4J Intranet Site Map
Schools of the Future Home Page : School Choice

January 6 Minutes: School Choice

Time: 7:00 - 9:00 pm 
Location: Roosevelt Middle School Library
Present: Task Group Members: Mike Dubick, Mike Garling, Robert Gordon-McCutchan, Cindy Hinton, Susan Hirata, Bob Jackson, Penny O’Leary, Diane Pergamit,  Hal Sadofsky, Anne Schrenk, Ollie Snowden, Fred Tepfer, Jan VanderTuin, Sandy Vaughn, Alice Wheeler, and Lynda Whitener.
Guests: Teresa Thompson and Kathleen Colson to represent homeschooling; Wilson Shirk and Jody Woldt to represent private schools; Sally Bigongiari, Mary-Kate Edmonston, and Alison Cantril to represent charter schools; and Jack Turner to represent CyberSchool. 
Staff and Facilitators: David Piercy and Betsy Shepard.
Absent: Task Group Members: Bahati Ansari, Erik Browning, Caroline Hopkins, Richard Leebrick, Mac McFadden, Shanti Michaels, Will Mueller, Maxine Proskurowski, Beckie Smolek,  Alice Wheeler, and Lynda Whitener. Facilitator:  Margo Helphand.
Note:  Sharon Shuman has resigned from the committee.
Notetaker: David Piercy
Time Topic Presenter

Discussion with Stakeholder Groups

Members and guests divided into the following groups:  home schooling, non-profit alternative education options, district alternative education programs, neighborhood schools, charter schools, private schools, and CyberSchool.  They discussed the questions listed in the attachment and had about 7 minutes to report to the large group. 

Their comments are summarized below:

Homeschooling:

Students need to be recognized for having different educational needs.  The district does not volunteer to offer support for homeschoolers.  They answer questions but do not volunteer.  Home Source in Bethel is a good option for students.  It would be good if 4J had an option similar to Home Source.  In an ideal situation, the district would be promoting all the options available for students, not just those that are district operated.

The criteria discussed by the task group are good, but it is important that students know the choices they have.  Ms. Colson asked how we were going to change the current system.  In response to a question from the larger group Teresa Thompson of Home Source described her program: 4J and other school districts release home schooled students to Home Source where they take some classes that meet once a week.  The classes are varied, but include classes like foreign language, math, and PE.  The program is K-12 and the program is able to receive state funding.  It was reported that the catalogue from Home Source is exciting and vibrant.  Ms. Colson reported that she hoped to start a program in 4J that could lead to a high school diploma.

 Kathleen Colson

Non-Profit Alternative Education Options:

 Schools in 4J do not offer what many parents and students want.  There is a very narrow span of choice and the district should be offering a broader range.  The top four issues were described in a handout:
  1. The district should provide information about all options (public and private).
  2.  There should be a friendly environment for private alternative education programs.  They should be seen as valid choices and shouldn’t feel competitive.  They should be funded as part of the public education system.  Information about the programs should be made available to all students at the time of registration.
  3.  If the programs are alternative, then evaluation should take into account the unique goals of schools—it should not be limited to the state benchmarks.
  4.  Currently the district funds private alternative education programs at 80% of state contributions.  What does the district do with the remaining 20%?
    •  Note:  Private alternative education programs are actually funded at 80% of  net operating costs, not just of state funding.
If private programs are going to exist with public funding, they should not be seen as competitive, but rather there should be cooperation.  Separation is not good.		 Hal Sadofsky

District Alternative Programs:

The top issues to this group dealt with the variety of offerings.  Many of the innovations that alternative programs brought early have spread to other schools.  Alternative programs may no longer be out in front.  There needs to be a change in the way that alternative schools are perceived.  Many see the district as having a “two-tiered” system.  We need to address transportation, special needs students, and dates of commitment to the programs.  There should be periodic reviews of the alternative school charters to determine whether the school is alternative.  Their goals need to be assessed and they need to feel the push to be innovative.  The schools were chartered to be innovative, but others have caught up.  The group would like to see as an ideal that alternative schools reflect the diversity in the community, socially, racially, and ethnically.  All schools should have stability and all schools should be allowed to cap their enrollment.  We should have a variety of alternatives that are sustainable and continue to have innovation.  Alternative programs are hurt as much by the pressure of the lottery as are neighborhood schools.		 Mike Dubick

Neighborhood Schools:

The top issue to this group is that neighborhood schools have declining enrollment.  They are a casualty of choice.  There is a disparity in SES and therefore in the ability to raise funds.  Neighborhood schools feel inferior when the two schools are together in a building.  Alternative schools' enforced caps leads to funding security that is not available in neighborhood schools.  We look too much at test scores.  What works best about the choice program in 4J is for those who get into alternative schools and that forestalls the development of private schools.  What is frustrating are the artificial divisiveness and the perception of a two-tier system with the alternative schools being best.  There needs to be fundamental change and periodic review of charters and perhaps sunsetting.  There should also be a review of the geographic location of the alternative programs.  As this group develops a vision for the ideal system, it should consider the neighborhood system as the core with choice as a supplement.  The fact that special programs are located only in neighborhood schools leads to the perception of a two-tiered system.  Both other neighborhood schools and alternative schools are cannibalizing neighborhood schools.		 Ollie Snowden

Charter Schools:

Sally gave the background of charter schools saying they had been in the United States for ten years in 36 states.  She said there are about 1,700 schools serving about 350,000 students.  In the ten-year history only 35 have gone “belly-up.”  She said that charter schools are public and are here to help public education use their innovations as a springboard.  Mary-Kate reported that the top issue to charter schools is autonomy but that they help public schools by letting plain people try things out.  They are moving away from a factory model even if it is cheaper to put schools in large buildings.  There are family and team models and it is from the bottom-up rather than the top down.  What works best for their schools is that it is a holistic curriculum and it works.  It is frustrating to get a charter and they are looking for equitable funding.  In 17 states charter schools receive 100% of the state amount.  When states do not fully fund them, the charter schools get other support.  Charter schools need the support of their districts.  Schools with the most autonomy and support seem the most successful.  In response to questions, she reported that The Village School would cap its enrollment at 200 or 250 and then create a new charter school.  The program would be K-8 because the curriculum flows through those grades.  The program teaches through art and movement.  When students graduate, they would attend regular high schools.		 Sally Bigongiari, Mary-Kate Edmonston

Private Schools:

Private schools have existed longer than public schools in this country.  They are mission driven and many are non-profit.  They can be expensive.  Some have financial assistance from other organizations.  They are usually in large cities, especially those like Oak Hill.  Teachers are paid less and are there by choice.  He believes in school choice.  The top issues are
  1. that curriculum should be driven by mission, which may vary from school to school and
  2. parents should have the right to choose their own schools.
 What works is that people are choosing private schools locally not because public schools are bad:  they are choosing them for different reasons.  What is frustrating is the jealousy that exists.  We are in competition.  He would counsel people to attend the school (public or private) based on what is best for the student.  It would be good for everyone to have information about the choices.  In response to a question about the system of vouchers in Vermont, he said they are needed here.		 Wilson Shirk

CyberSchool: 

CyberSchool does not depend on time and location.  It is on-line, operates without regard to time, is year round, accredited, and the vast majority of students are not from Eugene.  CyberSchool is not a school, does not have a coherent sequence and offers no diploma.  It allows, however, choices, that cannot be offered in regular schools or a regular choice program.  It complements other school programs and extends the options.  Information was distributed.		  Jack Turner.

Minutes Review:

No additions or changes to the minutes were noted.

Appointing members to present to Schools of the Future Committee:

Decision:  Jan VanderTuin, Hal Sadofsky, Fred Tepfler, and Mike Dubick volunteered to give a status report to the Schools of the Future Committee about the task group’s work on January 11.  David suggested they review the task group’s activities, review the community-input system, and review the issues, descriptors, and criteria discussed by the committee.

Meeting dates:

Decision:  The following meeting dates were scheduled:  February 9, 17, and 24.

Agenda for next meeting:

Decision:  At the next meeting the task group will analyze where it is and what needs to be done to have a preliminary report by February 8.  The group will also discuss whether there should be additional input.

Choice Task Group Meeting Schedule:

All meetings will be from 7 to 9 p.m. in the Roosevelt Middle School Library:
  • Thursday, January 20
  • Wednesday, January 26
  • Wednesday, February 9
  • Thursday, February 17
  • Thursday, February 24.
9:00

Adjourn
< Return to School Choice >

4J Home Page| Schools of the Future | Site Map | Search



Please send comments or questions to the 4J Web Team.
200 North Monroe Street - Eugene, Oregon, 97402 Phone: 541-687-3123
Eugene School District 4J