Trending

Advertisement

Dick Lyles: Poway Unified education neither free nor equal

Share

Poway Unified School District Superintendent John Collins regularly points out the fact that PUSD operates as a “site-based district.” Basically this means that where possible, the needs of individual schools are considered ahead of overall district needs when making decisions that impact an individual school site. The concept has substantial advantages over allowing a district bureaucracy to ignore or trample the needs of individual schools who might be trying to address unique issues regarding their own students.

Management initiatives designed to delegate decisions downward in large complex organizations typically produce positive results. PUSD is no exception. Many benefits have accrued to students since PUSD has adopted its “site-based district” approach. The dual language curriculum at Valley Elementary is an excellent example. The Design 39 Campus is another.

The biggest mistake made by executives who lead decision-delegation initiatives is failing to ensure that site-based decisions don’t lead to an unequal distribution of either benefits to consumers (in this case, students) or the quality of products or services (education) delivered. The challenge is how to discriminate in responding to different needs, yet maintain high standards for all.

This is the mistake of Mr. Collins and his team. They have allowed the appeal of operating as a site-based district to become an excuse for failing to address certain district-wide needs. This has fostered an uneven distribution of benefits to students. As a result, students at some schools suffer.

The recent emergence of individual school foundations amplifies this situation.

Most (not all) schools in the district now have their own foundations to supplement district budgets. Parents who have stepped up and provided talent and treasure to provide this support should be commended. But students in schools whose parents don’t have the time or money to provide this support are being left behind.

Many examples exist, but a simple one that is easy to understand relates to typing skills. Starting in third grade kids are now required to explain their answers on tests, which requires typing. Some schools have both the equipment and the programs to teach kids typing and others don’t, because in schools where the training is offered it is paid for by that school’s foundation.

At schools without typing programs it is up to the parents to teach their kids typing. These are often the same parents who don’t have time to work on foundation boards because they are single parents or for other reasons are already over-burdened.

The same is true for science labs in elementary schools. Some schools with foundations have them. Others don’t. For students in schools without labs, their experiments are conducted on a piece of paper, often as homework. If you want science for your kid in elementary school, you’ll have to get your child into a school where the parents are willing to pay for it.

Many parents moved into the district believing their kids would get “free and equal” education anywhere in the district. Neither could be further from the truth. It has never been free and is becoming less so, and the inequality between schools in increasing. Perhaps some of the inequality could have been lessened if Mr. Collins had spent less on inept bond consultants and questionable legal fees and more on kids’ needs.

In order to maintain the benefits of operating as a site-based district, we must ensure that the downside of this approach is mitigated. This is a major problem that Mr. Collins is not solving. The inevitable result is that we’ll be known as the district that “puts rich kids first” rather than one that serves all kids with high standards.

Advertisement