Updatejan2400


		Update Jan 24 2000

Serious "Situation" at Area Elementary School In a letter (click here to view letter) to parents of 4th and 5th grade students, the principal explained the details of a "situation" that took place on Friday, January 21 at the Area Elementary school. The letter reads, in part: "...a set of custodian's keys for equipment was left in the upstairs girls' restroom. When he returned a few minutes later to get them the keys were gone...the 4th and 5th grade teachers decided later in the day to check the desks, backpacks, and pockets of all the girls. While the district has the authority to do this..." Well, do they? Now I'm no lawyer, but it seems to me that students do have a constitutional right to privacy under the 4th amendment (related to unreasonable search and seizure). Of course lockers and desks are school property, and students shouldn't expect those areas to be private. However, there is a high expectation for privacy one's possessions - backpacks, purses, coats, and certainly their person. Without an individual suspect, can a District decide to search everyone? If there is a compelling state interest, maybe so. When weapons or drugs are brought into a school, an immediate danger may exist. But when a set of equipment keys are negligently left in a public place and then stolen, I'm not sure that anyone's safety or well-being is threatened. At last night's meeting, a citizen asked under what authority this search was conducted. Mr. King, the District's solicitor, said he had never heard of this before, so the letter to parents only contained the legal opinion from our elementary school principal. It's too bad the elementary principal was out last Friday. Her attempt to recover the keys (have the secretary ask the students to please return them) seems quite reasonable. So what went wrong? Why were so many innocent children searched? Does the District have the authority to conduct such sweeping searches? I don't think so - it's probably not legal and it's certainly not right. And if something ain't right, what is it????? Click here to read about the many other privacy violations in our district! Core Knowledge - Alive and Well Director of Curriculum and Staff Development, Dennis Spinella, reported on the recent fieldtrip to a Core Knowledge School in Lancaster, Ohio. Spinella, Jean Allen (Moraine principal) and 5 teachers (no names were given) visited the school in order to find out more about how Core Knowledge works. You may recall that this attempt at school reform was the brainchild of Adams and Christmann - but I guess they know all they need to about Core Knowledge - (Did we ever find out who the Directors of the Foundation are?)- and didn't really need to see it in action. Anyway. Spinella said it was "fascinating" and said the teachers were eager to talk with the Board about what they saw. According to Spinella, the teachers want a private meeting with the Board. They did not want to come to "an evening meeting like this where it is a public forum", but instead wanted a "roundtable discussion to share their candid thoughts". A private meeting? Candid thoughts? I don't know, but it seems to me that this is an issue that does involve the public. Whose children will be affected by this curriculum? Whose tax dollars paid for the trip? Why would a group of professionals be anything less than candid in public? But hey, Core Knowledge is just sound eduction. This ain't political, is it?!! Mr. King, though, said they had to do it in public. In March, 8 teachers (again nameless) will be going to the National Core Knowledge conference in California (Any community members asked to participate?). Once again, Adams and Christmann are too busy to go (where have they gotten all their information about Core Knowledge anyway? Investor's Business Daily?) Never fear! The Board nominated Angerett to represent the Board at the conference. Goodness knows, it always helps to learn about something from an expert and not just rely on personal feellings.... And finally.... This just in. Har-Mer parents and children, middle school parents and children, you've been screwed. Those plans for renovations - (the ones developed by the architect and approved by the state) forget it. Everyone knew Adams, Christmann, and Youngman would vote no when it came to approving the bond issue - and they did. But so did Angerett. When asked why, he said it was too much money. Pressed by Mr. Smith to explain the basis for thinking like that, Angerett said it was his "own personal feeling is that's too much". Based on what? Smith queried. "Based on my own personal feelings". Has Angerett ever renovated a school? What about the opinions of our consultant who found that the costs as presented by our architect to be acurate? What about the opinions of the staff and community members whose comments were taken into account by the architect? Oh no, Angerett knows better......based on his "personal feelings". Man. Ain't local control great!! Funny this vote came up on the night Surgenor officially resigned. Ah. The wonders of local control. Delay, delay, delay, and politics will out. And it's the politics of personal power. In my opinion (and ya'll know I have one); after watching this renovation thing go down for the last several months, is is apparent that the board knew Surgenor (and his vote) was going to resign, and Adams delayed this project just so it would come to a 4 to 4 vote and kill the project. Why did the board president Duryea allow these delays to continue? As president he should have seen Adams' political game and put an end to his thinly veiled attempt to have this come to a vote when there were only 8 board members. I'd sure sleep better at night if I knew that I could save money by compelling children to attend school in a substandard building with tainted water. But those are just my personal feelings.....

	HOME ALUMNI INFO ARCHIVES CONTACT ME CURRENT ISSUES EDUCATOR AWARDS LINKS PHONE NUMBERS PRIVACY VIOLATIONS SAFETY UPDATE BOARD SCHEDULE THIS JUST IN!