posted 3 years, 2 months ago
view in context