Complex lies from the SPS.
MGJ's letter of Nov. 23, explaining the 17% fiasco is framed on the District's News Page HERE.
It follows:
College and Career Readiness of Seattle Public Schools Graduates
In 2008, Seattle Public Schools (SPS) published a conservative data point aimed at determining the percent of students that graduate from SPS ready for a 4-year college. This specific data point is complex and one that districts across the state and the country grapple with as they try to quantify college and career ready.
{{Do all Districts across the state and country misrepresent data like the Seattle Central Administration does? On June 4, 2008 in the Strategic Plan, the SPS did NOT publish a conservative data point aimed at ready for a four year college. A statistic of 17% was presented as "Graduates meeting High School credit requirement for four-year colleges".}}
College readiness measures can be defined in multiple ways: the minimum requirements necessary to graduate high school, minimum requirements necessary to apply to a 4-year college, minimum requirements to successfully enroll in a college or university or meeting the necessary requirements to succeed in and graduate from college.
{{However, when the Superintendent stated in her Strategic Plan on June 4, 2008: "Graduates meeting High School credit requirement for four-year colleges = 17%". She was lying and misleading both the Board and the Public. This is fraud..}}
For additional information, please review this letter to the community from Superintendent Goodloe-Johnson. The letter describes the process of agreeing on the current definition of the measure and sets this topic in the context of our goal of all SPS students graduating ready for college and career.
So does this supposed process of agreeing on "the current measure" ... retroactively make that "the measure" presented on June, 4, 2008 and following?
NO WAY!! ...... NO WAY!!
The "Superintendent" takes lying to a whole new level and the Board is apparently inert or endorsing her fraudulent behavior.
Key Markers Relating to Organizational Health
12 years ago
6 comments:
It is ironic, a judge would support the board's right to run a school district into the red because the petitioners couldn't prove they weren't intending to do so.
It was that way with Burlington Edison - and fearful taxpayers voted yes to save their district. The realtors, bankers, and speculators involved in the ripoff scheme made off with millions. None of this would have been known either if the district hadn't entered into binding conditions.
If the state auditor had acted more aggressively against the district then you might have had a better case. By saving taxpayers the expense of another election, this judge has opened up yet more possibilities. How much abuse are voters willing to take? That's the real question.
Their fraud caused innocent people to lose their jobs. They threatened 'activists' who risked their careers. When a judge calls a whistleblower an activist that is the real test of a Democracy. Worst of all it hurts classrooms and the students who have to attend them.
@Anonymous:
"If the state auditor had acted more aggressively against the district...."
What EXACTLY do you think the auditor could have done except report? As noted on the Save Seattel Schools blog, the auditor can only report, not enforce.
So, again, what EXACTLY would you have expected them to do????
The State Auditor's office can ask the Attorney General to investigate any significant finding. It is the Auditor's call.
The AG will not investigate anything in current litigation.
Thank you Dan - you took the words out of my mouth. The auditor won't make accusations - that would be politically incorrect. This is a world where everyone gets a back rub to avoid legal expenses and public limelight. In the words of my adversaries - the state auditor doesn't have a spine.
"Anonymous said...
Thank you Dan - you took the words out of my mouth. The auditor won't make accusations - that would be politically incorrect. This is a world where everyone gets a back rub to avoid legal expenses and public limelight. In the words of my adversaries - the state auditor doesn't have a spine."
1) Grow up. 2) You have absolutely NO IDEA what you are talking about. 3) Do you see black helicopters all the time?
Real Arnold,
Thanks for balancing things a bit. The SAO actually sends all findings to the AG's office. Normally the AG does not act. Seattle weighed in with twice as many finding at the last audit than any other district in the state. The audit on Seattle Schools capitol funds etc. is coming soon. That should be an eye opener, perhaps it will open the AG's eyes.
Post a Comment