In This Issue:
 |
| • |
STUDENTS+SCHOOLS FIND CAMPAIGN TALK CONFLICTS WITH NO-BULLIES MESSAGE |
|
| • |
Commentary: THE POLITICAL GRANDSTANDING OF THE LAUSD BOARD + smf’s 2¢ |
|
| • |
INGLEWOOD SCHOOLS LAGGING UNDER STATE TAKEOVER, STATE AUDITOR SAYS |
|
| • |
A BETTER SAT …OR JUST A BETTER BOTTOM LINE FOR THE COLLEGE BOARD? |
|
| • |
HIGHLIGHTS, LOWLIGHTS & THE NEWS THAT DOESN'T FIT: The Rest (but
not necessarily the best) of the Stories from Other Sources |
|
| • |
EVENTS: Coming up next week... |
|
| • |
What can YOU do? |
|
Featured Links:
|
|
|
|
from the transcript of Thursday’s GOP debate:
BRETT BAIER: Mr. Trump, just yesterday, almost 100 foreign policy
experts signed on to an open letter refusing to support you, saying your
embracing expansive use of torture is inexcusable. General Michael
Hayden, former CIA director, NSA director, and other experts have said
that when you asked the U.S. military to carry out some of your campaign
promises, specifically targeting terrorists' families, and also the use
of interrogation methods more extreme than waterboarding, the military
will refuse because they've been trained to turn down and refuse illegal
orders.
So what would you do, as commander-in-chief, if the U.S. military refused to carry out those orders?
TRUMP: They won't refuse. They're not going to refuse me. Believe me.
. . .
BAIER: But targeting terrorists' families?
(APPLAUSE)
TRUMP: And -- and -- and -- I'm a leader. I'm a leader. I've always been
a leader. I've never had any problem leading people. If I say do it,
they're going to do it. That's what leadership is all about.
______
BAIER: Welcome back to the Republican presidential debate. Let's get back at it.
Gentlemen, this is the last question of the night. It has been a long
time since our first debate, seven months ago in Cleveland. A lot has
transpired since then, obviously, including an RNC pledge that all of
you signed agreeing to support the party's nominee and not to launch an
independent run. Tonight, in 30 seconds, can you definitively say you
will support the Republican nominee, even if that nominee is Donald J.
Trump?
Senator Rubio, yes or no?
RUBIO: I'll support the Republican nominee.
BAIER: Mr. Trump? Yes or no?
RUBIO: I'll support Donald if he's the Republican nominee, and let me
tell you why. Because the Democrats have two people left in the race.
One of them is a socialist. America doesn't want to be a socialist
country. If you want to be a socialist country, then move to a socialist
country.
The other one is under FBI investigation. And not only is she under FBI
investigation, she lied to the families of the victims of Benghazi, and
anyone who lies to the families of victims who lost their lives in the
service of our country can never be the commander- in-chief of the
United States.
BAIER: Senator...
RUBIO: We must defeat Hillary Clinton.
BAIER: Senator Cruz, yes or no, you will support Donald Trump is he's the nominee?
CRUZ: Yes, because I gave my word that I would. And what I have
endeavored to do every day in the Senate is do what I said I would do.
You know, just on Tuesday, we saw an overwhelming victory in the state
of Texas where I won Texas by 17 percent.
And I will say it was a powerful affirmation that the people who know me
best, the people who I campaigned, who made promises that if you elect
me, I'll lead the fight against Obamacare, I'll lead the fight against
amnesty, I'll lead the fight against our debt, and I will fight for the
Bill of Rights and your rights every day, that the people of Texas said
you have kept your word, and that's what I'll do as president.
BAIER: Governor Kasich, yes or no, would you support Donald Trump as the Republican nominee?
KASICH: Yeah. But -- and I kind of think that, before it's all said and done, I'll be the nominee. But let me also say...
(APPLAUSE)
But let me also say, remember...
BAIER: But your answer is yes?
KASICH: But I'm the little engine that can. And, yeah, look, when you're
in the arena, and we're in the arena. And the people out here watching
-- we're in the arena, we're traveling, we're working, we spend time
away from our family, when you're in the arena, you enter a special
circle. And you want to respect the people that you're in the arena
with. So if he ends up as the nominee -- sometimes, he makes it a little
bit hard -- but, you know, I will support whoever is the Republican
nominee for president.
(APPLAUSE)
WALLACE: Mr. Trump, I'm going to ask you a version of the same question.
As we saw today with Mitt Romney, the #NeverTrump movement is gaining
steam. Some people are talking about contributing millions of dollars to
try to stop you. Again today, you raised the possibility that you might
run as an independent if you feel you're treated unfairly by the
Republican Party.
So I'm going to phrase the question that the other three people on this
stage just got. Can you definitively say tonight that you will
definitely support the Republican nominee for president, even if it's
not you?
TRUMP: Even if it's not me?
(LAUGHTER)
Let me just start off by saying...
WALLACE: Thirty seconds, sir.
TRUMP: ... OK -- that I'm very, very proud of -- millions and millions
of people have come to the Republican Party over the last little while.
They've come to the Republican Party. And by the way, the Democrats are
losing people. This is a trend that's taking place. It's the biggest
thing happening in politics, and I'm very proud to be a part of it. And
I'm going to give them some credit, too, even though they don't deserve
it. But the answer is: Yes, I will.
WALLACE: Yes, you will support the nominee of the party?
TRUMP: Yes, I will. Yes. I will.
smf: We have a leading presidential candidate advocating committing war
crimes as a campaign pledge and we have his three major opponents saying
they would support him if nominated. One of the candidates’ even
pitifully invokes Teddy Roosevelt’s Man in the Arena speech as
justification.
The Beastie Boys said that you have to fight for your right to party ...but is this the party über alles?
“Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?”
¡Onward/Adelante! - smf
STUDENTS+SCHOOLS FIND CAMPAIGN TALK CONFLICTS WITH NO-BULLIES MESSAGE
The New York Times from the Associated Press | http://nyti.ms/24Euh8O
BUFFALO, New York — March 3, 2016, 9:09 A.M. E.S.T. :: Ryan Lysek rose
to become vice president of his fifth-grade class at Lorraine Academy
in Buffalo, New York, after the sitting vice president was ousted for
saying things that went against the school's anti-bullying rules. So the
10-year-old is a little puzzled that candidates running to lead the
entire country can get away with name-calling and foul language.
The nasty personal tweets and sound bites of the 2016 Republican
presidential campaign are reverberating in classrooms, running counter
to the anti-bullying policies that have emerged in recent years amid
several high-profile suicides.
For teacher David Arenstam's high school class in Saco, Maine, the
campaign has been one long civics lesson: "Can you really ban a whole
group of people from coming into the country?" the students will ask, or
"What's the KKK (the white supremacist Ku Klux Klan), and do they still
really exist?"
But mostly, Arenstam said, when it comes to Republican Donald Trump,
students "can't believe nobody calls him on the carpet the way that they
would be called on the carpet if they said those things."
There's Donald Trump calling Ted Cruz a "loser" and a "liar" and
singling out Muslims and Mexicans for criticism. And there's Marco Rubio
mocking Trump's "worst spray tan in America" and calling him a "con
artist."
Cruz says nearly every day on the campaign trail, "I don't respond to
insults" and he has been careful not to engage when Trump and others
call him names. But during the Jan. 28 Republican debate which Trump
didn't attend, it was Cruz who made some quasi-insults he said Trump
would have lobbed: "Let me say I'm a maniac and everyone on this stage
is stupid, fat and ugly," Cruz said, snickering that he was getting "the
Donald Trump portion out of the way."
On Thursday, Mitt Romney, the 2012 Republican presidential nominee, jumped into the fray, branding Trump "a phony, a fraud."
"Imagine your children and your grandchildren acting the way he does," Romney said. "Would you welcome that?"
In the battle for the Democratic presidential nomination, Hillary
Clinton and Bernie Sanders have focused more on policy than on each
other. The Republican race is a different story.
"If students are following this election — and they should be — we have a
lot of re-educating to do," Buffalo school administrator Will Keresztes
said. Much of the rhetoric would violate not only the district's code
of conduct, he said, but the state's Dignity for All Students Act.
This is not the first campaign to get ugly, but educators, parents and
students say this one is particularly challenging because often the
biggest applause lines and headline-grabbers fly in the face of appeals
for students be respectful and kind.
Pickerington, Ohio, school counselor Kris Owen said students should be
reminded that potential colleges and employers won't find a Twitter feed
full of insults as amusing as some have found the candidates'. She
suggested using the comments as conversation starters.
"Say, 'Listen, how would you feel if someone was saying these things
about you? How could this person approach it differently or why don't
you all develop your own campaigns using positive tools instead of the
negativity?'" said Owen, who was recognized at the White House last
month as a School Counselor of the Year finalist.
Candidates "need to think of what's important, the issues, not whether
one gets a spray tan. It's just ridiculous," Ryan Lysek's mother, Cindy
Lysek, said.
__
Associated Press reporter Will Weissert in Austin, Texas, contributed to this report.
Commentary: THE POLITICAL GRANDSTANDING OF THE LAUSD BOARD + smf’s 2¢
Posted on LA School Report by Guest Contributor Caroline Bermudez | http://bit.ly/1L7uUBp
March 4, 2016 9:23 am :: With the Los Angeles Board of Education poised
to consider the expansion of another successful charter school at its
March 8 meeting, parents demanding more choice deserve to know what is
driving the district’s questionable practices around charter review.
There is an anti-charter narrative so strong that it defies reason, and
few illustrate it better than the board of the Los Angeles Unified
School District.
The board, according to charter school organizations, is denying their
petitions to open new schools. Since last July, LA Unified has turned
down seven petitions and approved seven others. Just two years ago, the
approval rating for new charters was 89 percent.
The reasons LA Unified cites for some of these charter schools not being
allowed to expand? The handling of food contracts and problems with
signatures.
And while established charter schools tend to have their contracts
renewed (this academic year, the approval rate was 100 percent, the
previous year it was 97 percent), the process is not without pain.
Charter leaders have long complained that the list of items a school
must “fix” to secure a renewal is onerous, time-consuming and has little
to do with students or outcomes.
Hillel Aron of L.A. Weekly wrote about the efforts of a former LA
Unified board member, Bennett Kayser, to turn down charter school
applications at every opportunity or even close down high-performing
schools.
According to Aron’s article, Andrew Thomas, an education researcher who
ran unsuccessfully for an LA Unified board position last year, said of
Kayser at a candidate debate: “To vote on principle or ideology to close
a school—it’s beyond the pale for me.”
But intellectually dishonest (or bankrupt, as was the case with Kayser)
criticisms of charter schools certainly do not begin or end in Los
Angeles. Policy researcher Conor Williams has written about the petty
battles waged against charters across the nation, silly squabbles that
include allegations of copyright violation.
Yes, you read that correctly. Copyright violation.
A successful and wildly popular school got grief because it removed
swear words from a book it was criticized for having its students read
as it was deemed too offensive in the first place by, fittingly enough, a
charter school opponent.
Does that sound as ridiculous to you as it does to me? I think I know the answer.
Williams rightly notes, “Charter school critics have abandoned any pretense of consistency—any talking points will do.”
These talking points, which are largely false, typically involve
spouting nonsense about charters being corporate (they are, repeat after
me, slowly and with feeling, public schools), funded by billionaires,
or adhere to strict disciplinary policies.
(It’s worth noting I recently visited a charter school where its
students practice yoga and happily run around the parking lot during
recess, lending further proof that charters greatly differ from one
another.)
Not only are these attacks bereft of reason, they sometimes veer into
harassment, like doxing poor women of color who dare voice their support
of the charter schools their children attend.
On March 8, LA Unified is expected to determine whether KIPP Comienza
Community Prep, the highest-performing school serving low-income
children in the entire state of California, can grow to accommodate
additional grades.
Eighty-four percent of its fourth graders scored proficient or advanced
in English language arts on the Smarter Balanced Assessment compared to
39 percent for the rest of the state. The numbers are similarly
staggering for their math scores—81 percent at Comienza, versus 35
percent for all California students. Most of these children, 80 percent,
qualify for free or reduced-price lunch.
KIPP comes to the table with two decades of running successful schools
in low-income communities, and a wealth of data about its results,
including three federally funded research studies with the most recent
one in 2015.
This should be an easy decision for the board.
Sarah Angel, managing director of advocacy for the California Charter
Schools Association, expressed her confusion over the district’s
reluctance to approve charter schools in a statement:
“It makes little sense that the district would start denying new
charters when the district acknowledges the existing charters are
succeeding. Successful charter schools should be supported by LAUSD to
grow to serve more families in their communities, but instead, many of
them are being prevented from growing. Those who are being denied those
new schools are the families most in need of better schools and more
choice in their neighborhoods.”
In a city dogged by educational shortcomings for its poor children of
color, the LA Unified board seems to be letting political grandstanding
come before giving more of its neediest children access into a proven
foothold of educational equity.
Charter schools should receive careful scrutiny but to have proven,
successful schools jump through unnecessary bureaucratic hoops is
irresponsible—and nakedly ideological. Those entrusted in government
service should hold themselves to much higher standards—as these schools
have done for the children they educate.
▲Caroline Bermudez is a senior writer at Education Post and former reporter at Chronicle of Philanthropy.
●● smf’s 2¢: FIRST: The expansion of the charter school being kvelled
about is on next Tuesday’s Board of Ed agenda, recommended for approval.
SECOND: Ms. Bermudez is a writer for Education Post, which calls itself
“a non-partisan communications organization dedicated to building
support for student-focused improvements in public education from
preschool to high school graduation. We believe that education is not
one-size-fits-all and that every family deserves to choose from a range
of schools to find the right fit for their children, including high
quality charter schools.”
That’s all very lovely, but the word “non-partisan” is defied by the
buzz words “every family deserves to choose” and “including high quality
charter schools”.
“Choice” is a polarizing word in political discourse; “A woman’s right
to choose” v. “parent’s right to choose a school.” And when did anyone
publicly advocate for low-or-middling quality charter schools? They
happen – and they have their champions – but that was never the initial
intent.
The original promise/premise/bargain/deal over charter schools was that
in exchange for being "unfettered," they were supposed to do a better
job of educating students -- or they would be closed.
Not “as good as” – or “almost as good as” – but better! [See: http://huff.to/1nWjqoS + http://nyti.ms/1TZlNEr] But when the California Charter School Law was written by charter school proponents in 1992 [http://bit.ly/1nlZb3S] they left that part out.
And THIRD, Ms. Bermudez “repeat after me, slowly and with feeling”
cuteness notwithstanding: the Federal Courts and the US Census Bureau (a
part of the Department of Commerce) have determined that charter
schools are publicly funded private schools. And nobody ever gave
parents some imagined right to choose to send their kids to an inferior
public school; not a taxpayer’s expense.
INGLEWOOD SCHOOLS LAGGING UNDER STATE TAKEOVER, STATE AUDITOR SAYS
• REPORT CONCLUDES THAT THE DISTRICT’S FINANCES AND
OPERATIONS HAVE NOT SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVED UNDER THE STATE
SUPERINTENDENT’S CONTROL.
• STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION NEEDS TO BETTER COMMUNICATE HIS APPROACH FOR REFORMING THE DISTRICT
Adolfo Guzman-Lopez, KPCC 89.3 | http://bit.ly/1X0Cy1e
March 4, 05:02 AM :: The Inglewood Unified School District's finances
and operations have not significantly improved under the administration
of the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, officials with the
California State Auditor's office told residents at a public hearing
Thursday night.
“Deficit spending has continued in the three years following the state
take over and the savings called for in the district’s fiscal recovery
plan have not materialized,” said Deputy State Auditor Ben Belnap.
The 11,000-student school district was on the verge of bankruptcy in
July, 2012, when school board members requested a $55 million bailout
loan from the state. In accepting the loan, the board gave up its
authority and State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson
appointed a state administrator to run the school district.
But there's been growing criticism of Torlakson’s oversight of Inglewood
Unified, one of only nine school districts in the state that has
requested a state bailout loan.
The audit found that expenditures increased from $115.3 million to
$125.5 million between fiscal years 2012-13 and 2014-15. Getting the
budget into the black is critical, the auditor said, because it’s a
requirement for a return of local control and it’s the only way the
school district will be able to repay the $29 million dollars it has
spent from the loan it requested.
“The state has done a disservice, at this time, to this district,”
Johnny Young, a former Inglewood Unified school board member, said as he
left the hearing in the Inglewood High School auditorium.
State Assemblywoman Autumn Burke said recent reports of dilapidated and
dangerous facilities should prompt Torlakson’s office to move Inglewood
to the top of his priority list.
“I know you guys have a lot of schools but this one is incredibly
important, this community is incredibly important, and it's going
through an incredible time of change," Burke said. "It is inexcusable to
allow our children to suffer the way they have."
The state auditor recommended the state administrator to come up with
annual goals for the school district to address the improvements
outlined by the district's fiscal crisis management team. The auditor
also recommended the state administrator communicate what it’s going to
take for the school district to return to local control and the progress
toward that goal.
The audit was released last November but it was the first time officials
spoke about it publicly in Inglewood. The hearing was organized by
State Assemblyman Mike Gipson, the chair of the Joint Legislative Audit
Committee.
Torlakson aide Jason Spencer, who represented his boss at the meeting,
said that day-to-day management of the district's finances isn't in the
hands of the California Department of Education, but rather rests with
the state's administrator, a position that has been held by four
different people since 2012.
“This is not an instance where the state department is running the district,” Spencer said.
And officials heaped praise on Vincent Matthews, the new state
administrator who’s been on the job less than six months but who
officials said appears to be a better fit than the previous three state
administrators.
“Dr. Matthews is one of the few individuals in the state that has been a
state administrator that has returned powers to a district board,”
Spencer said.
Most of the 100 people in attendance were elected officials and their
staffs, civic leaders, school district employees and their union
representatives.
“I thought this hearing was for the community,” Inglewood teachers union
president Kelly Iwamoto said and the hearing’s organizers should have
made sure that the auditorium was full.
One of the few parents in attendance was Miriam Morris, who represented
the school district’s Parent Teacher Association council.
Inglewood Unified has lost many students due to low school performance,
rising housing costs, and more charter schools opening in the area. But,
Morris said, she is seeing progress.
“We see a shift in tone and we see things happen right away,” Morris said about Matthews’ leadership.
Case in point, she said: After she enrolled her kindergartener at an
Inglewood school this year the school district moved quickly to create a
dual language Spanish immersion program. And that, Morris said, gives
her hope that this school is the right place for her family.
A BETTER SAT …OR JUST A BETTER BOTTOM LINE FOR THE COLLEGE BOARD?
Op-Ed by Karin Klein in the L.A. Times | http://lat.ms/1VWUV75
▼NEWS STORY: On March 5, 2014, the College Board announced that a
redesigned version of the SAT (originally called the Scholastic Aptitude
Test, then the Scholastic Assessment Test, then the SAT I: Reasoning
Test, then the SAT Reasoning Test, and now simply the SAT) would be
administered for the first time in 2016. The exam will revert to the
1600-point scale, the essay will be optional, and students will have 3
hours to take the exam plus 50 additional minutes to complete the essay.
Approximately 277,000 students are taking the new+improved SAT in its
first national administration this weekend. The total 463,000 reflects
the number of students who will have taken the new test in March, as of
this weekend. Some school districts held SAT School Day this week, where
all students take the test in school.| http://lat.ms/21csUK4
March 4, 2016 :: David Coleman, president of the College Board, wants
everyone to know that the new SAT, which students will take for the
first time Saturday, is just as good as the old test at predicting who
would do well in college. Of course, he also wanted to be clear, in
introducing the SAT to a conference of the Education Writers Assn., that
his test was new and improved as well. Left unmentioned: The revamp
might do more for the College Board's bottom line than for the needs of
colleges, universities and students.
That's not to say the College Board hasn't improved the SAT. For one
thing, it makes the silly essay portion of the test optional; it was
both gameable and, in terms of the way it was scored, hardly an
indicator of who can write well. The new SAT also reformats the testing
of vocabulary, eliminating the $4 words that required weeks of
drill-and-kill memorization and then would never be used again. Plus,
there's no longer an extra penalty for guessing wrong.
Also to its credit, the College Board has added services to help the
students who can't afford thousands of dollars' worth of private test
prep. Free online prep and practice tests are available through the
nonprofit Khan Academy. And students whose income is low enough to
qualify them for free test taking also automatically qualify for waivers
of college application fees, which normally cost about $80 per college,
not an insignificant sum for working families.
But most important is that the new SAT is supposed to align with the
Common Core standards that have been adopted to one extent or another in
40-plus states, including California. This includes a heavier emphasis
on reading — even in the math problems — and more critical thinking
skills. That's what colleges say they want, and what students are
lacking.
What Coleman didn't spend much time discussing are problems with the SAT
that haven't been solved. The test may require more critical thinking
skills, but it is still coachable; it isn't going to put an end to the
big and growing high-end test-preparation industry that gives affluent
kids a leg up on the system. Poor kids get two free shots at taking the
SAT; kids with more money can take the test five to 10 times, and some
of them do. Then many of the colleges allow them to “superscore” —
report only their best scores on each section.
I recently met a sophomore who's taken the test five times. His mother
said she had spent $10,000 on test preparation so far, and his scores
had risen by 300 points.
And what about Coleman's assertion that the test has its usual utility
for college admissions officers? If the SAT is a reflection of the
Common Core lessons, and those lessons reflect the skills that colleges
need to see in students, why isn't the new test a better predictor of
freshman college success than the old one?
It's not that either test, old or new, would do a bad job of identifying
a good student. Studies have shown that the SAT is almost as good as a
student's grades at predicting college success during freshman year.
More important, using the standardized test in addition to grades gave admissions officers a better picture than grades alone.
Beyond freshman year, however, research on the SAT's predictive value
gets mixed reviews. A study of colleges that have gone test-optional —
applicants can report their scores or not — found that students who
didn't submit their scores fared just as well throughout college as
those who did, though they might have opted for easier courses.
A recent report by the Harvard Graduate School of Education suggested
that at some schools, the SAT might be a good predictor of success — for
instance, a mediocre math score probably indicates a kid who would
struggle at MIT or Caltech — but at others, it might not make much of a
difference.
One thing is certain: The new test will help the College Board grow its
business. The SAT's once-weak competitor, the ACT, was chosen as the
required admissions test by 15 states that pay for the first sitting.
But the College Board recently managed to peel off a couple of those
states, probably in part because of the SAT overhaul.
More generally, our national obsession with test scores and their
meaning of course redounds to the College Board's financial benefit.
Some states are starting to look at whether they can reduce the number
of tests taken by high school students by substituting the SAT or ACT
for other standardized tests. That would dramatically expand the reach
of both organizations into the increasingly lucrative
kindergarten-through-12th-grade testing — a big incentive to rewrite the
test around Common Core.
The new SAT is probably a better test than the last one, and admissions
officers may prefer it. Its greatest value, however, is to the
organization that produces it and the test-prep industry as a whole.
▲Karin Klein writes about education for The Times editorial board.
HIGHLIGHTS, LOWLIGHTS & THE NEWS THAT DOESN'T
FIT: The Rest (but not necessarily the best) of the Stories from Other
Sources
L.A. UNIFED KEEPS SCHOOLS OPEN FRIDAY AFTER "NON-CREDIBLE" THREAT- LA Times http://lat.ms/1U1zDpy
Threat Made At LAUSD Middle, High Schools Deemed ‘Non-Credible’ « CBS L.A.
http://cbsloc.al/1LZr4W1
INGLEWOOD SCHOOLS LAGGING UNDER STATE TAKEOVER, STATE AUDITOR SAYS
http://bit.ly/1p5Tedp
A BETTER SAT …OR JUST A BETTER BOTTOM LINE FOR THE COLLEGE BOARD?
http://bit.ly/1TVuwse
Commentary: THE POLITICAL GRANDSTANDING OF THE LAUSD BOARD + smf’s 2¢
http://bit.ly/1oWeSQC
SUPT. KING CALLS FOR PEACE WITH CHARTERS: "IT'S NOT US v. THEM", GETS EARFUL FROM PARENTS (3 stories+2¢)
http://bit.ly/1TcvD6P
STUDENTS+SCHOOLS FIND THAT CAMPAIGN TALK CONFLICTS WITH 'NO-BULLIES' MESSAGE - The New York Times
http://nyti.ms/24Euh8O
LEARN DIFFERENT: SILICON VALLEY DISRUPTS EDUCATION (Good Read!/Longform!)| The New Yorker
http://bit.ly/1T86vy3
EVENTS: Coming up next week...
• Tues. March 8, 2016 - 10:00 a.m. - REGULAR BOARD
MEETING INCLUDING CLOSED SESSION ITEMS – Agenda: bit.ly/1TzfdGl
• Tues. March 8, 2016 -- 1:00 p.m. - REGULAR BOARD MEETING – Revised agenda: bit.ly/1p7lCvw
*Dates and times subject to change. ________________________________________
• SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION BOND OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE:
http://www.laschools.org/bond/
Phone: 213-241-5183
____________________________________________________
• LAUSD FACILITIES COMMUNITY OUTREACH CALENDAR:
http://www.laschools.org/happenings/
Phone: 213-241.8700
What can YOU do?
• E-mail, call or write your school board member:
Scott.Schmerelson@lausd.net • 213-241-8333
Monica.Garcia@lausd.net • 213-241-6180
Ref.Rodriguez@lausd.net • 213-241-5555
George.McKenna@lausd.net • 213-241-6382
Monica.Ratliff@lausd.net • 213-241-6388
Richard.Vladovic@lausd.net • 213-241-6385
Steve.Zimmer@lausd.net • 213-241-6387
...or the Superintendent:
superintendent@lausd.net • 213-241-7000
...or your city councilperson, mayor, county supervisor, state
legislator, the governor, member of congress, senator - or the
president. Tell them what you really think! • Find your state
legislator based on your home address. Just go to: http://bit.ly/dqFdq2 • There are 26 mayors and five county supervisors representing jurisdictions within LAUSD, the mayor of LA can be reached at mayor@lacity.org • 213.978.0600
• Call or e-mail Governor Brown: 213-897-0322 e-mail: http://www.govmail.ca.gov/
• Open the dialogue. Write a letter to the editor. Circulate these
thoughts. Talk to the principal and teachers at your local school.
• Speak with your friends, neighbors and coworkers. Stay on top of education issues. Don't take my word for it!
• Get involved at your neighborhood school. Volunteer in the classroom.
Join your PTA. Serve on a School Site Council. Be there for a child -
and ultimately: For all children.
• If you are eligible to become a citizen, BECOME ONE.
• If you a a citizen, REGISTER TO VOTE at http://registertovote.ca.gov/
• If you are registered, VOTE LIKE THE FUTURE DEPENDS ON IT. THEY DO!
|
