Rochester Concerned Taxpayers

To the Editor:

This letter is in response to the article published September 11, 2009 entitled “Grandmother furious 5-year-old assaulted by fellow Rochester Student”. There seems to be some misconception about the article and what transpired. Obviously, there needs to be some clarification.

My 5-year-old grandson was attacked by another 5-year-old student on the third day of school, Friday September 4, 2009.

It was reported to the family by the school nurse, approximately two hours after the attack.

Apparently the child in question had been removed from the classroom earlier that day due to his inappropriate behavior and school officials were attempting to bring him back into the classroom when he attacked my grandson. My grandson was sitting in circle time paying attention to his teacher. The child in question grabbed my grandson around the neck and slammed his head on the floor. This was an unprovoked attack and had nothing to do with going out to recess as recess was over or any other fabricated story that has since come out. The only two stories that match are that of the nurse and my grandson.

My grandson was taken to the nurse’s office where ice packs were applied to his neck (he developed finger bruises on his upper neck and lower jaw) and the scratches on his throat were cleaned up and there was a cut under his left eye. When I dropped him off at school that day he did not have any cuts on his face. By bedtime the marks on his ribs had finally faded. We do have pictures taken by the family to substantiate our claim.

The family has yet to be notified by the principal Mrs. Theresa Morin-Bailey regarding the specifics of the incident as outlined in School Department Policy JGD-R3. The family did; however, receive in writing, from Mr. Hopkins that the child was attempting to take my grandson out to recess. This is the story they came up with approximately three weeks after the assault, and the excuse that the nurse did not call sooner because she must have gotten busy. Personally, after seeing everyone in action, in my opinion they needed that time for damage control. They are so used to brushing these things under the carpet. I will not go away!

The child in question assaulted another student in the same classroom the following Friday, September 11. Mind you this was after the statement made by Mr. Hopkins in the Foster’s article dated September 11, 2009 that steps were being taken to ensure this would never happen again, yet it did. The family was informed that he would not be in my grandson’s class come Monday the 14th. This is not the second attack from this child; it is my understanding that it is more like his sixth or seventh.

School Department policy JGD-R63 – Simple Assault Notification Policy states “Whenever an incident of simple assault or violence, occurs no report shall be made to the local law enforcement agency. Instead, the building principal shall notify the parents by telephone and confirm by a letter to the parents of all children directly involved. The letter from the building principal shall describe the incident and the seriousness and harm done or potential harm and the school district’s response to the incident.” This has never happened and it makes me wonder how many other incidents have been ignored.

There is also JGD-R1 Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Reporting of Acts of Theft, Destruction or Violence. The full reading of all school policies can be found on the School Department web site under School Board.

RSA 193-F:2 Pupil Safety and Violence Prevention. The General Court for the state of New Hampshire hereby finds that pupils have the right to attend schools that are safe, secure, and peaceful. One of the legislature’s highest priorities must be to protect our children from VIOLENCE by dealing with harassment, including “bullying”, in our public schools. House Bill No. 360 requires that each school district adopt, implement, and enforce its own pupil safety and violence prevention policy and provides that the state board of education shall issue a technical assistance advisory to school districts offering guidance on how to proceed.

In the case of my grandson none of the above policies have been followed and it makes me wonder just how many other policies are also similarly dismissed. How many other violent children are in the schools? Why is the School Department more concerned with the needs of the violent child than they are about the needs and safety of all the other children in the school? The needs of one cannot and should not supersede the safety of others.

I was informed Monday, September 28, by a number of individuals that members of the violent child’s family were at the East Rochester Elementary School yesterday meeting with the principal. I hope the only thing that was discussed was the fact he needs alternative educational options. It is not the taxpayer’s responsibility to pay to have a baby-sitter for this child because he lacks discipline. After speaking with a lawyer, letting this child back into school knowing that he has assaulted/injured others has put the City (ultimately the taxpayer because YES we will foot the bill for everything) in a position for serious litigation.

Personally, I am tired of the lies, stories and cover-ups all because “the child is coded”. This is a very serious problem and it is going on in our children’s schools on a daily basis. The School Department is worried about one parent suing. They should be worried about every other parent bringing a class action suit against the School Department for violating every child’s right to attend schools that are safe, secure and peaceful. Every parent who called regarding the earlier article should call their School Board member, school principal, their child’s teacher, and visit the classrooms and see what is going on. Every parent needs to be aware of what is happening to their child and the environment they are in. I have the utmost respect for all the teachers that my grandchildren have had to date and feel that they are working under adverse conditions that need to be corrected. They are there to teach not spend their time being a referee and filling out accident reports. We need to stand behind our teachers and not the administration. Those employed by the School Department work for us, the taxpayer, and so far I am totally dissatisfied with the performance of some of the administrators. If anybody has any additional questions, feel free to look me up.

Sue O’Connor

Mr. Shea was the guest speaker at the August RCTA meeting and spoke regarding a new “smaller” high school. Mr. Shea is definitely passionate about his desire to go forth with this project, but there are several concerns that have not been addressed. Like most projects put forth by the School Department it is being presented to parents in the usual warm and fuzzy approach, with the tag line of how well it will benefit each and every child. Mr. Shea alludes to the fact that the system is broken and is not working. I am sure that everyone can agree that there is a definite problem with the public school system and the question of how to fix it has raised many issues. The first problem is that all parents need to be involved with their children’s education. It is not the responsibility of the schools to be a babysitter. The responsibility of every teacher is to teach our children, not become their new best friend.

To date there has not been a lot of research done on this subject and it may be just another “fad.” The one fact that does come out regarding smaller schools is that the concept and models are generally geared towards larger cities with numerous inner city high schools and large percentages of minority student populations. There have been only 22 research reports since 1966 when the idea of smaller schools first emerged. These reports investigate and define school size, socioeconomic status, and school-size issues.

It would be an educational tragedy for current and future generations if, after a decade or so of experimentation with “small schools,” policy makers were to conclude that “small schools do not work.” This is becoming the conclusion regarding this concept.

Mr. Shea feels that he can get this new school off the ground without costing the taxpayer any additional money. He stated that the state funds 60% of all new school projects and he will try and find grant money for the remaining 40%. The down side to this is that a community must bond the entire project (with regard to state money) and then hope that the state comes through with the promised money. As of 2009, it appears that the state has been reneging on their obligations. There is still the heating, electric, water, sewer costs along with maintenance that the taxpayer will be responsible for, so how can this not cost us more money? Additionally, what will happen to the school when philanthropic funding disappears? Taxpayers will either have to find the money or the school will close.

Many examples have been cited regarding successful small schools, but on digging deeper it seems that parents are not as happy as administrations would want you to believe. Clover Park High School in Lakewood, WA; Hillsdale High School, San Mateo, CA; Noble High School, North Berwick, ME are all examples of Windows on Conversions produced by Stanford University. Research has shown that parents and some students are not happy with Clover Park High or Noble High. The dropout rate has not changed and academic achievement is poor at best. Parents of Clover Park High School students feel that the program has dumbed down the students so much that those going on to college have found the work and structure very difficult.

Oregon is an example of a state that implemented the small-school experiment and found it was slow to yield results. After four years, Portland and Hillsboro academies found there was no more progress than the big high schools they replaced and the dropout rate remained the same. This community was armed with $25 million from Bill Gates and other education reformers. They are contemplating returning the remainder of the grant money.

Denver, Colorado is not finding success with the small high school concept.

North Carolina is currently facing the loss of philanthropic funding.

Mr. Shea feels that students do not know what is expected of them and what they are to know at the end of each school year. Is that not the responsibility of the teacher? Is there not a syllabus for each class outlining expectations? This is how it is done in college. There will always be the students who succeed despite all odds and those that will always need that extra push. High school is not the time or place to continually hold a young adults hand in order to get them to succeed. There are expectations when one goes out in the working world, getting to work on time, getting your work done. The same goes for high school. It is the responsibility of the student to get to school on time, go to class and complete the work. This will prepare them for the real world. Holding their hand and changing the time when they need to be in school is not helping our future generation. Maybe the problem is that we are not telling our students what they must do, but have gotten into the habit of letting them decide what they would like to do! There is an importance in knowing the significance of the stock market, politics and other ‘grown-up’ material which is avoided and maturity has vanished. In this sense, high schools are guilty of endangering our society since its wellness depends on the education of its people.

As far as a grading system goes, the traditional A, B, C, D, F tells the college and/or future employer exactly what he needs to know. The student either understood/made an effort or did not. The current concept of teach, assess, move on, teach assess, move on works, but needs to happen at the elementary school level when students are learning the basics. If a student has mastered the building blocks then he should be able to face the challenge of moving on and not need constant repeating. Mr. Shea used the example in one of his articles of a physician working with a patient until they are healthy. Would you want to go to that physician if he had to keep repeating his classes over and over again? I should think not!

Rather than building new schools, redesigning curriculums and schedules, worrying about everyone’s feelings and egos, we should be allowing teachers to teach (improve instruction), not be social workers and best friends of each and every student (this is the parent’s job). Disruptive students should be removed from the classroom, not put in an “intervention room” so that they can have a temper tantrum. If a student does not grasp the basics then they should be repeating that grade. Pushing them on is one of the biggest mistakes this educational system has made. These students never catch up, become frustrated, fail and dropout. The responsibility of each and every student belongs to the parent first and foremost, not to the schools. Everybody needs to start paying attention to what is going on in the public schools before it is too late, if it is not too late already.

For all the changes made over the past 40 years, how much have we truly prepared our graduates with the ability to compete in today’s workforce? Without question we have many problems with the current educational system, but is this truly the road that Rochester parents wish to go down?

Sue O’Connnor