[Company Logo Image]    Keep Eanes Informed                                                                                               

 
 

 

A day without sunshine is like, you know, night. 

- Steve Martin

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.

- Aristotle

 Home
Trust and Confidence
Private Law Firms
Bond Priorities
ADA Advocacy
Special Education
Check Registers
Salaries/Contracts
Dan Harper Complaint
Connecting the Dots
Community Updates
Abuse/Litigation
Construction Audit
TOMA Violations
Sunshine on Eanes
Board of Trustees
Public Information
Open Government
In the News
News
Parent Advocacy
Links of Interest
Community Events
Gifted Education
Transfer Students

 

* Please download Adobe Reader 8.0 for best results in using this website.

 

Click here:  Animator vs. Animation

 

To avoid criticism, say nothing, do nothing, be nothing.

- Albert Einstein

 

 

All children deserve an equal playing field.

- Ed Allen, Westlake Picayune April 2008

 

 

My vision for Eanes can't be seen on a Jumbotron ...

- Eanes ISD parent
 
 
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter." ~ Martin Luther King, Jr.

 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

   "The truth is like the sun.  You can block it out for a time but it ain't goin' away."  - Elvis

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If You Aren't Completely Appalled You Haven't Been Paying Attention

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

All you need in this life is ignorance and confidence; then success is sure. - Mark Twain

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Information is currency for democracy.

-Thomas Jefferson

 
 

 

 

 

 

It's about power and money and the law firms who control and run the school districts.
- K. Yeaman,  Mom


 

 

 
 

 

 

Nothing is more destructive of respect for the government and the law of the land than passing laws which cannot be enforced.

- Albert Einstein

 
 
        William Tell Overture for Moms
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The best protection of the Texas Public Information Act is enforcement of the Texas Public Information Act. 

- Dianna Pharr

 


    News


Ohio puts teacher misconduct data online

A new state Web site listing 1,700 educators who were reprimanded for misconduct, including cases where teachers physically or sexually abused students, is intended to make classrooms safer, education officials said.

The Ohio Department of Education posted the database Thursday, naming teachers, coaches, administrators and other licensed educators who were investigated and reprimanded by state officials.

The state had promised to create the Web site after The Columbus Dispatch reported last month that there were widespread disciplinary problems, including abuse of children, assault and theft, among working teachers and that the information was not easily available to the public.

The newspaper also reported that the state Education Department did not always notify school districts about reprimanded teachers, so some superintendents had unknowingly hired teachers with histories of misconduct.

The Web site includes newly revealed cases on more than 40 educators who were issued written reprimands and allowed to keep their licenses. Some cases included students who were kissed, shoved, hit with a yardstick, or otherwise treated with excessive force by teachers.

The Education Department can punish educators for "conduct unbecoming" the profession in a variety of ways, including written reprimands and permanently stripping a teaching license.

"The new Educator Conduct Search tool provides access to a database of the small subset of educators _ less than 1 percent _ subjected to disciplinary actions since the Office of Professional Conduct was created in 1999," State Superintendent Susan Zelman said in an e-mail to school superintendents.

The database doesn't provide any information on unfounded allegations or educators currently under investigation by the state. Teachers unions had expressed concern that making more information public would spread false accusations that could ruin careers.

The Web site lists only cases in which state officials have confirmed misconduct and taken action. It names the school district where the educator worked and gives a basic description of the wrongdoing, such as "conviction for sexual battery" or "inappropriate relationship with a student."

"It's a significant step in the direction of assuring school district personnel have clean records," said David Laurenzi, president of the Buckeye Association of School Administrators and superintendent of Independence schools, near Cleveland. "It will help make classrooms safer."

Bill Mason, a former assistant superintendent for Newark schools, said the Web site has flaws. It doesn't provide enough detail about offenses that led to written reprimands, he said.

Ohio education officials crafted the Web site after reviewing online information released by Florida, South Carolina and Vermont on teacher misconduct.

All three states provide more detail about a teacher's misconduct than Ohio does. For example, Florida's database includes a link to case documents, including the original complaint.

Zelman said the Ohio database is a work in progress that will be updated and enhanced.

___

Information from: The Columbus Dispatch, http://www.dispatch.com


Wimberley superintendent receives $200,000 retirement payment

Marian Strauss resigned with four years left on five-year contract


AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Thursday, July 19, 2007

WIMBERLEY — Wimberley Superintendent Marian Strauss will receive a $200,000 payment from the school district in exchange for her early retirement. Strauss retired Monday with four years left on her five-year contract. The move comes after a group of Wimberley residents urged the board to fire Strauss in March for what they said was her emphasis on athletics over academics, missteps in two failed bond votes, unwillingness to listen to those with different points of view and low teacher salaries.  Full Article Here

Wimberley school board to consider ousting superintendent - Trustees to discuss options Monday.            

AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Friday, July 13, 2007

Wimberley school district trustees are considering the possible resignation of Superintendent Marian Strauss three months after some residents demanded it.

At their Monday night meeting, trustees plan to meet behind closed doors to consider entering into a resignation agreement with Strauss. They also could appoint an interim superintendent.

The move comes after a group of Wimberley residents urged the board in March to fire Strauss for what they said was her emphasis on athletics over academics, missteps in two failed bond votes, unwillingness to listen to those with different points of view and low teacher salaries.  Full article here


Texas AG obtains indictment for open meetings violation
A grand jury in Upshur County has indicted the former president of the New Diana school board for conspiring to circumvent the Texas Open Meetings Act, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott announced Wednesday. Click here to read full article


Click to read full post:  Money makes you honest  Apparently logic isn’t a virtue among journalists or TEA officials.  Dr. Neeley* said the wealthy districts on the list – including many considering self-investigations – are unlikely to cheat.

“You look at Highland Park, Richardson, Eanes,” she said, naming some of the state’s wealthiest districts in the Dallas and Austin areas. “Do they have to cheat to have good scores? I gave a talk in Eanes not long ago and said, ‘Do you people think Westlake High School had to cheat to get good scores?’ “

*Shirley Neeley, Texas Education Agency, Commissioner

Associated Links:

Districts on TAKS cheat list in dark; State didn’t seek data on why firm flagged schools, preventing investigation

TEA gets excuses, excuses; State finds merit in 62 school rating appeals, creativity in others


 
Awarding Blue Ribbons: Recognizing Schools or Students?
David W. Kirkpatrick, Senior Education Fellow   
                
In 1983 the U.S. Department of Education began its "Blue Ribbon Schools" program, a process by which it identifies what it proclaims as among the most successful public and private schools in the nation.  In the years since thousands of schools have been so identified. 
 
One weakness of the program is a failure to carefully distinguish what might constitute a blue ribbon school.  A simplistic approach is to see where students are achieving and give an award to that school.  The problem with that is it fails to recognize "socioeconomic status," that is, the backgrounds of the students.  It is both common sense and proven by studies that students who have advantages in terms of family income, educational levels achieved by the parents, who come from homes with books, computers, opportunities for travel etc, will do better than students who do not have those advantages. 
 
Thus a more accurate indication of a good school would be one that adjusts for such factors and identifies those in which students do better than would normally be expected, based on their backgrounds.
 
As an example, Pennsylvania makes it relatively easy to identify the overall wealth of a given school district, compared with the state average.  Keep in mind that this is the standing for each district as a unit.  It does not tell you anything about any given student or school.  Still, a very wealthy district can only be so if most of those in that district are prosperous.
 
In one year, Pennsylvania had eight schools that were awarded  "Blue Ribbon" status.  They represented seven districts since two of the schools were located within a single district.  A look at them in terms of their relative wealth  revealed that only one of the seven districts was at approximately the state average.  The other six were above average.  The district having two schools selected included the wealthiest community in the Commonwealth.
 
Over the years the Blue Ribbon program has grown but the tendency has been to produce similar results.
 
In summary, with all due respect to the schools receiving awards, what the federal Department of Education is recognizing is not so much blue ribbon schools as it is blue ribbon students, the kind of students who do well by virtue of their backgrounds, both individually, with most of them having advantages, and collectively, since their being together in one school makes it not only possible but inevitable that they will learn from each other.
 
On rare occasions this is recognized by those who know whereof they speak.
 
One such occurred when a superintendent who was about to retire from a wealthy district attended a conference on the disparity of funding, and results, among school districts.  Those in attendance were considering a lawsuit to obtain what they regarded as a more equitable distribution of funding among districts.  If achieved, his district would not be one of those to receive more funding.
 
Rather than oppose it, as one might expect, and although he was present just as a member of the audience and could have avoided any comment, he told the group that he supported their cause.  As for his still unknown successor, he said it really didn't matter much who it would be because the students in his district were so advantaged and capable that they would continue to do well in any event.  As they have.
 
This should not be viewed as an objection to a properly evaluated Blue Ribbon program.  Public (and nonpublic) schools whose students succeed well beyond what would be expected of them, with due consideration for their socioeconomic status, should be recognized.  An example is the Vaughn school in Los Angeles, a public school long rated one of the worst in the district.  Converted to a charter school It has had remarkable success, with essentially  the same staff and facilities, but less money.  Vaughn deservedly became the first charter school to win a Blue Ribbon.    This is the type of school most deserving of recognition. 
 
Unfortunately, the decades old Blue Ribbon Awards program, under, Republican and Democrat administrations, has shown they are not the ones  most likely to receive them.

statesman.com

Carbone: The school bully

Leslie Carbone, SPECIAL CONTRIBUTOR

Thursday, August 23, 2007

As a new school year opens, students, parents and teachers hoping for quality education face an ironic opponent: the National Education Association, America's premier teachers union. When it comes to opposing commonsense education reforms, the 3,200,000- member NEA is the biggest, baddest bully in the playground. Sadly, students who want to learn and teachers who want to teach suffer most from the union's misplaced policies and politics.

When parents and kids shop together for school clothes, supplies, and extra-curricular needs, they enjoy a bevy of choices in stores and manufacturers. That means that they can shop around for the right products at the best prices. Makers of shoddy goods and retailers with lousy service will be forced to improve or lose business to better product providers. That's how competition keeps quality and prices in line with customers' needs and expectations.

But kids who go off to school with good, inexpensive clothes and supplies may receive education that's just the opposite—overpriced and underperforming. That's because the National Education Association fights every effort to let that same accountability and competition improve the product its teachers work hard to provide—the education of America 's public school children.

The NEA's politicized leadership is fond of claiming that its efforts are in the best interests of students, but this is far from the case. Nowhere is this more clear than in its relentless mission to sabotage the accountability for results in the No Child Left Behind Act. While many groups have advocated ways to improve or change the law, NEA leadership has systematically worked to torpedo its reliance on academic standards and testing. Instead it proposes a meaningless jumble of apples-to-oranges comparisons and "portfolio assessments" that would make it nearly impossible to evaluate the progress a school or its teachers are making in teaching our children.

The NEA's leadership also stands in firm opposition to any plan to shift its teachers to performance-based pay determined by the achievement of their students. Blocking efforts to compensate good teachers more than bad ones, the union insists on determining pay raises strictly by seniority. It rejects paying teachers based on their area of expertise—thereby maintaining America 's shortage of good math and science teachers. And it stops retired folks or others who want to contribute their expertise from volunteering as teachers.

The NEA consistently opposes giving parents and students freedom of choice among public schools—so kids in districts with poorly performing schools can't seek better education in nearby neighborhoods.

On the other hand, the union protects teachers who clearly threaten students' best chances for a quality education. The tenure system makes it difficult to fire bad teachers; it can cost taxpayers nearly $200,000 to discharge a poorly performing educator.

The NEA shows no reservations about taking teachers' union dues and spending them to spread a radical political agenda. Annual NEA dues can reach as high as $500. A little of it goes toward core union activities, like collective bargaining for contracts that keep members from having to attend after-school meetings or teach another's class in an emergency. Some goes toward the hefty paychecks of NEA staffers, thousands of whom rake in six-figure annual salaries, far more than the teachers who pay them.

And a lot—as much as half by some estimates—goes toward politicking. The NEA doesn't restrict itself to lobbying on issues that directly affect education, like the No Child Left Behind Act. It doesn't even restrict itself to weighing in on issues that indirectly affect education, like tax reform, which it sees as a threat to its own cash flow. The union lobbies on a host of unrelated issues, like statehood for the District of Columbia, even though many of its dues-payers don't want it to.

Fortunately, teachers do have some recourse. In Right-to-Work states, they don't have to pay union dues at all. And in others, while they can be required to pay dues for core union activities, they cannot be forced to pay for politicking, public relations, or other non-essential union activities.

The NEA has done a solid job of stacking the deck against student, parents, and teachers who want good schools. But that can change, if everyone interested in quality education stands up—and stops turning money over—to the NEAborhood bully.

Carbone is an adjunct scholar at the Lexington Institute.     Link here

http://www.freedomfoundation.us/education


Teacher takes administrator to woodshed
The official voice of the Carroll Dragons delivered a message of fiery criticism this week about how the Carroll school district handles open-records requests.  At a school board meeting, English teacher Sara McCombs, best known for her halftime announcements at high school football games, compared Superintendent Gary Mathews and other administrators to a character in the classic novel The Scarlet Letter.  Click here to read full article 


Round Rock ISD made the national news on December 3, 2004.  You can watch the video on the RRISD $26 million stadium and other Texas "Gridiron Cathedrals" by clicking on this link: 

www.cbsnews.com/sections/home/main100.shtm

Enter search word:  gridiron


Texas Education Agency --- A Failed Work In Progress

Ethics?  We don' need no stinkin' Ethics!!!
 
 
According to the press release (see below my commentary) by Texas Education Agency (TEA), Commissioner of Education Shirley J. Neeley appointed Bill Hammond a member on the Commissioner's Task Force on Test Security.
 
Here's a few words to the wise.......
 
Gov. Rick "Special Interest" Perry appointed Bill Hammond as CEO of the Texas Association of Business (TAB), which is a group that lobbies for Big Business needs, which included an assertion last year by Mr. Hammond that Texas school districts should increase class sizes to save money on teacher salaries.  In addition, Mr. Hammond pushes for a school voucher program instead of first assuring that businesses will pay their fair share of public school taxes.
 
By the way, Gov. Perry also appointed Ms. Shirley Neeley as Commissioner of Education.
 
Quick!  Let's file a complaint to the Texas Ethics Commission and let it review the matter.  Oh, yes, forget that too.  Gov. Perry also appointed 4 of the 8 members of the Ethics Commission!
 
Does anyone else see a pattern here?  Where is ethics hiding REALLY in Texas government?  Where is the "Open" in Open Government?
 
When I wrote a formal complaint against Gov. Rick Perry to the Office of the Attorney General Greg Abbott, I received a response from the office that it did NOT have the jurisdiction and/or capability to hold accountable elected officials.  It recommended that I file a complaint with the Texas Ethics Commission!  Ha-ha, what a good joke on the People of Texas.  Apparently our governor is above the law.  He has padded every avenue in his favor.
 
BTW the TEA has been provided more authority over school districts throughout Texas.  How can a group of white collar workers in an office on one end of Texas dictate programs, policies and learning-outcomes for ALL Texas school districts?  They can't do it well!
 
Consequently, once again, the People of Texas have to protect themselves from our elected and appointed officials.
 
One good way to do so is to VOTE-OUT Rick Perry and his puppet officials in the November elections.
 
Meanwhile, Commissioner Neeley wants us to be concerned about our children cheating on state tests and to find any wrong-doing quickly.  That's a joke considering the role models our children have.
 
If Ms. Neeley and her appointed commission want to find any wrong-doing, they should find all they can handle by looking around the meeting room at each other!

 


COMMENTARY

Patterson: School officials lash out at threat to their power

Chris Patterson, TEXAS PUBLIC POLICY FOUNDATION

Thursday, July 14, 2005

Here's a brain teaser: Why should state legislators vote for an education reform bill if school administrators hate it?

Administrators are suffering severe heartburn over House Bill 2 because it requires schools to devote at least 65 percent of available money to core instruction.

Public education will be ruined, school administrators claim, if they must allocate 65 percent of funding to mathematics, science, English and social studies because no money will be left for enrichment — such as music and art — and vocational education.

This is simply untrue. First, some school funds can't be subject to the 65 percent spending requirement — such as money for vocational education and facilities debt — due to state and federal requirements. Second, the 35 percent of remaining money should be more than sufficient to cover the cost of electives that represent a small fraction of the school day.

What administrators aren't saying is that 35 percent of today's education dollar isn't nearly enough to pay for enrichment plus all of the non-instructional costs that consume a growing part of school budgets. Administrators would be forced to make hard decisions about divvying the remainder of available funds between enrichment courses and administrative costs — and technology support, legal counsel, lobbying fees, adult education, donations to chambers of commerce, day care, professional association memberships, cultural training programs, paved tennis courts, planetariums, and 200-acre nature preserves.

By decreasing spending on non-instructional items and devoting 65 percent to the classroom, Texas school administrators could channel another $1.6 billion toward student learning — without raising taxes.

It's absolutely essential to change school spending priorities. The research is clear: When schools spend more of each dollar in the classroom, student performance improves.

It isn't unreasonable to ask Texas public schools to devote more money toward classroom instruction. Texas channels a smaller percentage of total education funds to the classroom than 20 other states, according to numbers provided by the Texas Education Agency to the federal government. Today, four states spend more than 65 percent of the education dollar on activities directly associated with the interaction between teachers and students.

Unlike school administrators, Texans like the 65 percent solution. A recent poll showed that 78 percent support the legislative minimum for classroom spending, and that support rose to 91 percent when Texans learned this would put additional money in the classroom without increasing taxes.

When it comes to school spending, taxpayers and administrators are not always on the same page. Texans are openly rebellious about rising property taxes — taxes that reflect expansive school budgets, with a lion's share of spending going to stuff without the least connection to classroom learning.

In fact, the instructional portion of the total school spending pie has been decreasing annually in Texas since 2000. Some researchers link this trend to the declining authority of elected school boards. Their research shows that classrooms get a greater share of the school budget in communities where parents and taxpayers are significantly engaged in school district decisions.

In our super-sized schools, administrators wield enormous power over huge budgets and employ a significant segment of the community. Their power reaches beyond the school doors.

Some legislative offices say school administrators threaten to work collectively to unseat legislators who vote "against schools." Offices report communications from parents who say their superintendent advised them to complain about specific bills. Just last week, the Houston Chronicle reported that Katy ISD administrators sent e-mails to employees advising how they should vote in the spring election of school board trustees.

This influence might soon be restrained by a provision in HB 2 that puts local school board elections on the same ballot as election for state offices. A November election date would enlarge the number of voters who participate in school district elections and make it more difficult for administrators to influence election outcomes.

The bottom line? School administrators hate HB 2 because it would restrain their political influence and reduce their power over how tax dollars are spent.

Even though school administrators hate it, HB 2 is good for students, teachers and taxpayers. We have the opportunity to improve public schools by prioritizing dollars for the classroom and engaging more Texans in school district decisions.

Patterson is director of research at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, an Austin-based research institute.


COMMENTARY

Patterson: CRACK OPEN SCHOOLS' BOOKS

Chris Patterson, TEXAS PUBLIC POLICY FOUNDATION

Thursday, April 28, 2005

Austin American Statesman

What enterprise do you suppose wrote checks amounting to $1.6 million for lawyers, $375,000 for various chambers of commerce, $311,000 for professional association fees, $90,000 for Franklin Covey (personal effectiveness and productivity training), $14,500 for Billie Arbuckle Adventures and $2.7 million for Young Audiences of North Texas (arts and cultural programs)?

Would you be surprised to learn it was a Texas public school district?

These expenditures occurred when the district claimed it was "forced" to dismiss several hundred high school teachers because of "inadequate" funding. And when it was suing Texans for more tax dollars. The district? Dallas Independent School District, according to a review of their check register last spring.

Dallas is not alone; its books were just the easiest to crack, which explains how the education bureaucracy gets away with claims of "inadequate" funding.

Public schools simply do not keep accounting books that clearly identify how money is spent. Although districts make megabytes of financial data available on the Internet, the state's reporting system is so Byzantine that it's impossible for Texans to get a handle on how school spending is directed into true academic outcomes.

School finance reform offers the perfect opportunity to introduce a reporting system that opens the books to taxpayers in a clear, direct way. The Texas Legislature should seize this opportunity to craft legislation that improves school accounting practices.

The Texas House, in House Bill 2, called for greater clarity in school spending by requiring more disclosure. The bill requires schools to provide more detail about non-instructional spending — identifying money spent on memberships and lobbying. This is a definite step forward, a strong improvement over current accounting practices. But it does not go far enough.

As the Texas Senate takes up its own version of school finance reform, it, too, must make every effort to restore our confidence that reporting on school spending is more than another Enron-style accounting scheme.

The accounting ledger must differentiate between expenditures on mandatory, direct classroom costs and optional programs.

What cannot happen is the watering down of meaningful reporting with the inclusion of items such as "school leadership," "curriculum development" and "counseling services" as direct instructional costs.

If the lobbyists representing school administrators have their way in this debate, almost anything a school does would be identified as instructional expenditures — just like it is today. Of course, that makes as much sense as counting everything in a kitchen as nutrition-related spending.

School administrators want to continue to claim that inadequate funding forces them to fire elementary school reading teachers, while being able to pay chamber of commerce dues and construct tennis courts, and using our tax dollars to hire lawyers who sue us for higher state taxes.

Our hope for getting schools to open their books to scrutiny rests now with the Texas Senate, then with the Legislature's conference committee. We must get this right; it is unlikely we will have another chance to improve school accounting practices for a decade.

Texans deserve full, clear access to the information needed to control wasteful spending and improve public education. And until schools are forced to do so, Texans should close their wallets.

Patterson is the director of research at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, a nonprofit research institute based in Austin.

 

Home ]