MAILBAG - April 4, 2006

Students need to be making the grade

This letter to the editor is in response to the “Parents Talk Back” published March 28 and the recent publishing of the Academic Performance Index scores.

I have been an active parent of two students at Wilson School for the past six years. I have struggled with the same question as that asked by Mark Gleason: Why does Wilson School (I can only ask this of Wilson School because I am not familiar with how things are at Pomona or Rea schools) continue to be an underperforming school despite improvements like pre-school, an after-school programs and better curriculum? I know for a fact that Wilson School has excellent and hard-working teachers.

For the past two years I have been the director of a community-based after-school learning center located near Wilson School. About 90% of the students served are from Wilson School. My greatest concern has been for students who are promoted to the next grade level after making limited or slow progress toward meeting grade-level standards by the second grading period (March of that same year). At that point, there are only 2 1/2 months left in the school year, making it nearly impossible for a respective student to meet grade level standards. Many of these students are first graders. If they were retained in their current grade level so that they had the opportunity to master grade-level basics, they would have more success once they reached second and third grades respectively ? crucial years with regard to state testing.

If Wilson Elementary School or the school district maintains a student-retention policy where students are promoted only upon meeting grade-level standards, then it seems to need more scrutiny in its implementation. This is just one factor that contributes to underperforming schools not succeeding in raising their annual API scores. I believe that parents and teachers want the best for their students. It is a disservice to all of the community when students are simply passed along year after year, instead of insisting that they master the basics at the beginning of their education process.

GINA GARTNER

Costa Mesa

Charter proposal would line the wrong pockets

The OC Academy charter proposal highlights three big financial drawbacks in the state educational code. First, just because the code says that districts are not allowed to consider finances in judging a charter school, shouldn’t make it so. Local, county and state board members have the sworn responsibility to work for the public interest, which means balancing benefits with costs. Our state Assemblyman Van Tran should work to eliminate this section of the educational code. It’s not necessary and it’s wrongheaded.

Second, if the OC Academy was presented as a cost-saver, it could be of value to taxpayers, but it’s not. It will probably cost about $2,000 to $4,000 on average to teach a student part-time at the academy, but the Newport-Mesa Unified School District will have to shell out $6,000 per student who attends, of which only a few will be ours. The owners of the academy may talk about superior education and choice, but their charter is really about stuffing easy money into their pockets.

Third, the very idea that a local school district, such as Newport-Mesa, is forced to pay for school that’s open to anyone in the county, especially if only a few of its own students plan to attend, is just plain nuts. A county school should be run by the county. Again, our representative Van Tran and state Senate candidates Tom Harman, Diane Harkey and Larry Caballero should consider correcting this violation of local rights.

Since Newport-Mesa is the least able district to host a countywide charter school because of its unusual financing, why does the OC Academy want to base itself in Newport Beach? Could it simply be so that its owners won’t have to commute far from the second and third homes that they will be able to purchase in Newport Coast with the excess money they take from our school district? Would they be threatening the district so much otherwise? Don’t be a sap. Don’t support the bosses of the charter taking our tax money for themselves and non-Newport-Mesa students.

A charter is not a charter is not a charter. An elaborate science/technology facility may work as a charter school (which is under consideration by our school board), but a part-time, low-cost school with a full retail price will work only for its owners, not for the taxpayers or for the majority of students in our district. The state Educational Code should not be a suicide pact for Newport-Mesa. We need to support our school board in its fight against the OC Academy proposal locally and in Sacramento.

DENNIS ASHENDORF

Costa Mesa