Karen Lanier
The expansion of El Marino Elementary School to accommodate a full-day kindergarten requires the relocation of CCUSD’s other high school, Culver Park. CPHS is the district’s continuation school and provides a program, now limited by budget cuts to 80 students, where high-schoolers, 16 to 18 years old, have a supportive, productive place to make up lost time- time lost for as many reasons as there are students.
I’ve been a teacher at Culver Park long enough to now have the children of former students in my English classes, as well as teens I first met when they were El Marino grade-schoolers attending my after-school art program. My commitment to these students, past, present and future, goes way back. And my concern about this poorly planned, last minute push to shovel CPHS into a couple of degraded bungalows in the parking lot between Farragut and the middle school goes pretty deep.
The word “bungalow” needs clarification. What do you think of when you visualize the word? A rustic, cozy cottage maybe? If you are an educator or have school-age children, you probably think of a portable classroom, kitted out with the basics: clean walls, floors, proper lighting, ventilation and safe access to P.E., food services, restrooms and the other amenities of a real school. The structures in the parking lot cannot, by either definition, be called “bungalows." They are decaying 30-year-old pre-fab portables that have been there long enough to have grown roots- and not in a good way. Plumbing inside the buildings? Not that I could see. Outdoor bathrooms with a septic tank? Asbestos? Who knows. There is evidence of vermin, the stench of mold and mildew. No windows, ventilation or proper lighting. These are deep structural problems that can’t be remedied by our maintenance crew, good as they are, painting, carpeting and punching out a few windows.
And why would the district spend all the money necessary to bring the structures up to minimal building, health, safety, fire and earthquake codes when the site itself is so detrimental to any school, especially one for CCUSD’s most vulnerable young people? Is it even possible to open a school in the middle of a parking lot, expecting teenagers to make their way in the morning rush through cars moving in all directions? How can this location support the hard work continuation students must do to make up classes, change their behavior and priorities? How can Culver Park kids feel any school pride? For their final school years, they will be fenced off behind a locked gate, a utility pole with power lines hanging overhead, a view of the parking lot on one side, the creek fence on the other, truly banished to the farthest edge of the densest part of our school district for all to scorn. Not a great message for our community, or about our community.
Students in every school will see Culver Park as a prison sentence, a punishment place, not an opportunity place. Please, go take a look at the structures and try to imagine sending your own child there. No parents ever think their beautiful kindergartener, first-grader, 6th grader will require the individualized support that Culver Park provides. But all kinds of things can go wrong- family problems, friends, learning issues, bad choices, terrible wrongs and burdens can all lead to the need for an alternative school, a fresh start in a healthy, safe place. For the sake of all our kids, we’d best hope our school board makes sure that they have one.
Karen Lanier is a teacher at Culver Park High School.
Dear Ms. Lanier,
ReplyDeleteThank you for speaking out on this subject; the proposal to move Culver Park High students to those portable buildings is a disgrace. The buildings look like boxcars and the location is exactly as you describe.
This is a just another example of the struggle between the "haves" and "have nots." El Marino parents--who happen to have higher average incomes than families with kids in other district schools--accuse and threaten the School Board and others for not putting children first. What they actually mean is that their children should be first; they do not care about all children. I have heard that these parents received advice to “bully” the School Board to get what they want.
I hope the School Board uses its collective conscience and acts in the best interest of all the children in the district, not just the offspring of the more affluent and vocal parents who have more resources and time to demand what they think is owed to them.
Every time I think we are moving forward as a community, I find out that there are people who go out of theie way to stop the process.
Susan Levy
Susan, I don't know where to start with the theme of your comment. The "haves" and "have nots" stance is a tired and subjective argument. By the way, as an El Marino parent, I think Ms. Lanier's position is valid and should be strongly considered. Culver Park kids should be provided the best possible alternative, and if there isn't one available a plan should be put in place to create one.
DeleteHowever, when looking at "haves" and "have nots", the El Marino side is pretty compelling as well. EM kindergartners are the only school in the district who do not have full day classes. Who is the "have not" in this scenario? Every other elementary school in our district provide their kindergartners with twice as many hours in a school year than EM.
Then, within your argument, you really get divisive by classifying an entire school of 750 children as affluent. You become extremely hypocritical when talking about "moving forward", while writing a piece pitting one group of people against another. I personally know of many, many families at El Marino who are struggling in today's economy.
Ms. Levy, you say "they (El Marino) do not care about all children". Did you really write that with a clear head? If you did, then you are certainly living in a bubble. The 200-300 hours I volunteered for all CCUSD children in 2011 certainly doesn't jive with that statement. I know of many, many other El Marino parents who have spent countless hours volunteering outside of El Marino.
Most people who volunteer for something they believe in do it while sacrificing their time in other places, not because they have an abundance of free time and resources as you state. I believe our esteemed editors at Culver City Progress can dutifully attest to that.
As I read some of the other postings on this blog, and find Ms. Levy classifying El Marino parents as "affluent" in more than one post, I feel compelled to respond further.
DeleteThe animosity with which some people have towards the families of El Marino is astounding. I find myself frequently defending my wife's and my decision to send our children to a school that provides an amazing opportunity to learn a second language. It's truly incredible that such an explanation is necessary.
This polarizing effort that people like Ms. Levy inject into critical discussions as to the rights of parents to fund classroom assistants and/or adjuncts ACROSS OUR DISTRICT is nothing but divisive.
Regarding the labeling of El Marino families as "affluent" is also divisive. First of all, what is wrong with being affluent? Second, I did not know that the parents of Culver City children submitted their tax returns to the district office. I don't believe I have. How would anyone know if I or anyone else was affluent?
My shoebox of a home doesn't feel extremely affluent. None of the homes, condos and apartments of other El Marino families I've been in scream 90210, either.
Unlike three of our five elementary schools in Culver City, El Marino is NOT a Title I school. That does not mean its parents are affluent. What it does mean, however, is that it receives LESS funding from the federal government than the schools in our district who are classified as Title I.
The discussion of fairness keeps being brought up. The only question that should be asked, as it relates to fairness is, "What is best for the kids?" CCUSD cannot afford the support that the parents of this ENTIRE district desire. Parents from ALL of our schools are lining up to support the right of parents to fund positions that help our students.
I apologize for hijacking Ms. Lanier's comment section with a broader discussion on the subject of "have's and have's not", but it seemed appropriate in the context of Ms. Levy's comments.
Dear Mr. O’Brien,
ReplyDeletePerhaps I misread Ms. Lanier’s article, but she seems to suggest the same link about “haves” and “have nots,” albeit, much more subtly (to her credit).
I spoke to a next-door neighbor last week who is looking at different CCUSD schools for her kindergarten-level daughter. She researched the demographics of parents whose children attend the various elementary schools and found that El Marino parents have the highest postgraduate education than other parents in the district. It is a well-known fact that people with higher degrees usually have higher incomes.
I have another neighbor who was an ALLEM president about 12 years ago; she said the district approached El Marino about the adjuncts, but does not know what happened. It appears that the issue was raised again about seven years ago; the superintendent at that time did not want to pursue it out of fear of parent reaction at El Marino.
Perhaps El Marino parents should think about the negative responses they receive from other parents. I will repeat what I wrote in response to Debbie Hamme’s article: “Mob rule is very unbecoming for well-educated parents, who should know better than to bully, intimidate and threaten innocent people.”
You accuse me of injecting divisiveness into critical conversations. That is disingenuous because there have been no critical conversations, only unthinking reactions to misinformation and an unwillingness to sit down and discuss the issues at hand.
I look forward to civility returning to the community. This can only be accomplished by discussing our differences in a calm and reasonable way.
First off, I reread Ms. Lanier's article, and while she wrote an extremely articulate and passionate plea in support of her students and the location of their learning, there is not one word in there that overtly nor subtly refers to what you are talking about.
DeleteYour neighbor researched and found data (ibid?) that supports the assumption that EM parents have the highest postgraduate education of any school in the district (average, based upon number of students, I assume). That's great. It still does not mean that EVERY parent at EM is affluent, nor even the majority of the parents. Off the top of my head, I can think of four college-educated parents from El Marino who are either out of work or working for significantly less than their needs require. (I have not polled all 750).
How can you paint the parents of over 750 kids with the same brush? And once again, what's wrong with being affluent? I hate to bring this up on a progressive blog, but can you say, "Class warfare"?
You say you look forward to civility, but then you use inflammatory statements such as "mob-rule" when describing parents. Trust me, these parents are not a mob. They believe they are right to assert control over how their donations are spent, and they feel like victims of an attempted hostile takeover. They have exercised their right to organize, to petition, and to speak up for their children.
These parents have had attorneys research the law, and confidently believe ACE is strongly overreaching in their attempts to force parent-funded aides, adjuncts or whatever you want to call them to undergo the same fate as the Lin Howe aides that parents wanted to fund.
These parents - and I repeat, for the umpteenth time: From ALL schools, not just El Marino, believe that they are right and ACE is wrong.
And Ms. Levy, just because you have not been a part of critical conversations does not mean they are not happening.
Now, have a handful of emotional people gone too far in their criticisms or arguments? Maybe. There have been A LOT of people speak and write on this issue. However, it has not been more than a handful of parents who may have taken their words too far. Yet you choose to label an entire group of parents - again, well over 750 of them!
I understand completely your desire to defend Ms. Hamme against those voices, but to attack an entire school as you do IS in fact irrational and frankly, puts you in the same camp that you so strongly criticize.
Mr. O'Brien,
ReplyDeleteIn all honesty, my opinions really do not deserve so much attention; I am entitled to them as you are entitled to yours.
My comments were meant for the "ring leaders” at El Marino who began this distasteful campaign in the first place, a campaign that has hurt someone I know would never willfully harm another human being. Debbie Hamme does not deserve to be the object of so much hate.
I rest my case, really.
I attended the Board Meeting on March 13. I just happened to be sitting behind three teachers and a student from Culver Park High School. The student waited more than three hours to speak about why she and others should not be shoved into a shoebox to make way for El Marino kindergartners. While listening to the angry and sometimes dramatic speeches by El Marino parents, this student had to wrap her scarf around her mouth to keep from laughing. At that moment, she was the wisest person in the room.
ReplyDeleteFor the record, El Marino and Farragut are not Title I schools; therefore, they do not receive Federal funds designated for Title I schools. Six out of eight schools in our school district DO receive Title I funds because those funds are designated for schools that have children from lower-income households. I am not sure that everyone partaking in the self-appointed "Parents Have Rights" campaign are aware of what entitles a school to receive Title I funding.
ReplyDeleteAlthough parents do have certain rights, I don't think they should be able to call the shots. I also do not think the board should change policy to accommodate the parents; the board's purpose is to serve all of the children in our district on an equal basis.