A case of spoiled grapes?

First, take some time to read Mr. Silverman's letter.

Let's start by defending the 3 for Change slate - Mr. Silverman says, "All I've seen is platitudes and a cagey unwillingness to spell out what they'd do and how they'd pay for it." Well Mr. Silverman, you don't get to determine when the candidates "spell out" their ideas. Over the past two weeks the candidates have held press conferences and have posted on their web site 3forchange.com positions on community engagement and financial accountability. It is our understanding that they will discuss academics during the week of October 31, 2005. We have not seen anything from the "status quo" group of candidates - Steven Thomas, Steven Steel and Jim Whiteman. Why don't you challenge them to "spell out" what they'd do?

In defending his and the Board's record over the past 5 years, he lists a number of initiatives and actions. Problem is that all the items he identifies lack any metrics to measure or evaluate whether the dollars are spent on programs that provide the greatest academic outcomes, are based upon anecdotal evidence and misrepresent the facts.

Let's discuss a couple of the items:

Overhauling the reading, writing and mathematics curriculum which has made us a leader in Ohio - just what evaluative measurements did he base this statement on? Yes, test scores have improved, but how much of that is "teaching to the test" and taking practice tests? How much of the improvement is because they moved the lowest performing students to TPS sponsored charter schools? Just how do we know that these curriculum changes reflect best practices which will result in the greatest increase in academic outcomes? Mr. Silverman can't tell you as most decisions made by TPS are not research based and data driven.

Lengthening the school day - other that increasing the costs to the taxpayer, what changed in the classroom that made this expense a good investment? If children are just spending more desk time doing homework or class work and there is no increase in teacher-student interaction, how does that improve academic outcomes? You got it - the district has no way to measure the effectiveness of this investment? Maybe it was just a way to justify higher salaries to district employees?

Opening an all boys and girls academy and 3 charter schools - again where are the evaluative measurements? As to the charter schools just read a May 2005 article in in Catalyst Cleveland, Districts embrace charter option. After reading this article we wonder if the district set up the charter schools for their benefit and not the children. You make the call!

Hired and supported Dr. Sanders - well the Coalition asked for the Superintendent's performance standards and performance reviews. Mr. Silverman responded to our request for this information on July 9, 2004 as follows, "Documentation is tricky. If you do it, it has to be comprehensive and geared to clearly stating what one means; to the recipient's clearly understanding what is said; and to the public's understanding all the nuance and context given that it will be a public document and that partisans will latch onto it for their own purposes. The document becomes the focus, not the relationship between Board and Superintendent. Hence we did not document under my tenure."

Balanced the budget every year in extraordinarily difficult circumstances. What Mr. Silverman does not tell you is that since 2000, the TPS treasurer has been projecting financial deficits for the years after 2004. What did TPS do under Mr. Silverman's tenure as Board President? They increased spending over two years by almost 30%. They made the problem and then ignored it until they had to and found out the public would not support a new levy. They hired teachers during those two years just to fire them when the budget hit the fan! We don't call this responsible. Do you?

We could write about each of Mr. Silverman's points in his letter, but I think you got our point.

TPS' track record over the past 5 years has had pockets of success. But the district has failed to replicate the successes. Instead they use these successes as public relations fodder. We think it is a bit like putting new wallpaper over a cracked and crumbling wall.