Re: “Deconstructing Kent’s ‘Misinformation’ Case”
When the political arena provides issues for discussion, we term it a healthy give-and-take. When there are too few debatable issues, other weapons are employed. Character assassination and indignant assertion are the most common of these weapons.
It would appear that the ad hominem attack, commonly termed character assassination, was at work yesterday in Laura Stuart’s commentary on School Board candidate Kelly Kent.
Dr. Kent expresses thoughtful, carefully considered views, most of which register positively with my 40- plus years of CCUSD experience. I hope I have earned the right to this expression from Ms. Stuart’s perspectives.
The criticisms of Dr. Kent trouble me. By my lights, she offers important insights for School Board consideration.
Ms. Stuart’s castigation of her for figuring out how she could best serve Culver City as either a City Council member or a School Board member, seems excessively judgmental.
From my perspective, it was logical for a Ph. D in neuroscience to opt for the School Board.
I wonder how long does a new member to our community have to serve on any commission to be considered acceptable and seasoned in your view?
As a fellow adjunct professor at West Los Angeles College, I can attest that our part-time status relegates us to lesser status. But Dr. Kent is a bona fide professor at Moorpark College and (I believe) at Antioch also.
Your assertion that she is “not employed at an educational institution,” may be the result of a hiatus period that Dr. Kent took to care for her family — or that she has no assignments this semester/quarter.
The vituperative tone of your comments saddens me. Why infuse a School Board election with such indictments?
Many Culver City residents are familiar with personal histories and professional fiascos associated with the other candidates. But those experiences don’t affect their worthiness as Board candidates.
Much as CCUSD would like to disassociate itself from LAUSD, we are similar in major ways. Our interactions are numerous. Surrounded as we are by LAUSD, we are in its shadow. We strive to establish vast differences between our districts, but we can’t foolishly claim that we are in no way similar to LAUSD.
Regarding the proposed high school academies, you castigate Dr. Kent for perhaps not understanding the idea behind them. From my experience, academies are among the periodic educational panaceas trotted out for consideration by well-intentioned proponents.
Our Academy of Visual and Performing Arts functions spectacularly. But creating academies for other areas for careers in such a small district as ours might well falter. We are, after all, The Heart of Screenland where all AVPA students might well find employment.
Would an Academy of Hotel Hospitality achieve as successfully? Culver City has only one marvelous Culver Hotel. It has a great history, but given our size, an academy would not work. However, an Academy based on democracy and politics could benefit our students.
Academies, perhaps, should be built on interests rather than a student’s future job or profession. Having been drawn to education as an adult, not a student, I appreciate the position that Dr. Kent takes on academies.
As a dew-eyed junior, I only wanted to be a stewardess. By 25, I knew teaching was my calling.
Dr. Kent presents the same perspective….she sees education as her destiny. Every response about education that Dr. Kent has voiced resonates with her carefully calculated insights on age-appropriate instruction.
Her comments excite the idealistic teacher in me. She cares so deeply, can give so much and definitely is not duplicitous (consciously misleading) in my considered opinion.
Ms. Goldberg, president of the School Board and a retired Culver City High School teacher, may be contacted at godberg7@gmail.com
Since most of what Ms Goldberg wrote was her opinion; but, I could not let her limited reasoning for not having more academies in our district, stand as fact. Using only the Culver Hotel as a benchmark of success of a Hotel/Hospitality Academy is short-sighted. A quick search on MapQuest shows there are over a dozen major hotels within a 5-mile radius of Culver City. Each of which could lead to employment for a future H/H academy graduate.
If the academies idea is anything like the German school system, then agree it is not a good idea for CCUSD. If the new school board decides to pursue academies, I would want to see tons of research, particularly how it affects minorities and under-represented students. I’d like to see a school with similar make-up as CC where it has been successful. I agree with Ms. Goldberg that it should be based on the child’s interests, not where we think they should go.
You could start with this: http://www.mdrc.org/sites/default/files/Career_Academies_Impacts_on_Students.pdf
[…] to this election a number of important qualities, which are enough to make it easy to vote for her. Here, here, here, and here are just a few of our community members’ expressions of support […]
Patricia,
You are right to be concerned about tracking students into pathways that don’t prepare them for college.
The research that Scott cites is 15 years old.
A lot has been learned about how we can provide rigorous classes/academies that prepare students for college and career – read about Linked Learning here: http://www.connectedcalifornia.org/linked_learning.
The Linked Learning approach is supported by Superintendent Torlakson and the Legislature with funding.
Or you can look at this successful 20 year program right in our district.
http://www.avpa.org
AVPA is a great program that helps students fulfill their F requirement for getting into college.
The problem with the Burke Mc Varish proposal is that they present the trades (Industrial Arts) as the way for students that are not going to college. And this would lead to tracking and limit access to college prep classes to only certain students.
We should be working hard to prepare students starting in preschool. Giving up on at least 1/2 our students is not what we want to do in Culver City.
There are some pathways already in place in our district that include taking courses at West LA College. I see the academies proposal as an expansion of this. I’m not sure how one concludes we are giving up on any of our students by providing them a way to be successful in life. As far as research that one commenter asked for, you can google to your heart’s delight and see the evidence.
There is national debate about vocational education and its appropriate to have it in Culver City as well. Overall, I support the move towards more industrial arts training but with some important and critical things to consider.
The Board of Education must ensure that industrial arts must not displace quality education at all levels. We cannot end up with college prep for the well to do and industrial arts for the lowest income families. These programs must be seen as an attractive option for ALL students regardless of socio economic status, otherwise they will be seen as less desirable and we could end up with two tier education. There are many low income students who would do well in college but may not have the resources for college prep course or exams, tutoring or college visits that are all taken for granted by students from higher income families. I do not want to see an otherwise college able child choose industrial arts because he or she did not have the opportunity to pursue college because of resources. We must make sure that students are motivated to pursue excellence and college if they are able. To that end, it is incumbent on the District and its leadership to make sure that all children who want to go to college and can succeed in college are they are able to apply and be admitted. This approach must accompany any new and expanded vocational educational program and policy.
Vocational education should not be seen as a substitute for successful formal education. The success of students in industrial arts is tied to their success in the classroom in language arts, math, computer science, in short the basic s of education. The District needs to double down on its efforts to reach ALL students. That means not just improving the AP courses but focusing on the core classes that the majority of students take throughout their secondary career. If we don’t focus on these, our efforts to expand industrial arts will fail. Students in these jobs need to be able to read, use math and science skills, reason, and work as a team work in their jobs. The Schools’ job is to prepare students with these skills along with opportunities in the industrial arts.
The idea of academies are good however, the AVPA was established by interested parents who had the resources to support the new academy. Partnerships with industry can help support these but if the goal is to expand parent participation I fear that academies that are designed to support industrial arts, for example, may not have the same level of support that we have seen elsewhere.
Let me be clear, Scott.
I do not object to the idea of providing students opportunities for experiential learning related to a career.
What I want to share instead is the background behind what is now known as Linked Learning, and was formerly known as Multiple Pathways. This idea was presented in a book written by the Distinguished UCLA Professor Jeannie Oakes, called Beyond Tracking. In the book, which was co-authored by Dr. Marisa Saunders, propose a system of multiple pathways that will “provide both the academic and real-world foundations that students need for advanced learning, training, and preparation for responsible civic participation.”
All multiple pathways schools will have four main components: a college-preparatory core; a professional/technical core; field-based learning and realistic workplace simulations; and additional support services to meet the particular needs of students and communities.
“In this conception of multiple pathways, students and their families choose from among a variety of options, all of which lead students to the same destination: preparation to succeed in both college and career, not one or the other.”
This approach is embraced by our State Superintendent Tom Torlakson, the State Legislature and has been developed in many schools in California, including several in LAUSD.
All to say that when Career Academies are presented ‘as an alternative for students who are not going to college’, it really short changes large number of students. Creating Career Academies that are designed based on the belief that all students can achieve, and a commitment to high expectations is more in line with the ideals of public education.
I think the latest mailer from Burke and McVarish clearly shows that they are in line with your belief that “Creating Career Academies that are designed based on the belief that all students can achieve, and a commitment to high expectations is more in line with the ideals of public education.”
Has everyone forgotten the large concrete markers in front of each of our schools which say: “Lifelong learning … filling the future with options”
When it comes to starting other academies, what’s wrong with giving our students more choices and options, where the average student who goes through a 4-year college, is saddled with paying off an estimated $20K to $24K debt, right when they’re just starting their own life?
Just because our current superintendent’s mantra is “Success for All, Takes us All, All the Time,” doesn’t mean we need to forget our previous guiding words of inspiration.
Hi Scott,
I haven’t seen their latest flyer. I do know that in the interview in the Culver City News, Scott stated that “there’s a message in our society that tells students you have somehow failed, and I think that sends the wrong message” referring to the large numbers of students who are not graduating having taken the courses that are required to attend our state universities.
I believe that members of the School Board are the ones that need to COMMIT to ensuring our system prepares as many students to attend college as possible, because of the impact this has on the students, their family, community and our economy. The wrong message is that we should accept that so many of our students are not graduating prepared to go to college.
And there is plenty of good reason to be concerned when candidates suggest this. The efforts to de-track our schools so that prejudice doesn’t determine students’ futures has taken the work of many, for many years. So, unless one is absolutely intentional and clear that academies must include college preparatory coursework, all they are suggesting is that we go backward in time.