Re my recent post on Mayor L. Douglas Wilder's use of a letter "Richmond Proves Buckley Right" to The RICHMOND-TIMES DISPATCH in his VISIONS NEWSLETTER:
The T-D printed my rebuttal to Raymond B. Wallace's attack on the Richmond City Council on Thur. April 10, 2008. It gave the letter an appropriate, clever caption: "Letter Blasting Council Has It All Backward." And none of my points got lost in the editing.
Richmond City Council should be praised for the restraint it has shown, or it should be criticized for not being tough enough. But it would probably need a united front to be tougher.
It is the Mayor who has been the bully and the "pistol packing" warrior declaring no more olive branches.
Hopefully, the State Supreme Court will soon resolve the critical-crucial conflicts, and the city can take it from there.
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Monday, April 7, 2008
"Shape Up or Ship Out" II
I am only semi computer literate, so please bear with me.
SAVE RICHMOND http://saverichmond.com/?=482 argues and presents documentation that the improved SOL scores in the Richmond Public Schools (RPS) are due to the fact that the poor performers are being forced out. SAVE RICHMOND and its sources point to high out of school suspensions and dropout rates.
This is bad if poor performers are being discriminated against for out of school suspensions. If poor performers are being suspended for things good performers get away with, this is intolerable.
However, after thirty-nine years as an educator, it is clear to me that there is a strong correlation between behavior and performance.
If out of school suspensions are meted out on an even handed basis, we have a different set of issues.
This brings to mind an old, politically incorrect sexist (But it illustrates a point.) "joke." The man drives the woman to a remote spot and says: "If you are not here for what I am here for, you are going to be here when I am gone."
Students and parents need to understand that the schools will be there when those students who are not there for what the schools are there for are gone.
The issue is certainly complex. Too much emphasis is placed on the SOLS. There should be alternatives to out of school suspensions. And most importantly, "Good communities make good schools." I will write in detail on this at a later date.
Those who want to learn or who understand the importance must be protected. Those who would interfere with the teaching and learning process should "shape up or ship out."
SAVE RICHMOND http://saverichmond.com/?=482 argues and presents documentation that the improved SOL scores in the Richmond Public Schools (RPS) are due to the fact that the poor performers are being forced out. SAVE RICHMOND and its sources point to high out of school suspensions and dropout rates.
This is bad if poor performers are being discriminated against for out of school suspensions. If poor performers are being suspended for things good performers get away with, this is intolerable.
However, after thirty-nine years as an educator, it is clear to me that there is a strong correlation between behavior and performance.
If out of school suspensions are meted out on an even handed basis, we have a different set of issues.
This brings to mind an old, politically incorrect sexist (But it illustrates a point.) "joke." The man drives the woman to a remote spot and says: "If you are not here for what I am here for, you are going to be here when I am gone."
Students and parents need to understand that the schools will be there when those students who are not there for what the schools are there for are gone.
The issue is certainly complex. Too much emphasis is placed on the SOLS. There should be alternatives to out of school suspensions. And most importantly, "Good communities make good schools." I will write in detail on this at a later date.
Those who want to learn or who understand the importance must be protected. Those who would interfere with the teaching and learning process should "shape up or ship out."
Friday, April 4, 2008
Raymond B. Wallace, Jr., Wilder Attack City Council
On March 29, 2008, The Richmond TIMES-DISPATCH published a letter from Raymond B. Wallace, Jr. Entitled "Richmond Proves Buckley Right," Mr. Wallace's letter was an illogical, inaccurate, and irrational attack on the Richmond City Council.
The letter's caption and Wallace's preface reflect his pathetically absurd effort to relate a statement by the late William F. Buckley, Jr. to City Council and Richmond. Buckley said he would prefer to be governed by the first 2000 people in the Boston phone directory than the Harvard University faculty.
Buckley's--highly debatable--point was that a random collection of "common" folk would govern better than "liberal" academics. But for some odd, peculiar, strange reason that reminds Wallace of Richmond City Council. How many liberal academics are on Council?
Three days later, on April 1, 2008, Mayor L. Douglas Wilder's VISIONS NEWSLETTER captioned "Notwithstanding Obstructionists, Richmond Moves Forward" quoted some of Wallace's nonsense:
"With one Council member generating gaseous platitudes calling a City official "crook," another playing nasty turf politics with a popularly-elected Mayor, a third continuing to excuse and blindly supporting the mediocrity of Richmond’s Public Schools at ridiculous cost, a repetitive majority refusing to give the Mayor his appointees, followed by their spending tens of thousands of City dollars in gotcha legal battles, Richmond citizens have been ill served."
Wallace has bought the Mayor's con game that the Mayor is the devoted public servant and the City Council is obstructionist. Not really, Mr. Wallace!
Let us move past Walace's criticism of three unnamed members of Council to his attack on a Council majority. A majority of Council has not refused "to give the Mayor his appointees." Rather, Council refused to confirm one nominee on the basis of his qualifications and his controversial behavior. And Council approved a subsequent nominee without opposition.
Why does Wallace and others think City Council should be a rubber stamp?
"Gotcha legal battles?!?" Hardly. Council filed one lawsuit and joined the Richmond Public Schools in a second. Council bent over backwards to accommodate the Mayor. It agreed to expand his powers. It used the only weapon it had after he declared the power to hire and fire its employees, advertised their positions and fired the one who did not reapply for her job.
City Council is hardly perfect. But now that Richmond has an executive branch of government and a legislative branch, City Council stands head and shoulders above the Mayor in credibility, ethics, integrity and professionalism.
That explains why the Mayor increased his public relations staff by thirty percent. He needs to search out the Wallaces of Richmond and try to project them as a majority.
The letter's caption and Wallace's preface reflect his pathetically absurd effort to relate a statement by the late William F. Buckley, Jr. to City Council and Richmond. Buckley said he would prefer to be governed by the first 2000 people in the Boston phone directory than the Harvard University faculty.
Buckley's--highly debatable--point was that a random collection of "common" folk would govern better than "liberal" academics. But for some odd, peculiar, strange reason that reminds Wallace of Richmond City Council. How many liberal academics are on Council?
Three days later, on April 1, 2008, Mayor L. Douglas Wilder's VISIONS NEWSLETTER captioned "Notwithstanding Obstructionists, Richmond Moves Forward" quoted some of Wallace's nonsense:
"With one Council member generating gaseous platitudes calling a City official "crook," another playing nasty turf politics with a popularly-elected Mayor, a third continuing to excuse and blindly supporting the mediocrity of Richmond’s Public Schools at ridiculous cost, a repetitive majority refusing to give the Mayor his appointees, followed by their spending tens of thousands of City dollars in gotcha legal battles, Richmond citizens have been ill served."
Wallace has bought the Mayor's con game that the Mayor is the devoted public servant and the City Council is obstructionist. Not really, Mr. Wallace!
Let us move past Walace's criticism of three unnamed members of Council to his attack on a Council majority. A majority of Council has not refused "to give the Mayor his appointees." Rather, Council refused to confirm one nominee on the basis of his qualifications and his controversial behavior. And Council approved a subsequent nominee without opposition.
Why does Wallace and others think City Council should be a rubber stamp?
"Gotcha legal battles?!?" Hardly. Council filed one lawsuit and joined the Richmond Public Schools in a second. Council bent over backwards to accommodate the Mayor. It agreed to expand his powers. It used the only weapon it had after he declared the power to hire and fire its employees, advertised their positions and fired the one who did not reapply for her job.
City Council is hardly perfect. But now that Richmond has an executive branch of government and a legislative branch, City Council stands head and shoulders above the Mayor in credibility, ethics, integrity and professionalism.
That explains why the Mayor increased his public relations staff by thirty percent. He needs to search out the Wallaces of Richmond and try to project them as a majority.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)