Sunday, April 28, 2019

The Diversity Delusion - a must-read


This book is a must-read. You can buy it (it's worth it) or you can check it out from the Richland Library.

Heather Mac Donald's 2018 book, The Diversity Delusion - How Race and Gender Pandering Corrupt the University and Undermine Our Culture, hits the nail on the head with her hard-hitting analysis and commentary on "diversity".

The Richland 2 school board heard a presentation about cultural relevance on February 26, 2019. You can view the presentation to the board on YouTube. Search for "Richland 2". Then select the video for the 2/26/2019 meeting. Fast-forward to 2:15:10 on the elapsed-time counter for that presentation.

Richland 2 contracted with Gloria Boutte, Ph.D. (pronouced Boo-tee'), founder of the Center of Excellence for the Education and Equity of African-American Students.

The training with Dr. Boutte, which is a combination of in-person and online work, winds up with a trip to Washington, D.C. for a "Capstone Field Study" experience at the National Museum of African-American History and Culture.

For an explanation of the District's Culturally Relevant Training and its "Cohort" program, watch the video. I guarantee you will have questions, especially after you read Heather Mac Donald's book.

Trustee James Shadd (2:49:10) offered his perspective that "an African-American male may get bored with what is going on in class and may speak loudly. A teacher, regardless of the color, may decide that this child is being disruptive. Had they known that, from a cultural standpoint, we express ourselves sometimes in an elevated voice does not necessarily mean that we are angry... We are just more expressive than others."

I'd love to see a debate on that subject. Somehow, I suspect that what teachers endure in the classroom is not just a "loud" or "expressive" student but that there is considerable disrespect that accompanies a raised voice.

Think about what happened at Spring Valley High School in 2015, when Niya Kenny participated in the disruption of a class that ended with her arrest, along with a second, minor and unnamed, disruptive student. She wasn't a student who just spoke loudly or was expressive.

My guess is that many teachers have to put up with that every day, and that's because of what the students are showing up with, when they come to school. It's not the teachers' role to accommodate the student. It's the student's job to behavior himself and herself in school and to apply themselves to the learning process.

Sorry, but Boutte's "Culturally Relevant Pedagogy" doesn't get a passing grade from me, and I believe the District is wasting its (your) money on the training and staffing for it.



Saturday, April 27, 2019

Richland 2 Board - still minus 2

UPDATE

To my knowledge and belief Richland School District Two still lacks two board members. The problem identified months ago has not been remedied.

What's the problem?

Two persons elected to the School Board on November 6, 2018 have never been legally seated on the Board. They have assumed positions on the Board and have been allowed to do so. But - legally - they are not on the Board.

Why not? It's really simple. A third-grader could understand it.

On November 6, 2018 Amelia McKie was re-elected to the Board and Teresa Holmes was elected to the Board.

On November 13, 2018 each took the Oath of Office and entered upon her official responsibilities by attending the November 13th school board meeting. Therein lies the problem.

South Carolina Code of Laws Section 8-13-1110(A) reads, in part, "“No public official … may take the oath of office or enter upon his official responsibilities unless he has filed a statement of economic interests in accordance with the provision of this chapter with the appropriate supervisory office.” Violating this Section is a misdemeanor under Code of Laws Section 8-13-1520.

Neither McKie nor Holmes had filed her Statement of Economic Interests Report with the South Carolina Ethics Commission. Thus, neither was eligible to take the Oath of Office. And each committed a misdemeanor by so taking the Oath.

On December 4, 2018 both McKie and Holmes filed the required Statement of Economic Interests Reports.

As of December 4, 2018 each became eligible to take the Oath of Office. But neither has taken the Oath of Office since December 4, 2018.

On March 18, 2019 the District informed me that neither had taken the Oath after December 4. I believe neither has taken it since March 18.

Thus, the Richland 2 School Board has five legal members and two persons allowed illegitimately to be seated at the Board. Why do the five legal members allow this?

The problem is further compounded by McKie's assuming her role as Board Chair. That role terminated on November 6, 2018. Yet the Board has not challenged her or elected a new chairman, as is required by S.C. Code of Laws Section 59-19-70.

The question is not how to remove McKie and Holmes from the Board. They have never been legally on the Board. It should be no problem for the five legal members of the Board to refuse McKie and Holmes seats at the Board.

Why isn't the legal counsel for the District advising the Board of the importance of correcting this very serious problem?

Friday, April 26, 2019

Will Richland 2 Board demand answers?

The next School Board meeting will be the day before teachers go on holiday and waste their day parading around the State Capitol, hoping to influence legislators to throw a few bones their way.

How will Richland 2 be affected?

Chester County has already decided to cancel school on May 1. Wow!

According to The State newspaper this morning, Richland 2 "... is not considering closing schools"

According to the governor's mouthpiece, the governor “believes that teachers leaving their classrooms sends the wrong message to students, unnecessarily disrupts schools, and inconveniences their students’ working parents.” 

Maybe he should send the State Police to the capitol grounds to arrest teachers? Of course, that won't happen. But where should this have been stopped? At the school level. When a teacher asked for a personal day (on a day when thousands claim they will protest), the principal should have denied the request. If the teacher said last week that she is going to be sick on May 1, tell her to bring a note from her doctor on May 2.

The Governor is right, but he needs to put some teeth in his message. 
.
The School Board should make a clear, strong statement to teachers - "The mob does not control the schools." Review the Policy on personal days of leave. If it doesn't already state that a Principal will consider all factors, including impact on the students for the day when considering a request for personal leave, it should!

The Board should direct the superintendent to report on April 30 how many teachers are expected to be absent from their classrooms on May 1, and then he should report on May 14 how many teachers did not report to work on May 1.


Coming up on 4/30/19. Another marathon.

The next Regular school board meeting for Richland 2 will be Tuesday, April 30, 2019, at 5:00PM. Note the time!

The Regular, open session will begin at 5:00PM with a 30-minute Budget Update. Then the Board will run for cover in the Executive Session for an hour and then return to open session at 6:30PM.

A skeptical person might ask, "Why don't they just have the Budget Update at 6:30PM? You know, when parents can be there to hear the whole thing." Place your answers in the Comment section below.

Under Item 10 on the Agenda for April 30 the trustees will be asked to vote on revisions to 32 board policies. How many? THIRTY-TWO. This is absurd. Hopefully, at least one of the trustees will protest the impossible situation in which they are being placed by the board chair and the superintendent, who put their heads together to construct the Agenda.

And then they will be asked to consider nine more policies, two reports and the Capital Improvement Update.

I hope EMS will be standing by. The board members will need oxygen and other medical care after such an ordeal. If four board members pass out from over-exertion, there won't be a quorum. Will Grubhub deliver to R2i2?

It's way past time for this Board to hire a consultant to train the board chair how to run a meeting. As they are, meetings just run on and on, ad nauseum. There appears to be no commitment to conduct the board meetings expeditiously and within a pre-determined time-frame. Remember the phrase - Work expands to fill the time available? Good ol' Parkinson's Law? This Board would do well to set a specific time, such as a maximum of 90 minutes, and then focus on completing the meeting "within the time allotted."

Without an ending time, one of the days the Board will end up being there all night.

Thursday, April 25, 2019

Cell Tower Informational Meeting

Last night's meeting on the cell tower to be located at Kelly Mill Middle School was an "informational" meeting. The meeting room (a portion of the room used by the School Board) was packed with parents (including some children and babies), neighbors, and interested community members.

No member of the Richland 2 School Board attended.

Richland 2's Director of Planning William Simon chaired the meeting, which was mostly informal and friendly. Speakers on behalf of the construction of the tower were Leonard Forkas, President of Milestone Communications, and Kevin McMannis, an environmental safety consultant.

Forkas outlined the procedure that has been followed to gain the necessary approvals for the tower to be built, starting with the Richland County Planning Commission in October 2018. In November they were at the Richland County Council. In January community notifications were mailed. (Some in the audience protested that they had not received notice.) In February a community meeting was held, and those receiving notice included the board chair.

If I understood correctly, two cell towers have already been built on Richland 2 school property; this will be the third. The tower will be constructed in accordance with an Request For Proposal (RFP) approved by a previous School Board.

If you are concerned about safety around wireless equipment, go to the website for this project, www.KellyMillMSwireless.com, and click on "Wireless Safety" in the left sidebar. Be sure to click on the link in Paragraph 2 about RF safety.

Many concerns and fears were expressed by those attending. Most of them were based on rumors, suspicions, and emotions. None was based on fact.

I managed to irritate just about everyone in the room by suggesting that parents needed to show up at School Board meetings and know what is going on. (It's too late to complain after the fact.) I also suggested that the FACTS about RF energy be considered, not just one's emotions about this project. I also asked how many use cell phones and even allow their children to use cell phone.

Isn't the perceived (but probably unfounded) worry about brain cancer much, much worse from a handheld cellphone than it is from a 195' tower located 300 feet from a school? But today just look around at all the adults, students and small children who are running around with cell phones stuck to their ears.

The tower will be built, and it won't be so bad as people think.

Director Simon acknowledged that the School District could have done a better job of communicating about the planned tower. I imagine the District will pay more attention to communications with parents and neighbors in the future.

Last night's meeting wasn't even posted on the District's website. And the library doesn't know who is using the District's main conference room at R2i2. Hint to Richland 2 School District: it's a common facility. Why not arrange for the library's telephone operator to answer calls about meeting room usage?

My thanks to The Voice of Blythewood & Fairfield County for posting the announcement of last night's meeting on its Facebook page. That's how I learned of it at 5:05PM.

Wednesday, April 24, 2019

TONIGHT! 6:30PM. Cell Tower public meeting

Sorry for the late announcement. Just learned of this meeting, thanks to publication on the Facebook page of The Voice of Blythewood and Fairfield County.

Milestone Communications wants to build a 195' cell phone tower ON THE GROUNDS of Kelly Mill Middle School. Recently a parent addressed the Richland 2 School Board about this, but do you think there was any publication by Richland 2 of this meeting?

No doubt Richland 2 sees this tower as a money-maker. There would be a long-term lease involved and important legal protections in the agreement.

The meeting is tonight, April 24, 2019, at 6:30PM at R2i2.

For more information, visit www.KellyMillMSWireless.com  The meeting announcement on this website says the meeting is at 6831 Brookfield Road.

The Voice believes the meeting at R2i2, as of 5:15PM.

22 Policy Revisions - too many

At last night's Special Board Meeting (4/23/19) revisions to 22 Board Policies were considered. Why so many?

When you look closely at the structure of Richland 2, I swear you'd think you were looking at the Federal Government.

Hopefully, the meeting was video-recorded, so that voters, taxpayers and parents (and teachers and staff and students) can review "your government" at work. Audio quality can be expected to be considerably better than in the room.

For a little background regarding the revisions to board policies, watch the video of the April 9, 2019 meeting, starting at 1:06:30, when Item 13 on that meeting's Agenda was addressed. Item 13 included eight proposed policy revisions. Even though the Board had the list and contents, Supt. Davis took the time to read each one into the record.

The Acting Chair of the meeting, Vice Chair Elkins- Johnson, proposed that the board examine one policy at a time. When discussion was called for the first revision, Trustee Lindsay Agostini (1:07:39) questioned the District's expectation of  a compensation package sufficient to attract "highly-qualified employees" for the premier district in exchange for "adequate" compensation. She suggested there ought to be a (better) balance between expectation and compensation.

To me, that is a very reasonable position. But did any Board member jump into the fray and further challenge the wording in the proposed revision?

Supt. Davis commented that the language came from the School Board Association. That doesn't mean it can't be modified, adjusted, amended, edited, or tinkered with to suit the exact needs and desires of the Richland 2 Board. When Vice Chair Elkins-Johnson asked Supt. Davis if the language could be changed (of course it can), and does he (the superintendent (the staff)) have the "time to do that", he paused and then, somewhat hesitantly, said they could go back and re-visit the language, if that was the "will of the board". Of course he could do that and, of course, he does have the time (or he'd better make the time).

Wait a minute! It's the staff that is proposing the revision. They work for the superintendent. Of course, they can go back and make changes. It doesn't take the "will of the board"; it takes the will of the superintendent.

The Vice Chair looked around the board and asked if it was the will of the board. Well, the way you find out if it's the will of the board is to vote on it. Only Trustee Caution-Parker spoke about it and indicated it wasn't her will. The Vice Chair failed to poll the rest of the rest and assumed it was not the will of the board.

Then Trustee Agostini commented (1:09:45) on the second-to-the-last bullet point in the first revision - "to develop a climate necessary to obtain maximum staff performance and a high level of morale and job satisfaction." She suggested replacing "necessary to obtain" with "to develop a climate which encourages maximum staff performance and a high level of morale and job satisfaction."

Trustee Shadd asked Mrs. Agostini what she sees as the difference. She responded that she was looking for a positive word representing something they are working toward.

The Superintendent effectively squelched Mrs. Agostini's suggestions and got away with it, saying they had a number of policy revision to get through before the end of the school year and, in other words, she shouldn't be so picky with her "warm and fuzzy" suggestions. The superintendent sees himself as a "member" of the board when, in fact, he is not. He is the administrator of the school district - the "hired gun". He works for the Board; he is not on the Board.

Due to overall weakness on the Board itself, the superintendent has been able to raise his influence on the board. The board would benefit by hiring a consultant to explain to them exactly how they should function as elected representatives of the people of Richland School District Two.

While the superintendent is hired to run the district, he does so at the direction (and pleasure) of the board (albeit with a fat and secure contract, I'm sure, that protects him financially, if he encounters the displeasure of the board).

Mrs. Agostini wasn't raising "just" grammatical points. Her points went straight to the heart of the policy. They did relate to content!

Then Mr. Shadd felt he had to jump on the anti-Agostini bandwagon and make a comment about "necessary" and putting the onus on the District to make darn well sure it created such a climate. Is this kicking and shoving versus leading and pulling?

When you watch the video, you'll see Supt. Davis sitting up straight as Mr. Shadd spoke, and you'll see Trustee Caution-Parker having a side conversation with the Vice Chair while Shadd was speaking.

In some cultures there is a motto that reads, "The beatings will continue until morale improves." It seems to me that Mrs. Agostini was trying to avoid that pathway.

OK, so then what happens if/when the policy requirement is not met? Who gets caught in the crosshairs? The staff? The superintendent? The Board? Who is accountable?

Mrs. Agostini then correctly stated that it is the Board's responsibility to write the policy, whether it's the content or the grammar. She reminded the Board that it is the Board's responsibility. Bam! I agree.

Again, there was no vote to determine the will of the board. The Vice Chair just assumed that, because no one spoke up, it was not the majority and not the will of the board. And that was wrong.