The reason the district continues to spend so much money on outside service providers and consultants is because the excessive central administration and board simply don't want to do the work that needs to be done in house! Spend, spend, spend until the money runs out and then everyone looks at each other with their mouths open and says that they should be able to do things as other districts are doing but in reality no one wants to do the HARD WORK and figure things out. Just pay someone else to do it, well look where that has gotten the district. This is so disgusting and disheartening. I can't believe we have teachers and paraprofessionals still willing to put up with this. Shame on the board and the Supt. Enough is enough!
I'm thinking some administrators don't want to do the hard work, and a lot of them simply aren't capable of doing the work. As far as the teachers putting up with it ... well, lots of us have already left. I expect the exodus will continue.
The competence bit is a serious issue. You go from a superintendent with a PhD from Stanford to a dude with an EdD from Chicago State. And the latter prioritizes hires based on his CPS network rather than merit, it seems.
Part of me tells me they are oblivious, wholly disconnected from reality. They have no concept of the damage done to the community. I wouldn't let these guys manage a lemonade stand, let alone a budget of ~$140M
I agree. They don't think it is their fault. They should have apologized a long time ago. However, I am still hoping they will. The FB army is already starting to pounce ahead of the election and calling everyone who reads this blog MAGA.
Well, they've already done that but that's OK, they are entitled to whatever opinions they want to have - even if I disagree. I'm working on an opinion piece for here or the Roundtable. Everyone in Evanston should agree that we need functional schools that are not bankrupt. You can't do any of the equity stuff if you have no money or if the State takes over. This is not a zero sum game between "do equity work" or "finances" - you need the finances in order to do the equity work.
I know they don't like me but I'm hoping I can use my megaphone to help bridge this gap in the community - I have no beefs with anyone.
If they were really invested in equitable outcomes for kids they would be furious about how Horton fleeced the district, the increasing achievement gap, and how the district is driving money away from classrooms and into central office. It's nonsense.
Yes, this is what I'm saying! We've tried their policy prescription here and it didn't work. The disruptor guy who promised to solve all these issues just schemed us:
- He totally screwed up the Foster School Project, forget about the money: he promised the neighborhood a school and then did absolutely nothing and just left but plastered it all over his resume.
- He burned $2.5 million on a teacher residency program that absolutely screwed a bunch of mid-career Black folks trying to get into education
- He used his equity budget to give contracts to his friends, who then gave him consulting work in CPS.
- He used the capital funds to do stuff like buying fancy cars for the security team instead of .. building the Foster School.
Despite his constant insistence that he was equity forward, none of this stuff moved the ball on equity. And the Board was complicit in this by not holding him accountable at all.
I’ve been thinking a lot about the FB group I think you’re referring to. It’s extremely rich of the five people who comment in that group to make any claims whatsoever about FOIA GRAS. That group is the most toxic public forum I’ve ever had the displeasure of being a part of. I stay in it because I’m worried about the influence it might have over the board elections, given the sheer number of folks (albeit silent ones) in the group. Someone needs to step in. And I’m quickly approaching a DNGAF mentality where I might just do it at some point.
A few things that really irk me about the existing one...
A) who elected the admins and mods? Are they representative of the 4500 members of the group or just a vocal minority that wants to have elevated position?
B) Those admins and moderators don't even consistently enforce adherence to the "Group Rules"...
-2: "Be Relevant" why are there so many posts around adult events that aren't specific to education and caregiving for K-8 kids?
-3: "No insults"...I see plenty of that going around!
-4: "Be Courteous. Create a welcoming environment. Use appropriate language and community standards for communication. No tone policing allowed and graciousness is expected" Absolutely laughable that this is a rule.
-5: "No Hate Speech or Bullying" The vocal few love to get into semantic arguments about what constitutes bullying, so I'll leave that alone, but the description of this one goes on to say "degrading comments about things like race, religion, culture, sexual orientation, gender or identity will not be tolerated." I've seen plenty of that be tolerated. Just because you use the spelling "whyte" in expressing your disdain and stereotyping an entire racial population of Evanston doesn't mean you're not making degrading comments.
-7: "Respect Privacy and Maintain Trust (Exceptions)" First, what are these "exceptions"? Second, the description says "What's shared in this group stays here". I realize I'm breaking that "rule" by making this post, but you also have some of the most vocal people on there saying things like "I HOPE a parent is screenshotting this to use it against you". The description also goes on to say "NEVER doxx, share anyone’s medical history, mental health status, **negative personal information** from elsewhere on the internet" -- oh, you mean like Lady Dog Whistledown didn't pull in negative personal info in from elsewhere on the internet?
-9: "Receiving Feedback - If you are the recipient of critical feedback and feel uncomfortable, stay calm and ask for clarification. Do not dismiss, belittle or mock." It is quite literally part of the playbook the shoutymcshouty pants posse to dismiss, belittle, and mock people they think have said something offensive, even if unintended.
Impact vs. intent doesn't give you carte blanche to be an asshole to people, full stop. But that's a big reason why, among 4500 members in that group, we have so little meaningful dialogue or community to show for it -- and why people seek anonymity where it's offered. For 99% of people it's not because we want to transact in racism, ableism, or otherwise attack or belittle marginalized communities. It's because so many people's concerns are disqualified or dismissed without being reasonably heard. It's amazing when you look at the admins, their "rules" they don't really bother enforcing, and their seemingly unwavering support for current/recent boards and admins, you realize the similarities between the two in how they selectively respect rules and guidelines.
Having never been a member of the FB group, what I don’t understand is why people continue to post there, let alone engage in pointless arguments with what sounds like the group of trolls serving as admins.
Also, if it’s not a D65 affiliated group, what is stopping someone from starting a splinter group?
I think it's exactly as Megan explained. Unfortunately, it's not as simple as just starting a new group. I think there actually is one. But there would have to be a more effective means of bringing people over from the one in question. So then you have this problem that certain people seem to have larger megaphones to an audience of 4500 people with a vested interest in D65. I think that number amounts to about 1/2 of the votes cast in the 2023 election!
Additionally, many who would otherwise comment there have come here for a similar purpose. Only real difference is we just have a comment section vs. having dedicated forums and threads not necessarily tied to a specific post Tom published.
It would also be helpful if a D65 parent started a new D65 Facebook group that is not beholden to a single ideological viewpoint. Many parents may be interested in a new forum.
Therapists did this earlier this month. There’s a group on Facebook called TIPP (therapists in private practice). It became an absolute cesspool of ideological hate. Bullying or banning anyone who swayed from a very narrow worldview of who is the oppressed and how to navigate anti-racist/anti-imperialist therapy. It has 25k and many people did not join for the same reasons. Many joined to be up to date with professional news, updates, resources. Anyway, a group was formed called the NTIPP (new therapists in private practice). NTIPP is sooopoo much safer. There is no sudden crash of a discussion that derails the process of discourse into shame. It’s fascinating to feel the difference having been in both online spaces. Despite what TIPP says about NTIPP, it’s not a MAGA playground. It’s just the information without the burning down of people’s spirits.
If you start it, I recommend the New D65 Parents & Guardians. ND65P&G.
There is one! Been a little quiet lately but maybe that's because the other group has been occupied with other things and it's hard to spin the tsunami of bad news that keeps coming.
Absolutely. A notable plaintiff in a lawsuit brought against the City of Evanston has been using screenshots of people's comments on facebook ... to try to prove that there's a Global Conspiracy against him?
Truly unhinged and reprehensible behavior. As if something on a facebook group for D65 students is grounds for city commission members to say that a large community outcry is just "white people shit".
Specifically, Tone Police, there are screenshots in this lawsuit (which Tom has previously written about) being used from the Evanston CASE group, which is for parents of kids with special educational needs in the Evanston school districts. It takes a special kind of person to think it's ok to screenshot things from this kind of group and use it for their lawsuit.
I’m hoping people in this community are finally seeing through the “everyone who doesn’t agree with us is a racist, white supremacist Trump supporter” argument. It’s fascist and it doesn’t get us any closer to solving these huge problems in D65.
And also like, there are very few actual Trump supporters here. I'll post about when the precinct data comes in but like .. there are probably more people running for the D65 board right now than there are Trump supporters in Evanston. In 2016, Gary Johnson got more votes...
Not to mention there were probably more third-party/write-in voters among that group of activists (which, that's their prerogative, but ironic to call everyone else MAGA). They also did this type of deflection during the Haven issues when a group of parents wore red in support of teachers to a school board meeting (newsflash, "red for ed" is a thing and not just for the GOP). It's also neither here nor there because none of the self-described equity-focused candidates achieved better outcomes for marginalized populations in Evanston and now they're all leaving the board, while many of the incoming group will probably pull things in the other direction toward cost controls and improving test scores. If we'd had more of a balance of interests on the board over the past 6 or so years we could have possibly had more oversight of finances/Horton's admin while advancing some of these other programs, collaborating with the city, NU and other community organizations. Compromise is not easy, but that's generally how elected bodies have to work.
How we got here is kind of on us - we're lucky to have this wide of a slate to choose from this cycle, and the current momentum is probably going to push things a certain way like you said. I don't think the answer is putting four people with an exemplary financial background up there simply to get us out of the red and I'm concerned about the notion of us going too hard in that direction. You want your board to be unified, but they should be a great blend of
Watched the public comment. Spencer Stern’s comment was especially good - very pointed but civil. Hopefully the consultant will recommend cutting admin ranks … of course the consultant was HIRED by admin 😬
I think one of the biggest problems with the current board is that 5/7 people (everyone except Omar and Mya) work in the business of educational administration in one way or another - either as a consultant or an administrator themselves. Having non-admins alone on the Board I think would move the ball on some of this stuff.
Seems like nearly all of the 17 fit that description so now all we have to do is figure out other ways to distinguish between them! Or we could just throw some darts.
There is at least one "diversity consultant" running and I would also stay away from the two professors running given the nature of their scholarship.
It would be helpful to see an explicit reform slate of four candidates where they run on:
1) Educational improvement and pre-college readiness
2) Fiscal responsibility
3) Transparency in governance and decision-making
4) Retention and recruitment of high quality educators.
Given the vacuousness of the term and the way it has been leveraged to run the district into fiscal crisis, any candidate who highlights "equity" should be viewed with suspicion.
Did they say how the $225k for lunchroom supervisors would be used? I know some schools have told parent volunteers they’re no longer welcome to supervise. I wonder if the two are related.
My guess is the lunchroom volunteer thing was raised as inequitable so they had to stop it, but they still recognized the need for help there so now it's hired across the board. Could be that parent volunteers are less likely to be as firm with keeping things moving.
A couple alternatives that would be cheaper:
1) have existing building staff/admin do lunch supervision on a rotating basis
2) have lunch supervisor sign-ups, then fill necessary slots with the hired help when volunteers aren't available
I understand the parent volunteers are viewed as inequitable but at the same time why spend money we don't have if we have willing parent volunteers? That savings could go towards reading specialists or tutoring.
My understanding is that not all children can have their parents volunteer at school so it is viewed as unfair. That is also one of the reasons they got rid of mystery reader. However, they still have field trip chaperones so... unless D65 canceled all field trips... I don't know the status.
I'm not sure if it's specifically each individual kids' parents ability to come or just that some schools inevitably have more volunteers than others, so when they haven't had hired lunch supervisors, it presented an "advantage". Those lunchrooms are pure chaos! I've done the lunch volunteer thing before, and I can assure you I spent most of the time helping out kids I didn't know, not chatting with my kid or friends.
I will say, there is built in inequity by having some kids essentially forced to eat whatever's on the school lunch menu. It means they have less time to eat, since they have to wait in line, and I can't imagine they're able to do as well in the afternoon when they don't eat anything substantial because they don't like what's on the menu. Just might be good food for thought (swear no pun intended) for those of us whose kids are fortunate enough to have a packed lunch daily or to be able to choose the days they want school lunch based on things they'll actually eat.
I thought the most equitable thing that the District did was during COVID they had federal free lunch for all kids, so like every kid in the District had the same lunch. That was such a burden off of parents and was a real equalizer among the kids. I never understood why the board or state didn't even bother to consider continuing that program (other states did, like Minnesota)
The reason the district continues to spend so much money on outside service providers and consultants is because the excessive central administration and board simply don't want to do the work that needs to be done in house! Spend, spend, spend until the money runs out and then everyone looks at each other with their mouths open and says that they should be able to do things as other districts are doing but in reality no one wants to do the HARD WORK and figure things out. Just pay someone else to do it, well look where that has gotten the district. This is so disgusting and disheartening. I can't believe we have teachers and paraprofessionals still willing to put up with this. Shame on the board and the Supt. Enough is enough!
We've got the worse of both worlds - we're paying for the outside consultants and the in-house staff!
I'm thinking some administrators don't want to do the hard work, and a lot of them simply aren't capable of doing the work. As far as the teachers putting up with it ... well, lots of us have already left. I expect the exodus will continue.
The competence bit is a serious issue. You go from a superintendent with a PhD from Stanford to a dude with an EdD from Chicago State. And the latter prioritizes hires based on his CPS network rather than merit, it seems.
So, are the departing board members going to apologize to the community, or just walk away whistling from the wreckage?
https://i.imgflip.com/9awcz5.jpg
Part of me tells me they are oblivious, wholly disconnected from reality. They have no concept of the damage done to the community. I wouldn't let these guys manage a lemonade stand, let alone a budget of ~$140M
I agree. They don't think it is their fault. They should have apologized a long time ago. However, I am still hoping they will. The FB army is already starting to pounce ahead of the election and calling everyone who reads this blog MAGA.
Well, they've already done that but that's OK, they are entitled to whatever opinions they want to have - even if I disagree. I'm working on an opinion piece for here or the Roundtable. Everyone in Evanston should agree that we need functional schools that are not bankrupt. You can't do any of the equity stuff if you have no money or if the State takes over. This is not a zero sum game between "do equity work" or "finances" - you need the finances in order to do the equity work.
I know they don't like me but I'm hoping I can use my megaphone to help bridge this gap in the community - I have no beefs with anyone.
If they were really invested in equitable outcomes for kids they would be furious about how Horton fleeced the district, the increasing achievement gap, and how the district is driving money away from classrooms and into central office. It's nonsense.
Yes, this is what I'm saying! We've tried their policy prescription here and it didn't work. The disruptor guy who promised to solve all these issues just schemed us:
- He totally screwed up the Foster School Project, forget about the money: he promised the neighborhood a school and then did absolutely nothing and just left but plastered it all over his resume.
- He burned $2.5 million on a teacher residency program that absolutely screwed a bunch of mid-career Black folks trying to get into education
- He used his equity budget to give contracts to his friends, who then gave him consulting work in CPS.
- He used the capital funds to do stuff like buying fancy cars for the security team instead of .. building the Foster School.
Despite his constant insistence that he was equity forward, none of this stuff moved the ball on equity. And the Board was complicit in this by not holding him accountable at all.
Thank you for everything you are doing. I can't imagine how things would be in this district if you didn't start this blog.
I’ve been thinking a lot about the FB group I think you’re referring to. It’s extremely rich of the five people who comment in that group to make any claims whatsoever about FOIA GRAS. That group is the most toxic public forum I’ve ever had the displeasure of being a part of. I stay in it because I’m worried about the influence it might have over the board elections, given the sheer number of folks (albeit silent ones) in the group. Someone needs to step in. And I’m quickly approaching a DNGAF mentality where I might just do it at some point.
A few things that really irk me about the existing one...
A) who elected the admins and mods? Are they representative of the 4500 members of the group or just a vocal minority that wants to have elevated position?
B) Those admins and moderators don't even consistently enforce adherence to the "Group Rules"...
-2: "Be Relevant" why are there so many posts around adult events that aren't specific to education and caregiving for K-8 kids?
-3: "No insults"...I see plenty of that going around!
-4: "Be Courteous. Create a welcoming environment. Use appropriate language and community standards for communication. No tone policing allowed and graciousness is expected" Absolutely laughable that this is a rule.
-5: "No Hate Speech or Bullying" The vocal few love to get into semantic arguments about what constitutes bullying, so I'll leave that alone, but the description of this one goes on to say "degrading comments about things like race, religion, culture, sexual orientation, gender or identity will not be tolerated." I've seen plenty of that be tolerated. Just because you use the spelling "whyte" in expressing your disdain and stereotyping an entire racial population of Evanston doesn't mean you're not making degrading comments.
-7: "Respect Privacy and Maintain Trust (Exceptions)" First, what are these "exceptions"? Second, the description says "What's shared in this group stays here". I realize I'm breaking that "rule" by making this post, but you also have some of the most vocal people on there saying things like "I HOPE a parent is screenshotting this to use it against you". The description also goes on to say "NEVER doxx, share anyone’s medical history, mental health status, **negative personal information** from elsewhere on the internet" -- oh, you mean like Lady Dog Whistledown didn't pull in negative personal info in from elsewhere on the internet?
-9: "Receiving Feedback - If you are the recipient of critical feedback and feel uncomfortable, stay calm and ask for clarification. Do not dismiss, belittle or mock." It is quite literally part of the playbook the shoutymcshouty pants posse to dismiss, belittle, and mock people they think have said something offensive, even if unintended.
Impact vs. intent doesn't give you carte blanche to be an asshole to people, full stop. But that's a big reason why, among 4500 members in that group, we have so little meaningful dialogue or community to show for it -- and why people seek anonymity where it's offered. For 99% of people it's not because we want to transact in racism, ableism, or otherwise attack or belittle marginalized communities. It's because so many people's concerns are disqualified or dismissed without being reasonably heard. It's amazing when you look at the admins, their "rules" they don't really bother enforcing, and their seemingly unwavering support for current/recent boards and admins, you realize the similarities between the two in how they selectively respect rules and guidelines.
Having never been a member of the FB group, what I don’t understand is why people continue to post there, let alone engage in pointless arguments with what sounds like the group of trolls serving as admins.
Also, if it’s not a D65 affiliated group, what is stopping someone from starting a splinter group?
I think it's exactly as Megan explained. Unfortunately, it's not as simple as just starting a new group. I think there actually is one. But there would have to be a more effective means of bringing people over from the one in question. So then you have this problem that certain people seem to have larger megaphones to an audience of 4500 people with a vested interest in D65. I think that number amounts to about 1/2 of the votes cast in the 2023 election!
Additionally, many who would otherwise comment there have come here for a similar purpose. Only real difference is we just have a comment section vs. having dedicated forums and threads not necessarily tied to a specific post Tom published.
It would also be helpful if a D65 parent started a new D65 Facebook group that is not beholden to a single ideological viewpoint. Many parents may be interested in a new forum.
Moderating that would be my personal nightmare
Therapists did this earlier this month. There’s a group on Facebook called TIPP (therapists in private practice). It became an absolute cesspool of ideological hate. Bullying or banning anyone who swayed from a very narrow worldview of who is the oppressed and how to navigate anti-racist/anti-imperialist therapy. It has 25k and many people did not join for the same reasons. Many joined to be up to date with professional news, updates, resources. Anyway, a group was formed called the NTIPP (new therapists in private practice). NTIPP is sooopoo much safer. There is no sudden crash of a discussion that derails the process of discourse into shame. It’s fascinating to feel the difference having been in both online spaces. Despite what TIPP says about NTIPP, it’s not a MAGA playground. It’s just the information without the burning down of people’s spirits.
If you start it, I recommend the New D65 Parents & Guardians. ND65P&G.
There is one! Been a little quiet lately but maybe that's because the other group has been occupied with other things and it's hard to spin the tsunami of bad news that keeps coming.
https://facebook.com/groups/243765297320242/
Be careful because they screenshot everything. I’ve left almost every Evanston group for this reason.
Absolutely. A notable plaintiff in a lawsuit brought against the City of Evanston has been using screenshots of people's comments on facebook ... to try to prove that there's a Global Conspiracy against him?
Truly unhinged and reprehensible behavior. As if something on a facebook group for D65 students is grounds for city commission members to say that a large community outcry is just "white people shit".
Specifically, Tone Police, there are screenshots in this lawsuit (which Tom has previously written about) being used from the Evanston CASE group, which is for parents of kids with special educational needs in the Evanston school districts. It takes a special kind of person to think it's ok to screenshot things from this kind of group and use it for their lawsuit.
I’m ok with that. It can’t go on like this.
I’m hoping people in this community are finally seeing through the “everyone who doesn’t agree with us is a racist, white supremacist Trump supporter” argument. It’s fascist and it doesn’t get us any closer to solving these huge problems in D65.
And also like, there are very few actual Trump supporters here. I'll post about when the precinct data comes in but like .. there are probably more people running for the D65 board right now than there are Trump supporters in Evanston. In 2016, Gary Johnson got more votes...
Not to mention there were probably more third-party/write-in voters among that group of activists (which, that's their prerogative, but ironic to call everyone else MAGA). They also did this type of deflection during the Haven issues when a group of parents wore red in support of teachers to a school board meeting (newsflash, "red for ed" is a thing and not just for the GOP). It's also neither here nor there because none of the self-described equity-focused candidates achieved better outcomes for marginalized populations in Evanston and now they're all leaving the board, while many of the incoming group will probably pull things in the other direction toward cost controls and improving test scores. If we'd had more of a balance of interests on the board over the past 6 or so years we could have possibly had more oversight of finances/Horton's admin while advancing some of these other programs, collaborating with the city, NU and other community organizations. Compromise is not easy, but that's generally how elected bodies have to work.
How we got here is kind of on us - we're lucky to have this wide of a slate to choose from this cycle, and the current momentum is probably going to push things a certain way like you said. I don't think the answer is putting four people with an exemplary financial background up there simply to get us out of the red and I'm concerned about the notion of us going too hard in that direction. You want your board to be unified, but they should be a great blend of
Ironic, given they behave just like MAGA
When you behave autocratically, it doesn’t matter if you are from the left or the right; you get the same crappy results.
My money is walking away saying “Did I do this?"
Watched the public comment. Spencer Stern’s comment was especially good - very pointed but civil. Hopefully the consultant will recommend cutting admin ranks … of course the consultant was HIRED by admin 😬
I think one of the biggest problems with the current board is that 5/7 people (everyone except Omar and Mya) work in the business of educational administration in one way or another - either as a consultant or an administrator themselves. Having non-admins alone on the Board I think would move the ball on some of this stuff.
Seems like nearly all of the 17 fit that description so now all we have to do is figure out other ways to distinguish between them! Or we could just throw some darts.
There is at least one "diversity consultant" running and I would also stay away from the two professors running given the nature of their scholarship.
It would be helpful to see an explicit reform slate of four candidates where they run on:
1) Educational improvement and pre-college readiness
2) Fiscal responsibility
3) Transparency in governance and decision-making
4) Retention and recruitment of high quality educators.
Given the vacuousness of the term and the way it has been leveraged to run the district into fiscal crisis, any candidate who highlights "equity" should be viewed with suspicion.
Did they say how the $225k for lunchroom supervisors would be used? I know some schools have told parent volunteers they’re no longer welcome to supervise. I wonder if the two are related.
I am not sure but it would be very D65 to fire the volunteers and replace them with more costs
My guess is the lunchroom volunteer thing was raised as inequitable so they had to stop it, but they still recognized the need for help there so now it's hired across the board. Could be that parent volunteers are less likely to be as firm with keeping things moving.
A couple alternatives that would be cheaper:
1) have existing building staff/admin do lunch supervision on a rotating basis
2) have lunch supervisor sign-ups, then fill necessary slots with the hired help when volunteers aren't available
I understand the parent volunteers are viewed as inequitable but at the same time why spend money we don't have if we have willing parent volunteers? That savings could go towards reading specialists or tutoring.
This is a new one to me and I thought I'd seen everything. Dumb question, what's the theory for why lunchroom volunteers are inequitable?
My understanding is that not all children can have their parents volunteer at school so it is viewed as unfair. That is also one of the reasons they got rid of mystery reader. However, they still have field trip chaperones so... unless D65 canceled all field trips... I don't know the status.
I'm not sure if it's specifically each individual kids' parents ability to come or just that some schools inevitably have more volunteers than others, so when they haven't had hired lunch supervisors, it presented an "advantage". Those lunchrooms are pure chaos! I've done the lunch volunteer thing before, and I can assure you I spent most of the time helping out kids I didn't know, not chatting with my kid or friends.
I will say, there is built in inequity by having some kids essentially forced to eat whatever's on the school lunch menu. It means they have less time to eat, since they have to wait in line, and I can't imagine they're able to do as well in the afternoon when they don't eat anything substantial because they don't like what's on the menu. Just might be good food for thought (swear no pun intended) for those of us whose kids are fortunate enough to have a packed lunch daily or to be able to choose the days they want school lunch based on things they'll actually eat.
I thought the most equitable thing that the District did was during COVID they had federal free lunch for all kids, so like every kid in the District had the same lunch. That was such a burden off of parents and was a real equalizer among the kids. I never understood why the board or state didn't even bother to consider continuing that program (other states did, like Minnesota)