In his last public statement before leaving the district, former Rochester schools Superintendent Bolgen Vargas recommended that the school board close one school a year until the quality of city schools improves.
Vargas often said that without significant improvements, the city school district will continue to lose students to charter, private, and suburban schools. But Vargas and the school board often disagreed on how to address the declining enrollment.
Board president Van White not only opposes closing more city schools, he’s advocating opening new ones. About two years ago, he floated the idea of a School of the Arts for the west side of the city; it didn’t get far.
He’s now assembling a panel to review the viability of a military academy; White says that it could be in the form of a program or a distinctly separate school.
Whether to close existing schools that aren’t doing well or open new ones has been a conundrum for large districts with a high number of failing schools for more than a decade – much of it the result of No Child Left Behind. It’s still hard for many educators to say with confidence which, if either, is the right way to go.
And it’s one reason why charter schools are frequently touted by educators and parents as worthy of a try even if they aren’t, in the end, the solution.
What doesn’t get as much attention in discussions about improving schools is how difficult it is to open new ones and close those that are failing. For instance, opening another SOTA would require a specific type of space suitable for arts, music, and theater education.
Opening another School Without Walls, what’s referred to as a consortium school, is a challenge mainly because the state approves so few of them.
Adding another trade school for students not interested in pursuing a four-year college degree is a perennial recommendation. But much of what was taught in trade schools 30 years ago isn’t going to lead to a good paying job today. And frequently the programs that will lead to solid careers are now offered at the community college level.
Then there are the political and financial hurdles.
White says that the district needs to pursue innovative solutions, such as its partnership between the University of Rochester and East High School.
“The military academy is not a vision for replacing a struggling school,” he says. “We can’t keep thinking in a deficit model. This is being forward-thinking.”
This article appears in Jan 6-12, 2016.
incredible that a Board is leading this in the first place and not the district visionary-the Superintendent, whoever that might be. Boards govern not design. That is the leaders job. Secondly, it is interesting to see a board that advocates for softening discipline by mandating restorative justice programs promote a very strict military approach. Lastly, who in the world considers a military approach to be innovative? The RCSD is in huge trouble and Mr. Whites desire to run it himself is crazy. He must find a courageous new Superintendent as unlikely as this is.
Gotta Say It:
Section 2503 of New York State’s Education Law defines and states what a board’s role is – including the responsibility for establishing and maintaining “schools and classes as such board shall deem necessary….”
Additionally, I thought I’d provide you other portions of Section 2503 for your consideration and review. That section states quite clearly that the Board of Education:
3. Shall have in all respects the superintendence, management and control of the educational affairs of the district…
4. a. Shall establish and maintain such free elementary schools, high schools, training schools, vocational and industrial schools, technical schools, night schools, part-time schools, vacation schools, schools for
adults, schools for physically or mentally handicapped or delinquent children or such other schools or classes as such board shall deem necessary to meet the needs and demands of the city…
c. Shall authorize the general courses of study which shall be given in the schools and shall approve the content of such courses before they become operative.
5. Shall create, abolish, maintain and consolidate such positions, divisions, boards or bureaus as, in its judgment, may be necessary for the proper and efficient administration of its work; shall appoint properly qualified persons to fill such positions, including a
superintendent of schools, such associate, assistant and other superintendents, directors, supervisors, principals, teachers, lecturers, special instructors, medical inspectors, nurses, claims auditors, attendance officers, secretaries, clerks, custodians, janitors
and other employees and other persons or experts in educational, social or recreational work or in the business management or direction of its affairs as said board shall determine necessary for the efficient
management of the schools and other educational, social, recreational and business activities; and shall determine their duties except as otherwise provided herein.
In addition to the above referenced statute, I firmly believe that if we continue to pin our success on one leader, many of our children will continue to fail. Every one of us is a leader and is called upon to use our creative energies, ideas, and experiences to turn this District around.
Respectfully,
Van White
Mr. White,
Just a final thought because I am sure many others in the community feel the same way as I do. The “We are all leaders” argument doesn’t fly any more. Hundreds and thousands of parents and community members over thirty years have attempted to help lead but in the end, there a few people in a room behind closed doors that make the decisions. We all know this and no lengthy policy statements will convince us otherwise. Hope is lost and the only thing you can do to change this is to hire a new Superintendent willing to break through the same stagnant system you control. Unfortunately there is very little doubt that you will (instead) select someone who will say “yes” to your commands and maintain the status quo. My money goes on someone already inside the system who has already told you he or she will obey you.
I hate the concept of a military academy simply because military invokes thoughts of war and guns. How about a peace academy instead?
Gotta Say It:
My original post is not a “lengthy policy statement”. Rather it is, in fact, an exact quote from the LAW. Regrettably, that law has not been followed – which, I believe, accounts for the decades of failure and poor district outcomes.
Unfortunately, and contrary to the clear legal mandates I’ve cited, many (including yourself) have come to erroneously believe that legally and strategically it is best if just one person leads our City Schools. *
Decades of failure suggests that that approach is not working for us. In fact, folks who continue to think this way will, as Einstein once observed, continue to reap the same sad and disappointing academic results.
Furthermore, it saddens me that you have such a cynical view of a concept that, quite frankly, underlies the very foundations of our government – “WE the people”.
Needless to say, I do not share your views, as I vervently believe that everyone can be and must be a leader (in their homes, schools, and neighborhoods) if we are to be successful in our efforts to transform our schools and community.
Respectfully,
Van Henri White
*BTW I do not seek to be that “one” person or leader. For, in my mind, the results and outcomes would be no different. Instead our approach to dealing with our significant challenges must be collaborative and community based. That is why, as President, most of my recommendations for Board action, come from broad community based advisory committees.
A military style academy would be perfect for the RCSD. The structure and discipline it would provide would be beneficial to students (especially males) who suffer from lack of structure in their home life.