open to success wrote on Jun 27, 2008 9:49 PM:Looks like O'Reilly is working hard to create distrust among the teachers and parents. I wonder why the head of the union prefers to keep using a teaching method that fails 60% of the students? You would think that after 8 years she would be open to a more successful approach. Could it be the union has a vested interest in the students failure?

Informed wrote on Jun 28, 2008 12:30 AM:I have been a member of the school site council for the last two years and am amazed at how little power this group has had to make change for our school. We wanted to hire qualified basic skills teachers to work with struggling students on skills identified by classroom teachers and assessment data. We allocated funds for these important positions, and then the district office would not allow us to hire anyone. The only ones allowed to be hired are Lindamood Bell teachers who can only handle three small groups of 5 students each. This meets the needs of far fewer students and takes them away from important classroom instruction, whereas a basic skills teacher works inside the classroom keeping the instruction in tandem with the rest of the class. Also, the basic skills teacher can work on more skill areas than a Lindamood Bell teacher. Basic skills works with reading, writing, math and spelling, but Lindamood Bell only works on comprehension. School site councils are closer to the heartbeat of their schools and make informed decisions. They should not be forced to give over funding to support someone's pet project.

vistamar wrote on Jun 28, 2008 8:50 AM:The new proposal by Bales for School Site Councils would render these councils powerless. With that said, serving on a site council, or even having one at all, will really be a waste of time for all involved.

TOW wrote on Jun 28, 2008 9:15 AM:The headline is very misleading. The very fact that the administration and board are creating this policy is part of what is CREATING the tension. Furthermore, to say that the district "compromised" by giving Casita $35,000 to spend anyway they wanted is also spin. Casita was supposed to have far more than that. Is it a compromise if I take $200,000 your money and then give you back $35,000? The first writer (Open to Success) will have a surprise when this year's test scores come out and finds out that the current approach is NOT working. O'Reilly and "Informed" hit the nail on the head.

Concerned wrote on Jun 28, 2008 9:44 AM:For 2 days, two summers ago, teachers were exposed to LmB strategies. Since then, no follow up has been provided. Basically, the millions spent are on less than 2% of the students who are served by a costly specialist in a 5 to 1 ratio. They are pulled from the classroom for hours. No specific data on these students has been disclosed. Instead, administrators have used CST scores that have gone up due to the hard work of teachers before LmB and claim it as their results which is no way accurate. LmB is only one tool in the tool box and other school districts recognize the price tag does not serve the students well. When will our leaders wake up?

What is Legal wrote on Jun 28, 2008 10:00 AM:The fact is that there are laws in place that define the role of the School Site Council. As stated above, School site councils are closer to the heartbeat of their schools and make informed decisions. These councils are made up of teachers and parents that have an investment in the success of both their children and their students.
If LMB was as good as what is being "sold" by the superintendent then they would invest in that program too. To many the LMB can not compete with other avenunes of educational improvement. It is not a "silver bullet" and does not provide the greatest "bang for the buck". Mr. Gibson should see this by now but is obviously blinded by the spin from the superintendent. Most LMB data uses vague terms such as "significant" gains with no specific numeric information. In essence, it's a sell job that spins the limited group data to project the possiblity of mass educational success. More and more people are seeing the connection between the superintendent and this limited program. LMB serves a limited group of students only and at the same time denies them the much needed classroom time. If this were not a legal issue the superintendent and board would have declared how the funds were to be used and directed the councils. (End of story) They tried and were legally challenged by the councils. I think this is healthy. Have debate and discourse on how these funds should be used. Do not allow a "top down" blind dictate from the superintendent and board. If the LMB program was so great everyone should be asking for more. It simply is not. (By the way, "Why did San Diego City School District dismiss the LMB program years ago after an initial evaluation?)

Former VUSD parent wrote on Jun 28, 2008 10:33 AM:As the parent of two now-grown children who attended VUSD in years past and received an excellent education, and as an active member of the community who has served on School Site Councils, I urge parents to vehemently protest this move on the part of the current administration. School site councils were created as part of a series of checks and balances--to combat the abuses of power that are now taking place daily in VUSD. Despite the spin that has been placed on it by the media, Lindamood Bell is an ineffective program for most of the students for whom it has been "prescribed". There is absolutely no real data to support continuing to spend millions of dollars on it, and the School Site Councils know this. Please parents, DO NOT let this administration become any more dictatorial than it already has. School Board members come and go, as do superintendents, but the legacy of your children's education will remain. Remember: If these administrators and School Board members were genuinely concerned about our children, they would be welcoming parental involvement rather than attempting to squelch it.

Tax Payer wrote on Jun 28, 2008 11:33 AM:This money is from tax payers. The school district is responsible on how it is spent. The board needs to exercise oversight. I understand there are millions of dollars at the disposal of teachers and the teachers union. Some of the money has been spent on t-shirts and barbecues at a time when our children do not have books in the classroom. No one has the right to spend tax money without accountability.

fumin human wrote on Jun 28, 2008 11:58 AM:Gibson wants to be sure that each dollar is spent wisely. Why now? Millions have been spent to service 2.5% of the student population. Admin. will tell you differently. I am a LMB teacher. I work with 9 students all day every day and teach either visualizing or seeing stars strategies.. I get paid the same salary as my collegues teaching 34 students and all subjects. I am supervised by a young girl who is 24 years old who does not have a teaching credential or has never worked in a classroom with children. Her job is to tell me if I am teaching correctly. She was available to do demonstration lessons in the classroom but due to ineptness teachers refuse to have her do her lessons with the students. My question to the voters is, Is this wise spending?

Concerned wrote on Jun 28, 2008 12:05 PM:"Former VUSD Parent's" remarks were well said and should be amplified! I had not attended a School Board meeting in years, but went to last week's. It is interesting how Gibson and Hubbard spoke about how important communication is and what a great job everyone was doing. Gibson personally came outside to the overflow and told them their voice would not be heard this night (regarding new start and end times)and those who pulled cards might be heard at end of evening if possible. He also said this was an administrative matter anyway and pointless. Be prepared for more of this. Not only will School Site Councils be taken over, but any voice parents and groups might like to share will be silenced and disregarded as well.

Vista Teacher wrote on Jun 28, 2008 12:25 PM:Cut out the Middle Man! Cut Administration in half, get rid of the Union, return control of the classrooms to the teachers and return control of the District to the local community.

By the way, SSCs should be elected by the local community and NOT by PTAs. It is the Community's Tax Dollars that are at stake here. Special Interests often tend to have too narrow a focus: "MY child would do better if..." Who wins when the money is focused only on a few children? As for LMB: Just pick something and stick to it! LMB is no better than most others, but so far VUSD has failed to standardize on their reading improvement programs. Even though Administration is pushing LMB, the Union is fighting back via the rumor mill and newsletters/phone calls to teachers. They plan to use this, and anything else they can find to divide the parents and teachers so that they can remain in control. Time to vote our Union OUT and take back our Schools and Classrooms! This is America and we have a legal right to work without fear of retribution from the Union or the Government!!!

TOW wrote on Jun 28, 2008 1:14 PM:I defy "taxpayer" to prove when school money has been spent on t-shirts or barbecues. If there are such expenditures, they are paid for by special funds, such as PTA. And on the subject, PTA does not elect members of School Site Councils. Ballots are sent out to every parent. I also defy "Taxpayer" to name one school which does not have a textbook for each child. Our school had a state "walk-through" to show every child with every textbook...Results of a lawsuit whose name I don't remember.
I used to have issues with the union as well, but on this subject they are on the side of children and the taxpayer.
Also, btw...regarding LMB testing, it includes ORAL reading comprehension tests. That blows me away! I don't get it!

Hey Taxpayer wrote on Jun 28, 2008 2:53 PM:We're all taxpayers.. what makes you different? You can be a public employee and still you are a taxpayer. That line gets really old.

What makes you think that the teachers and the union have "millions of dollars at their disposal?" Clearly you have never been on a School Site Council. I've been on one as a parent at an elementary school and years later as a teacher at a high school, and I can attest to the fact that the monies received are allocated per Board goals. The goal of allocating these monies is to benefit all children, not just 2.5% i.e. LMB. You would see improvement in all children that were in a 5-1 student-teacher ratio for a much lower cost. It costs around $80/hr per student for LMB. This figure came from the lips of a LMB employee.

VUSD Trustees are an oxymoron wrote on Jun 28, 2008 4:40 PM:School Site Councils are one of the most pure forms of school funding in California. It empowers individual schools, teachers, parents and students to prioritize their school needs and creates considerable buy-in by creating site specific projects and ideas for the good of the individual school and the children it educates.

In Vista’s case, the VUSD school Board has, again, overstepped their boundaries as trustees. Every district in North County knows that the Vista school board has mismanaged their state funding for years and now they must now seize money from the very source they should be protecting, the individual schools.

It is completely unethical that Jim Gibson and the rest of the school board can justify this travesty in the name of trying to keep funding Lindamood Bell, a program that is too expensive in this time of financial crisis.

Why weren’t any of the irate parents interviewed for this article? How convenient for Jim Gibson to control the spin again in the name of his own compromised ethics.

Frustrated wrote on Jun 28, 2008 4:46 PM:Any of the school site council critics should see for themselves how the self funding is really used at the individual site. Then, again, if they were really informed, those critics wouldn't be allowed to complain and stereotype once they knew the facts.

Ha wrote on Jun 28, 2008 5:01 PM:It sure looks like "Open to Success" is a VUSD school board member in disguise. Yeah, right, the union has a vested interest in student failure! Get real!

Samuel wrote on Jun 28, 2008 5:39 PM:I admit my lack of knowledge regarding the Site Funds and how they are controlled. As I am writing this none of the 12 previous blogs gave any information to help not only me but many others that also have very little knowledge about this matter. Why is this? When I was attending public schools in the mid-west in the 50s and 60s I found that my best teachers exhibited two traits. One was their ability to find interesting ways to fully explain the topics being studied and the other was their common sense. From the introductions to several of the blogs it is obvious that teachers did offer their opinions and yet they failed to explain the facts on the Site Funds. I am asking that someone take the time and give the taxpayers a fairly close total dollar amount that the District is giving to these Site Funds, what can and can’t these funds be used on and who decides how they are disbursed and can balances be rolled over or does the school lose the funds if not used? These are just a few questions that come to mind and please add as much information as possible. I find the lack of common sense being displayed by many of the teachers disturbing. It is obvious to this taxpayer that some VTA officials and some teachers are trying everything within their power to end Dr. Bales tenure as our Superintendent. As I have mentioned in previous blogs our often-fractured Board of Trustees VOTED UNANIMOUSLY to hire someone of Dr. Bales stature to take over the District. Why? In my opinion because of the information that the Board receives in closed session that can not be released to the public. I have a feeling that this also covers the Board’s decisions regarding the probationary teachers. The Board can not release information that they receive in closed sessions. Unfortunately, this still does not stop the comments from some that took shots at the Board earlier this year. Unlike some I do not believe that any Board Member has a personal vendetta against teachers. Their only concern is the education of our students. Again as I have said in previous blogs the Board was forced to hire someone like Dr. Bales because of the failure of our kids being able to learn for the last 12 to 15 years. I can’t help but wonder why we as taxpayers, parents and VUSD employees allowed this to happen. I guarantee two things; if Dr. Bales is forced out the District will be taken over by either the State or County and we will never be able to hire a quality superintendent after the way Dr. Bales has been treated. We have had our warnings.

RRR wrote on Jun 28, 2008 6:55 PM:To taxpayer....You're saying that no one has the right to spend money without accountability. That is our point exactly. Dr. Bales misappropriated the transfer of $150,000 from Bobier's grant. She should be held accountable for how it is spent, considering only about $15,000 goes to pay the LMB teachers. The four men on the board should be held accountable for the expenditure of more than $2 million for Successmaker or for budgeting Greg Sinn's position when they knew he was leaving and they couldn't pay for some measly (sp?) classified positions. School Site Councils are trying to hold the DISTRICT accountable, not the other way around.

wondering wrote on Jun 28, 2008 8:51 PM:Might I add that this whole mess has got everyone stressed-out and mad.From Teachers,aids, custodians,maintenance workers all the way to the grounds dept.That being said VUSD is not the best of places to work anymore that it once was. still enjoy the work but you never know who's going to be in you face the next minute and for no reason at all! Maybe something good might happen?

. wrote on Jun 28, 2008 9:29 PM:If 2.5% of students in a classroom require nearly 50% of a teacher's time because of their significant problem with reading and comprehension, then providing assistance to those 2.5% in a forum outside the normal classroom is helping the other 97.5% of students by enabling the teacher to spend more time with the rest!

Just like the comment about "taxpayers" getting old, so is the issue about spending money on those who need it the most being a waste of funds! Now, if we can only get the rest of the nay sayers to stop fighting against everything new, stick to one plan long enough to see the results, we might actually return to the days when VUSD was rated as the BEST District in San Diego County, as opposed to its current rating: the WORST!

To wondering wrote on Jun 29, 2008 9:39 AM:Yes, a school should be a fun place to work and the teachers, aids, custodians, librarians, food workers, and administrators should all present a positive attitude around students. But, certain groups have realized the power contained within the primary education system: getting to children early and telling them everything you can about how bad some things are and how great other things are, and the way they should be living their lives. I know, this all sounds simple, but when you realize how powerful this early education can be when trying to achieve your ultimate goal, taking control of our schools can be the best way to ultimately take control of most anything else. What do I mean? In 1948 documents were discovered in N. Korea in the possession of the Chinese assisting the Communist Army that spoke directly to the concept of taking control of curriculum development, teachers' unions, PTAs, school news papers, etc. This was only one of the many methods designed to ultimately indoctrinate the masses and win control of the people of the United Sates of America. These documents are well publicized in various peer reviewed texts concerning Communism and the infiltration and overthrow of a society. I may sound like one of those alarmists, but realize that sometimes one needs to connect the dots and head the warnings or you will find yourself with another 9-11, or worse. Wake up America and Take back your schools before it's too late!

kidsfirst wrote on Jun 29, 2008 10:37 AM:hey VUSD school board , listen to the people and honor site councils' rights do decide what WHAT IS BEST FOR THEIR SCHOOLS..A big shoutout to Casita and Bobier parents standing up for kids!!!!!Bing local control back Vote in November. Take back VUSD for ALL KIDS AND PARENTS!!!

to to wondering wrote on Jun 30, 2008 1:01 PM:Perhaps it is time for a little comunism to prevail. Then the bickering would end. I am for this if this is what it takes to get a board who doesn't fight among themselves. Jan O'Riley has it right. Money should be spent equaly benifiting all students not the small manority.

Wake up and smell the Coffee wrote on Jul 1, 2008 1:33 AM:The bickering will never end. There will always be some cause for which power is at stake. If you have watched the Board for the last few years, you would have noticed that they have been attempting to work together toward a common goal and that goal is to get children of this district to read, write, and speak English. Why is it so hard for you to understand that a very large population of VUSD school children don't even speak English let alone are able to read and write it? The Board is taking a stand to see that change and things are moving towards major improvement. But unfortunately the VTA doesn't want that "small minority" to be singled out because it might just show success. If these students aren’t helped, then not only will they suffer but the schools that they attend which are on the sanction list will be taken over by the State and all of the teachers, aides, and support staff will be looking for jobs elsewhere. Maybe Ms. O'Riley should remember who (Dr. Bales and her staff at the District Office) supported her teachers in keeping their jobs when in so many other districts have made such large cuts in their teaching staff? My momma always told me to never bite the hand that feeds me. Maybe she should think long and hard about this offense that she has mounted against her boss.

Front Row Seat wrote on Jul 1, 2008 6:42 AM:I have sat on an SSC for the past 5 years. In those 5 years the district has stripped the SSC's of any true decision making. When our SSC didn't approve the budget the district demanded, we were called into an "invitation only" meeting, which lasted for over 3 hours. Interestingly enough the "minutes" from this meeting are extremly vague and don't contain half of what was said. The message from Dr. Bales and crew was "You'll do it our way or else". Funny after that meeting we were given some of our funds back. And to clarify, SSC's are made up of parents elected by school site parents, teachers elected by school site teachers, classified reps elected by school site classified reps. The only person who isn't elected is the principal, who, according to the new district guidelelines, will be the contact person (and believe me the principals won't say no to this administration or they won't have a job). This district is in a big mess and we won't be able to fix it until Bales goes away and true communication is open again. I grew up in this district, my children got a superior education here and now I am a district employee. That said, I have never seen fear like now. Someone has got to stop the power play by Bales and the Board.

Vista Teacher wrote on Jul 1, 2008 6:50 AM:I can't believe there is anyone stupid enough to believe teachers want children to fail. Do you really think if LMB was such a GREAT program and so many children were improving that teachers would want to do away with it? The test scores in Vista will be DOWN because of LMB. Why? My students missed all of their math instruction due to their time in the LMB clinc. Yes, they may have made some improvement but the kids in LMB are 2-3 years behind in reading and NO program can bridge that gap in a couple of months. Parents and teachers want what's best for kids, ALL kids, not just the tiny percentage the LMB clinics teach. LMB has been around for 25+ years and has been found to be no better or worse than any other intensive reading program. If so, why can't each teacher use what they've found to be effective, rather than be forced to make the shoe fit all kids. Very few teachers I know actually use the program but we all know the answer if we're asked. Still, LMB will get credit for all improvements, even for the kids who never had a drop of instruction in it.

To Vista Teacher wrote on Jul 1, 2008 8:27 AM:I question your intent. The real Vista Teacher would have not said those things. Your attempt to confuse the issue is transparent.

Vista Teacher wrote on Jul 1, 2008 9:22 PM:Looks like someone got caught in the act of acting. I wonder who that could have been? See you in the lounge next fall!

VT

To Front Row Seat wrote on Jul 1, 2008 9:38 PM:I didn't see anybody listed who was "Elected" by the general public in an open election. You have limited control over Taxpayer dollars and according to the laws of the land the use of those funds is very strictly controlled. But, a serious question is raised when that control is granted to a very narrow special interest group. How do we, the taxpayer, know that the funds are being spent in a manner that will best serve the majority of students? I would be very surprised to find any parents "elected" to the SSC who truly represents the under-privileged minority. We all know that the typical parent elected to these Special Interest SSCs are those that spend too much time attempting to manipulate every waking moment of their child's life and rarely if ever has any true concern for the rest of the children. They only want what is best for their child, and make the assumption that if it is good for their little Johnny or Janey then it is obviously good for all the rest of the Johnnys and Janeys etc. attending the school. The teachers elected know the score and can easily see that by keeping these "involved" parents happy, they will have an easier time in the classroom as at least this vocal parent will know them as one who agrees with them. No, these special interest groups are not really any great benefit to the majority of students or teachers. They are just another group being bought off by the Legislature in Sacramento!

Joyce wrote on Jul 2, 2008 8:02 AM:It is becomming more obvious that Joyce Bales is the George Bush of VUSD. Both will do whatever they can to promote their agenda over the common good...

To Joyce wrote on Jul 2, 2008 10:07 PM:Looks like she is in good company! The left hates Bush so much they are willing to sell the country to the highest bidder. Obviously he must be doing something right or else they wouldn't spend so much time trying to convince everyone of how bad he is. Same goes for Dr. Bales: she must be doing something right or else the Union and the Left wouldn't be trying so hard to get rid of her. Now wait a minute... I thought the Left, and the Union for that matter, supported Women's Rights. Here we have a woman who has actually made it to the top of a District (a position held primarily by men, even to this very day) and what are they doing? Trying to beat her down and get rid of her. This MUST be a case of sexual discrimination! Yep, Dr. Cowels was just so much better during his many years at VUSD (while the test scores went from best District in SD County to worst!). Yes, a man can do so much better in that position. Yes, we need to put Dave's brother in that slot so that we can have more of the corruption we saw over the last 20 years of Dr. Cowels!

Talk is cheap wrote on Jul 2, 2008 11:53 PM:You got it right, the Left talks a good talk but can't produce when it comes down to business. Look at what they did to Hilary: they brought in a Man to get rid of the Woman who would be President! Why should it be any different at VUSD?

VHS Parent wrote on Jul 3, 2008 1:14 PM:School site councils are spelled out in the State Ed. Code. How can the local school board develop a policy that goes against State Ed. Code? They can't. This Supt. and Board don't think we can look up Ed. Code. It is on the internet. The money in question is grant money from the state. It is to be used at the discretion of the Site Councils. It is spelled out in the ed. code. School Boards cannot just say we aren't giving you grant money, which has specific designations. If the district doesn't use the money right, the state takes it away. This board better believe that there are educated parents in this district that can read Ed. Code.

Jamie wrote on Jul 3, 2008 11:09 PM:Samuel I hope your right:

"I guarantee two things; if Dr. Bales is forced out the District will be taken over by either the State or County and we will never be able to hire a quality superintendent after the way Dr. Bales has been treated. We have had our warnings."

VUSD deserves to be taken over by the state!!!

Oh God wrote on Jul 3, 2008 11:16 PM:What is Legal- if you say there are laws that define the "roles of school site counsel." than why are they not being applied at VUSD?

Mumbo jumbo is not legalize so quote some Ed. Codes, CA codes, FPPC, or Brown Act. I am sure the school site counsels know nothing about any of these codes.

So we are expected to trust a group of totally ignorant people to make FINAL decisions involving millions of dollars of state and federal funds?

Come again?

Fishy and part of the entrenchment wrote on Jul 3, 2008 11:28 PM:Front Row Seat- Wow you say that you have sat at the SSC for FIVE YEARS? Do you think there is something wrong with this? Should you have give others an opportunity to partake in this experience? I wonder if these SSC have term limits?

You say that "serious question is raised when that control is granted to a very narrow special interest group."

So are you part of the CONTROL GROUP?

Sounds like it, its like the pot calling the kettle black here.

Let me ask you do you think that a racially diverse (if VUSD had one in SSC) is considered a special interest group?

James wrote on Jul 3, 2008 11:42 PM:VHS Parent- Oh please site the state codes here for us stupid folks to understand.

In my opinion the state legislation approves Education Codes and regulations.
In turn the Ed. Codes and Regs filter down to the state or CDE to draft and comply with the AB- codes approved by the state legislation, state assembly, senate and finally signed by the governor.

The school district are supposed to DEVELOP POLICIES allied with ALL the state and federal codes. It is not for the school district to choose, they have to comply!!!

If in fact you are looking up state codes ask someone to help you understand them.

Oh and the grand money is supposed to be used in accordance with the restrictions attached to the grants. This is not FREE MONEY.

To VHS Parent wrote on Jul 4, 2008 10:00 AM:Ed Code is also quite clear in that the Board is responsible for ALL funds spent by the District, including School Site Grants from the State, and that they have ultimate oversight of those funds. Ed. Code is also quite clear that the Board is to set the guidance for those funds, since it was the District and NOT the SSC that applied for the Grants in the first place. Now, if the SSC applies for and receives funds outside of the District Administration that would be a different matter all together. But, such is not the case when talking about the State Grant funds that SSCs ultimately get to use. So, if the District desires to use these funds in a manner that better serves the needs of the District they have the discretion to do so. Better read the WHOLE of Ed. Code before you simply try to use one or two sections to justify your argument. Legal scholars can be baffled by what is found therein, so simply being an "educated parent" may only get you into more trouble than you really want to get into!

VHS Parent wrote on Jul 4, 2008 12:50 PM:James your comments truly show your ignorance. The Ed. Codes in question are 41579-41573 & 52570-52863.

I agree that legal scholars can be baffled by Ed. Code. And it's true the district has oversight "to approve or disaprove of the SSC plan". But oversight does not mean policies designed to silence the voice of the parent. The spirit of the law is that parents be included in their child's education and SSC were developed to do this. Also, by applying for the grant money you are agreeing to develop and have SSC's. I understand the code. Grant money comes with conditions - federal and state. Not some local school board policy. Better read the whole of the Ed. Code? You haven't. Save the advice, I'll see you at the Board Meetings.

James wrote on Jul 4, 2008 10:04 PM:CALIFORNIA CODES EDUCATION CODE
SECTION 41570-41573 can be located at :
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/calaw.html

The Ed. Codes quoted by VHS Parent are referring strictly to:

41570. (a) The establishment of school and library improvement block grant.

(b) (1) Except as specified in paragraph (2), a school district may expend funds received pursuant to this article for any purpose authorized by the programs listed in Section 41571.

41571. The block grant of a county office of education shall be based only on those programs for which it was eligible to receive funds in the 2003-04 fiscal year. In this case Casita Elementary and many of the VUSD qualify for these block grants, due to the racial, ethnic, and low-income groups.

41571. These funding are strictly for the purpose of these programs:
(a) School library materials as set forth in Article 7 (commencing with Section 18180) of Chapter 2 of Part 11.
(b) School improvement programs as set forth in Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 52000) of Part 28. Most of these block grants are restricted and must be used for the purpose of helping the subgroups above. Contrary to the assertions of most SSC the categorical funds must be used in a very specific manner to assist the subgroups above.

41572. A school district that receives funds pursuant to this article SHALL HAVE A SCHOOL LEVEL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
as required by Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 52000) of Part 28, as it read on January 1, 2004, and shall have a single school plan that incorporates the requirements of Sections 18181, 52014, and 52015, as those sections read on January 1, 2004.

Here is the problem based on The California Department of Education-Form CTS-la (Rev.6-02) 2002-2003 Coordinated Compliance Review Noncompliance Findings of VUSD. VUSD did not have and still does not have a racially and economically diverse SSC population. The California Department of Education found in their review of VUSD SSC that the members of the SSC were ALL WHITE. Including the teachers, administration and parents. This is significant because Casita Elementary has a large population of special education students, Hispanic students make up about half of the student population, and also African Americans were not represented in the SSC either. The significance is great in that the beef has to do with the LMB spending. LMB as we know would be helpful for these groups that are not represented above.

52850. The provisions of this article shall apply only to school districts and schools, which participate in school-based coordinated categorical programs pursuant to this article. No school may operate pursuant to this article unless a newly developed plan or a revision of the previously approved plan has been approved by the local GOVERNING BOARD and is retained at the school site. …

52852.5. The GOVERNING BOARD OF EACH SCHOOL SHALL:
(a) Ensure that the principal of every school receives information covering the provisions of this article, and provides such information to teachers, other school personnel, parents, and, in secondary schools, pupils.
(b) Adopt POLICIES to ensure that, prior to a school beginning to develop a plan pursuant to Section 52853, a school site council as described in Section 52852 is established at the school site to consider whether or not it wishes the local school to participate in the school-based coordination program…..

The spirit of the law and in all fairness is that the SSC be composed as required by the California Codes of Regulations. (a) That the VUSD Board draft policies and for SSC’S that are racially, economically diverse that includes special education parents, Hispanic parents, and parents of various races. If in fact VUSD had complied with the recommendations of CDE’S Form CTS-la (Rev.6-02) 2002-2003 Coordinated Compliance Review Noncompliance Findings. VUSD would have avoided the murky waters it finds itself in.

The censorship in these blogs is proof in itself that the North County Times dances around the subject and censures blogs that bring in common sense and logic.

To James wrote on Jul 5, 2008 10:21 AM:Thank you for showing VHS Parent and other, just what I meant when I said, "Legal scholars can be baffled by what is found (in Ed. Code), so simply being an "educated parent" may only get you into more trouble than you really want to get into!." Your quotes only show us just how confusing Ed. Code can be. But, one thing is for sure: Our Elected Officials, and the District Administration are Legally bound to uphold CA Law (Ed. Code). SSCs are not! But, the Board is required to oversee the SSCs and are required to oversee the budget and all funding at the District. So, if SSCs have a problem with what the Board is doing with the funds the SSCs believe are for them to control, they need to take another look at the CA Constitution, and CA law. SSCs are NOT elected officials, sworn to uphold the Constitution. They are simply an advisory group. They cannot right checks, issue contract, etc. And, though elected by special interest groups at their local schools, they DO NOT represent the People of the Great State of California any more than do the Union Leaders who keep spouting all their bilge on the TV and Radio.a8qmq

kidcentered wrote on Jul 6, 2008 11:18 PM:School Site Councils are supposed to fund programs that support student achievement. Monies from various accounts are allocated to meet the needs of various students. For instance, GATE - gifted and talented- money goes to these particular students. SSC can vote to fund after school programs or field trips to enrich the GATE students' education with this money. Most often, parent members of SSC rubber stamp what the teachers on SSC want for the GATE students. These are not controversial students and parents on the SSC are often parents of GATE students. Title One money goes to low socioeconomic students. This sub-group is often the lower performers when it comes to reading. Plus the parents on the SSC most likely aren't the parents of the low socioeconomic students. This money makes up a large portion of the SSC budget for the schools that qualify. Especially in comparison to GATE money. Hence, Title One money funds the LmB clinics at these schools. The clinics serve the students with the most intensive needs, the students who can not read. You don't see LmB clinics at the non-title one schools. A lot of money is going to the students who need it. Rich parents can afford to take their children to the LmB clinic in Del Mar and pay $80 per hour for individual tutoring. VUSD pays hourly credentialed teachers $25 per hour or classified teacher aids approximately $12 per hour to perform this same reading therapy program with a group of 5 students. VUSD is giving these students an opportunity. Rich parents can pay for tutorial services. Kumon, Sylvan Center, and Lindamood-Bell are companies that do the work that public schools should be doing to meet the needs of all students. Is it fair that the rich can meet their children's needs and not the poor? This is why the US federal government gives Title One money to our VUSD schools with lower socioeconomic students. Why are so many of you opposed?????

Jamie wrote on Jul 7, 2008 7:57 AM:The amount of GATE funding is very limited and it is supposed to enrich EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS. The initial argument for the GATE program and the reason why CA approved it was due to the argument that this program was supposed to bring ENRICHMENT to high achieving students whose parents could not afford exposure to educational enrichment classes.

I beg to differ in that this program is most surely controversial. First the VUSD cannot prove that any student or their parents is functioning at a SUPERIOR RANGE based on a 20-year data. GATE like bilingual education have proven to be ineffective and simply do not work. The VUSD essentially does not have any higher courses and neither can the students or parents keep up with the strenuous work that these academic courses require.

In fact most parents complain that they don’t want Johnny to have a lot of HOMEWORK and the most ardent complainers are the parents are the presumed GATE students.

Lets not forget that most of the GATE students come from POLITICALLY CONNECTED parents. Most of these students are strong in your face PTA, SSC and VTA supporters. I hardly think that these characteristics qualify as SUPERIOR RANGE.

The North County Times this weekend wrote an article, which brings up the issue of parents paying for their kids EXTRACURRICULAR ENRICHMENT classes.
Very interesting, for the past decade I have been paying at least $ 380.00 dollars a month per child for these enrichment courses. No GATE program can match up to the hours of music, dance, physical sports, and painting classes that a good disciplined and truly talented student requires. In fact my children have no time for GATE after school classes because their truly enrichment classes start right after school at my cost.

To Jamie wrote on Jul 7, 2008 10:46 AM:Did you realize that for less than $200/month more than you are currently spending on "extracurricular enrichment programs" you could send your child to a private school and not have to worry about paying extra for these programs. If we take the dollar figure down to a daily figure you will find that it is less than a daily cup of coffee at Starbucks. Infact, your total daily cost for the average private school in the area (based on 365 days in a year) is less than $20. Now I must ask you, if you really care about your child's education and future, are you willing to spend $20/day to provide them with something better than they are getting at VUSD?

Jamie wrote on Jul 7, 2008 1:17 PM:Tell me about it I wanted to enroll my kids at the catholic school because I heard good things about the curriculum. I missed the pre-K registration and it was very difficult to get them in after Kindergarten. Frankly.., almost impossible I was told that I had to be part of the Parish ( I am mot catholic). Some of my friends were even part of the Parish and they couldn't get their kids in.

to Jamie wrote on Jul 7, 2008 6:17 PM:If you really love your kids you won't give up at one try at only one school. There are other schools, many quite good too. Some are even looking at declining enrollment due to the current economy (as they had many parents who were working in real estate). So, believe me when I say there are still schools in Vista/Oceanside/Carlsbad/San Marcos that have openings, and are willing to take the time to EDUCATE your children. Don't give up! Your children are worth every penny and then some!
VT