On Thursday of last week, the school board received a one paragraph report from Pam Mari who was Principal at DaVinci High School and now is District Director of Student Services. In her presentation, Ms. Mari laid out what the policy consisted of and in some detail what was going on.
What we have learned stunned many of the elected officials on the Davis School Board. This will be the first in a several part series looking into the actions of the school district and the policy that has led to police presence on the Davis High School campus and truancy sweeps in the Davis community. This first installment focuses heavily upon the school board meeting itself.
According to Pam Mari, there is “grave concern” in the school district about habitual truancy. The district has struggled with a number of students that they simply could not get back into school. These new policies came about through a multiagency approach that to find ways to get students back into school.
Ms. Mari claimed to have derived this policy from Section 6.4 of the California Education Code:
“The measures that I am suggesting are not of my invention, they are explicitly stated in ed code.”
This policy is simply an extension of what is already laid out in the education code, according to Pam Mari. The district did not have a lot of success in creating a multiagency approach; that changed last May when the Davis Police Department led by Sgt. John Wilson and Lt. Darren Pytel and district personnel decided to take a step together.
The policy involves a complex web of steps beginning with a letter that the family receives after the three full days of unexcused absences. Then the family will receive a second letter after another three unexcused absences. Along with the letters, each day, there are phone calls to the parents including now on their cell phones where the kids cannot intercept the phone calls. Further steps include a report of the numbers of absences on the students progress and grade reports. If these problems continue there will be more severe punishments culminating in-home visits by police and district personnel and also these truancy sweeps whereby the police go around and “if they saw a child out of school, they approached that child and escorted that child to the school, taking custody of that child.”
According to Pam Mari:
“It’s not the severity but the surety of the consequence that has an effect, so if we can specify the punishment, the warning has no effect.”
The bottom line in her presentation was that they were following the letter of ed code.
“Bottom line is we are doing what we need to do.”
Once Pam Mari finished her presentation, she responded to questions from the members of the school board, it is here that we start to get a fuller picture of the policy and where we might start getting concerned.
First of all, it becomes clear almost from the start that the school board has very little written information about the policy.
At the beginning of her presentation, Pam Mari says:
“As you look through your packet…”
And Board President Jim Provenza responds:
“I don’t think we have a packet, I have a paragraph.”
Ms. Mari says just the summary, that’s it. But is it?
Responding to questions about detention, Mari has this response:
“Detention I think frankly went the way of ‘all teachers must be married’ and ‘we will all wear boots to school’ it frankly is not a believed you can punish anyone into learning or wanting to be in school. So those have not proven to be effective.”
She may indeed be correct with regards to detention. But is not the policy she is advocating seems to be directed toward forcing and punishing people into learning and being in school. How else could this policy be interpreted other than to punish students and force them to go to school?
It was when the student representative on the board spoke, Amanda López-Lara, that it became more clear that what was being described by Pam Mari looked very different from the student perspective.
“Today was probably the first day most students were actually told these rules. We had never heard of them before, we were not aware of them. I agree it is very good to kid the kids into class again, because I do know there’s a problem at the high school especially with a lot of kids just skipping class and going to parks. But one concern I do have is that a lot of people appreciate Mark Hicks, and I know a lot of kids who are at-risk students who really respect him, but one concern that I had is that I know today during lunch, the whole high school was scared. We were scared because we went to lunch, we weren’t necessarily scared but we were made nervous, because we went out and I don’t think I’ve see that many cop cars at the high school. I saw one across the street, and two and each entrance, and then once I went down the street I’ve had my license for a year, so I wasn’t nervous, but what did make me nervous is that there were cop cars going up or down and I know that there were some students pulled over. I know one student who actually had his license for year and there was a misunderstanding between himself and the police officer. But I do know that a lot of students afterwards were feeling very nervous and had a lot of apprehension towards the police officers.”
Furthermore she stated:
“I’m an A student, I have no truancy problems, and I know that made me nervous.”
Pam Mari responds that “it is a paradigm shift” and it’s going to take some doing at first. She believes if we can get the kids to come in and then they can work with somebody on a personal level, we just need to get them there. “And then the other half of that story, for kids who are apprehensive because they’ve been misbehaving, that would be a logical consequence.”
Amanda López-Lara however responds,
“Relations I feel as a student, are already prestrained between students and police officers. Good students and bad students… The relations to be completely honest as a student with you, they’re not that great… I know there are some high school students who once they feel apprehensive, they don’t want to listen, they just want to act out.”
At this point, Ginni Davis, who is the Associate Superintendent interjects with a lecture:
“Part of our job Amada, if I could just say that quickly, is that we are teaching people how to be citizens in our society. And when people are out of high school and become adults, they have to get along with police, and the police work for the public to make our environment safe for everybody. So the sooner that people are to understand that police are there to enforce laws that we make in this country, and work with policemen, the more people can be good citizens, and that’s part of the education that we’re responsible for.”
School Board Member Keltie Jones also defended the policy:
“[The] missing piece here is to facilitate some positive interactions as well to develop the types of relationships where people won’t necessarily feel apprehensive, they’ll feel like it’s somebody that they know and they’re connected to.”
Keltie Jones advocates facilitating ways to get police officers in with the student leadership groups. But, what Jones appears to be missing is that students are not going to have positive interactions with uniformed police officers who are making a show of force.
School Board Member Tim Taylor however, does not miss this point.
“All I want to say is that we all need to listen very closely to what Amanda is saying because she’s right, there is a very fine line insuring compliance and intimidation. And no matter how well intended they are, police officers can be intimidating. In fact, that’s part of what they are there for, it can be a good thing but it can also be a bad thing. The student perspective… on this is a very important one and how that presence is felt by the student collective is something that we should be very cognizant of.”
School Board President Jim Provenza advocated the need to be able to differentiate between those with legitimate reasons to not be in the high schools and those who are truant.
“We don’t want the fact that you are of high school age [to lead to] everyday being stopped by the police. That would be the exact opposite of what I would want.”
Pam Mari dismissed that concern:
“It would be hard to believe that there is even enough resources to do that.”
However, she then went onto address ways by which students who had legitimate reasons for being off campus could get that straightened out. First, school personnel would be able to receive calls if someone claimed that either they did not go to that school or they had a free period. She also discussed a “Lifetouch” system whereby images are stored into a “hand-held device that would load all of the students schedules so that right on the spot that could be determined and keep any kind of misunderstanding and I want everyone to be respectful of each other.”
Tim Taylor however interjected:
“Pam with all due respect that is interesting, but Jim’s point is that a student with all the reason in the world to be going to the bank, shouldn’t be stopped… It doesn’t matter that once their stopped and police run a check on them that fifteen minutes later they are let out of police control, the problem is the being stopped in the first place. I have a huge concern about it… [He stated he is supportive of the mission to reduce truancy] but there are limits, and I think the limits that Jim is identifying in his question are the ones that I am concerned about.”
This part of the discussion seems to suggest a fairly wide net employed by the police. My concern here is that the moment a student is stopped by the police and checked, that will be a very serious event in their day. They may get angry, humiliated, or afraid. There is a strong likelihood that they will think about this event all day long instead of focusing on school. And so the policy meant to get kids into the classroom to learn may end up in fact disrupting learning.
Once confronted on this point by Tim Taylor however Pam Mari become a bit standoffish while at the same time appears to back off her previous statement.
“Let’s not dance around it, what you’re saying is when does stopping for a very good reason become harassing, and the police don’t want to get there, they don’t have enough humans to get there I don’t think.”
And yet as we will see in the future installments of this series, this may be exactly what is going on.
Pam Mari then directs the next comment to the student representative:
“The reason that you haven’t heard about any of these things until today is this discussion right here, so you’re really hearing it first and there’s a lot of just simply communication that needs to follow this. And secondly, I absolutely here you about what you’re saying, so you do have that. And interestingly enough, there could have been an incident that happened today that had nothing to do with anything about this topic, but the last perception is crucial.”
Board Member Gina Daleiden then talks about the confusion involving the open campus policy and whether students and parents even know what the policy is–this apparently came up at a PTA meeting.
Pam Mari responded:
“I can’t imagine how they don’t know, but let us assume all things being equal… It is a closed campus with an open lunch… It says so in the guide. If you do not have a class period… then there are two options, one is to have a study hall and the other is to petition for an actual free period where you don’t have school obligations.”
Those require the student meet a grade threshold and unit threshold. But the bottom line is yes, there are students who have a free period and are free to leave campus and could go to the grocery store or the bank.
Jim Provenza then expressed his concerns about the policy and the lack of board notification. He stated that he wants district counsel to take a look.
“This is the first time this has come to board and we saw nothing in writing, just the one paragraph. I’m not comfortable at this point.”
Ginni Davis interrupts:
“Jim, this is not an action item, it’s for information and we’re happy to back to you and give you in writing what we’re going to do, but we do need to enforce ed code.”
Provenza more forcefully responds this is “something that needs to come back to us.”
“This has never come before the board and I wouldn’t assume that you have board authority…”
Keltie Jones once again strongly defends the policy.
“I have to say that I think this is a very detailed well-thought out administrative approach to this. This is something they’ve been looking at and studying for a long time. They’ve got public agencies that are well-informed about codes and what the requirements are in following the codes… As Pam said, this is not about students who are going to the bank at lunch time, this is about students who are not showing up for school on a consistent regular basis, this about students were are losing. If there’s any way that we can make the connection to get to them and talk to them and find out what their needs are and find out how we can meet there needs, then I think this is something that is worth doing and I think it is within the realm of the administration to do it.”
Mr. Provenza responds:
“I don’t disagree with anything that you said except the last statement. This is something that I think is a policy item that should be approve by the board. We should have some sort of memorandum of understanding in force with the police department. We should know exactly how it’s going to be implemented and we should have procedures to guard against unintended consequences… As a board member, I will bring this back to the board… At the very least, we have to something in writing, guidelines, something that all parents and students can understand.”
Now Pam Mari responds:
“Jonathan Raven, traffic office commission, the entire Davis police department, this is black and white.”
While she stated this Ms. Mari holds up a stack of papers that are paper clipped together and one has to wonder if this is information that was not provided to the board. It sure seemed like she had something there that they did not.
Provenza firmly and forcefully responds:
“We have one paragraph in front of us, I’m sorry that’s not enough for me. If you feel that you have the authority to go ahead with it, you can do that, but it won’t be with my blessing, I’m going to place it on the agenda and ask our attorney to review it, there’s too many lawsuits against the school district we want to make sure we do it right and maybe we are doing it right, but I don’t have enough information before me now, not after the discussion.”
Keltie Jones again defends the policy:
“We’ve been talking about the sweeps, and [I] want to clarify that’s it is not just about tagging somebody who looks like they’re a particular age, my understanding… is that the sweeps are for specific students that the district has identified as… here’s the fifteen students, here’s the twenty students who have missed x number of days so far, here are the students we want you to see, here are the homes, see if you can bring them in. So it’s not just random let’s pull out anybody who looks like they may be of high school age.”
However, Tim Taylor responds:
“I don’t know what the sweeps are. Based on the paragraph the sweeps are of 15 or 20 students. But based on Amanda’s comments perhaps other things are going on that are beyond the 15 students. I don’t know what is and I’m not trying to find out tonight.”
He further states:
“I have a problem with the school district supporting some kind of action that I don’t really understand or know who it’s about or where it’s going to be or who gets caught in the net until we have a discussion with the city.”
The story at this point shifts from sweeps to 15 to 20 students who are the worst offenders being targeted.
Pam Mari at this point feels the need to back of her more hard-line stance from earlier as it becomes clear that the board with the exception of Keltie Jones is very uncomfortable with all of this:
“Perhaps we are really hurting on this word sweep… And if the word sweep were eliminated and it was home visit, I wonder if we would be as hurting. I apologize if that word is what is causing the trouble, that’s a word that the police department uses to mean on a given day we are going to use a lot of our energy and do this.”
Tim Taylor however clarifies why he is uncomfortable and it does not have to do with the word, “sweep.”
“One of the things we are struggling with is that regardless of whether the law allows certain things to be done, if they haven’t been done, we have two choices, we can hit the ground at 100 miles per hour or we can have a discussion with ourselves and the community and the public and discuss what are we going to do and I think what you’re hearing and certainly what I’m feeling certainly is that the 100 mile an hour approach while perhaps legal may not be the best fit. Because people are gong to feel like they are getting run over. That will cause community pullback… instead of buy-in, which I think we need, that will have the opposite effect.”
The board is determined to have discussions with both the city and to have an action-item placed on a future agenda to discuss this. From my perspective, there are problems with this policy.
First, it was put into place without the elective body of this community even having knowledge of what was going on.
Second, when the board expressed concerns about this both administrators insisted that they had the authority to do this administratively and the perception I go from this meeting, their attitude was that they could legally do this and they frankly did not care what the board said.
Third, and this will be examined much more closely, I really do not believe we know what is actually going on, at the school level with regards to this policy. Pam Mari backed way off the claim this was some kind of general sweep to suggest this was a 15-20 student operation. But what I hear from the students and others on the campus, that is not necessarily accurate.
Furthermore, it is not clear this is in fact directed by ed code. It is clear that the police and the DA’s office were in on the planning of that, but that is not the full extent of juvenile services in this community, and it is not clear that they were involved in planning this and in fact, just the opposite, there are indications that they were not.
Finally, I am simply uncomfortable with this policy. Pam Mari claims that everything was done to exhaust the alternatives, but then she and Ginni Davis made the call as to what to do, rather than have community discussion on the issue or bring the board in. So we have a choice–we can take them at their word or we can ask questions. Mari claims this is non-punitive, but the students do not believe that is the case. This looks to me to be sheer intimidation.
As Tim Taylor suggested, that is not going to lead to buy-in and cooperation from the community, it is going to lead to pull-back. He made, I believe the most pertinent point, even if they have the legal authority to do this, the very fact that this is a change of direction–we have not done this before–should necessitate a discussion as to the right approach. That did not happen here.
Now we will need to learn what this policy entails and what impacts it is having.
—Doug Paul Davis reporting
I was at the School Board meeting.
I want to clarify that the process that Pam Mari detailed was as follows:
If a child was absent, the household would receive automated phone calls alerting that the child was absent on those days or for an individual class period. Pam Mari says that these go out by the next day, but in my experience they can be up to two weeks after the absence.
After accumulating either 3 full day unexcused absences or tardies of 30 minutes or more for any class period the student would be deemed truant and a letter would be mailed home.
After three letters or an accumulation of 20 unexcused absences or tardies, the household would receive a home visit as part of a truancy sweep by two police officers and a school district official. It is unclear from Pam Mari’s what happens during these visits and there was no description whether they would take the child into custody or just counsel the child. It appeared that one officer would take the child while the others talked to the parents.
The phone calls home that Pam Mari talked about were automated phone calls. She said that these were going to home land lines but that now the system could be programed to go to cell phones.
At some point, and it was unclear where in the process, the Davis Police send a letter as well.
At no time did she describe any effort by a human being to contact the family before the police sweep. Notice to the families is by mail and automated phone calls. No contact with the child to find out what’s up, no phone call home to find out where’s Johnny, etc.
The other issue, which was Amanda’s concern, is that police are stopping school age kids during patrols to determine if they should be in school. This is not part of any organized sweep. This is every day. Kids are being pulled over or stopped on their bikes or while walking, etc. and being made to defend their presence off campus. DSIS students are regularly and repeatedly stopped and the school has scheduled its picture day for Sept. 12th in an effort to get the students a picture I.D. that they can show the police when they are stopped.
The presentation by Pam Mari was very poor. The information given was given out in bits and pieces. The whole flavor of the presentation was that they were authorized to do this by Ed. Code and didn’t really even need to tell the Board or the community about it. Pam Mari was rude and dismissive to the Board and clearly angry with those present that questioned what the District was doing.
Another thing, she declared that the Yolo County Court was “on board” with her truancy management plan, which I found out was untrue.
I was at the School Board meeting.
I want to clarify that the process that Pam Mari detailed was as follows:
If a child was absent, the household would receive automated phone calls alerting that the child was absent on those days or for an individual class period. Pam Mari says that these go out by the next day, but in my experience they can be up to two weeks after the absence.
After accumulating either 3 full day unexcused absences or tardies of 30 minutes or more for any class period the student would be deemed truant and a letter would be mailed home.
After three letters or an accumulation of 20 unexcused absences or tardies, the household would receive a home visit as part of a truancy sweep by two police officers and a school district official. It is unclear from Pam Mari’s what happens during these visits and there was no description whether they would take the child into custody or just counsel the child. It appeared that one officer would take the child while the others talked to the parents.
The phone calls home that Pam Mari talked about were automated phone calls. She said that these were going to home land lines but that now the system could be programed to go to cell phones.
At some point, and it was unclear where in the process, the Davis Police send a letter as well.
At no time did she describe any effort by a human being to contact the family before the police sweep. Notice to the families is by mail and automated phone calls. No contact with the child to find out what’s up, no phone call home to find out where’s Johnny, etc.
The other issue, which was Amanda’s concern, is that police are stopping school age kids during patrols to determine if they should be in school. This is not part of any organized sweep. This is every day. Kids are being pulled over or stopped on their bikes or while walking, etc. and being made to defend their presence off campus. DSIS students are regularly and repeatedly stopped and the school has scheduled its picture day for Sept. 12th in an effort to get the students a picture I.D. that they can show the police when they are stopped.
The presentation by Pam Mari was very poor. The information given was given out in bits and pieces. The whole flavor of the presentation was that they were authorized to do this by Ed. Code and didn’t really even need to tell the Board or the community about it. Pam Mari was rude and dismissive to the Board and clearly angry with those present that questioned what the District was doing.
Another thing, she declared that the Yolo County Court was “on board” with her truancy management plan, which I found out was untrue.
I was at the School Board meeting.
I want to clarify that the process that Pam Mari detailed was as follows:
If a child was absent, the household would receive automated phone calls alerting that the child was absent on those days or for an individual class period. Pam Mari says that these go out by the next day, but in my experience they can be up to two weeks after the absence.
After accumulating either 3 full day unexcused absences or tardies of 30 minutes or more for any class period the student would be deemed truant and a letter would be mailed home.
After three letters or an accumulation of 20 unexcused absences or tardies, the household would receive a home visit as part of a truancy sweep by two police officers and a school district official. It is unclear from Pam Mari’s what happens during these visits and there was no description whether they would take the child into custody or just counsel the child. It appeared that one officer would take the child while the others talked to the parents.
The phone calls home that Pam Mari talked about were automated phone calls. She said that these were going to home land lines but that now the system could be programed to go to cell phones.
At some point, and it was unclear where in the process, the Davis Police send a letter as well.
At no time did she describe any effort by a human being to contact the family before the police sweep. Notice to the families is by mail and automated phone calls. No contact with the child to find out what’s up, no phone call home to find out where’s Johnny, etc.
The other issue, which was Amanda’s concern, is that police are stopping school age kids during patrols to determine if they should be in school. This is not part of any organized sweep. This is every day. Kids are being pulled over or stopped on their bikes or while walking, etc. and being made to defend their presence off campus. DSIS students are regularly and repeatedly stopped and the school has scheduled its picture day for Sept. 12th in an effort to get the students a picture I.D. that they can show the police when they are stopped.
The presentation by Pam Mari was very poor. The information given was given out in bits and pieces. The whole flavor of the presentation was that they were authorized to do this by Ed. Code and didn’t really even need to tell the Board or the community about it. Pam Mari was rude and dismissive to the Board and clearly angry with those present that questioned what the District was doing.
Another thing, she declared that the Yolo County Court was “on board” with her truancy management plan, which I found out was untrue.
I was at the School Board meeting.
I want to clarify that the process that Pam Mari detailed was as follows:
If a child was absent, the household would receive automated phone calls alerting that the child was absent on those days or for an individual class period. Pam Mari says that these go out by the next day, but in my experience they can be up to two weeks after the absence.
After accumulating either 3 full day unexcused absences or tardies of 30 minutes or more for any class period the student would be deemed truant and a letter would be mailed home.
After three letters or an accumulation of 20 unexcused absences or tardies, the household would receive a home visit as part of a truancy sweep by two police officers and a school district official. It is unclear from Pam Mari’s what happens during these visits and there was no description whether they would take the child into custody or just counsel the child. It appeared that one officer would take the child while the others talked to the parents.
The phone calls home that Pam Mari talked about were automated phone calls. She said that these were going to home land lines but that now the system could be programed to go to cell phones.
At some point, and it was unclear where in the process, the Davis Police send a letter as well.
At no time did she describe any effort by a human being to contact the family before the police sweep. Notice to the families is by mail and automated phone calls. No contact with the child to find out what’s up, no phone call home to find out where’s Johnny, etc.
The other issue, which was Amanda’s concern, is that police are stopping school age kids during patrols to determine if they should be in school. This is not part of any organized sweep. This is every day. Kids are being pulled over or stopped on their bikes or while walking, etc. and being made to defend their presence off campus. DSIS students are regularly and repeatedly stopped and the school has scheduled its picture day for Sept. 12th in an effort to get the students a picture I.D. that they can show the police when they are stopped.
The presentation by Pam Mari was very poor. The information given was given out in bits and pieces. The whole flavor of the presentation was that they were authorized to do this by Ed. Code and didn’t really even need to tell the Board or the community about it. Pam Mari was rude and dismissive to the Board and clearly angry with those present that questioned what the District was doing.
Another thing, she declared that the Yolo County Court was “on board” with her truancy management plan, which I found out was untrue.
My kids have always been intimidated by the Davis Police. The frequent stops of just school age appearing drivers is going to futher intimidate the kids, rather than foster any “community policing” style of trust with the kids. Is there any concern about the fact that people are being targeted because of their apparent age? This will lead to the police making frequent stops of freshman college students, and young looking working adults in our community.
The police need to consider a better approach – get to know the kids and the school before you jump to hard core tactics. Imagine cops getting to know kids and then KNOWING who they pull over because they know the car and KNOW the student should be in school. They would be targeting the truants instead of casting such a wide net that they catch the equivalent of more dolphins than tuna.
I applaud changing the number dialed on the robocalls from the school to cell phones. That would have gotten me in tune with one child of mine who regularly intercepted the calls for a time. Still, why aren’t the letters home warning that “the next step” could be cops at your door in the middle of the day? How about giving that information out as an actual packet to parents rather than just a paragraph to the school board months after it is considered, arranged for, and adopted?
This is really poorly enacted. I am disappointed with Ms. Mari and the school administration on this one.
My kids have always been intimidated by the Davis Police. The frequent stops of just school age appearing drivers is going to futher intimidate the kids, rather than foster any “community policing” style of trust with the kids. Is there any concern about the fact that people are being targeted because of their apparent age? This will lead to the police making frequent stops of freshman college students, and young looking working adults in our community.
The police need to consider a better approach – get to know the kids and the school before you jump to hard core tactics. Imagine cops getting to know kids and then KNOWING who they pull over because they know the car and KNOW the student should be in school. They would be targeting the truants instead of casting such a wide net that they catch the equivalent of more dolphins than tuna.
I applaud changing the number dialed on the robocalls from the school to cell phones. That would have gotten me in tune with one child of mine who regularly intercepted the calls for a time. Still, why aren’t the letters home warning that “the next step” could be cops at your door in the middle of the day? How about giving that information out as an actual packet to parents rather than just a paragraph to the school board months after it is considered, arranged for, and adopted?
This is really poorly enacted. I am disappointed with Ms. Mari and the school administration on this one.
My kids have always been intimidated by the Davis Police. The frequent stops of just school age appearing drivers is going to futher intimidate the kids, rather than foster any “community policing” style of trust with the kids. Is there any concern about the fact that people are being targeted because of their apparent age? This will lead to the police making frequent stops of freshman college students, and young looking working adults in our community.
The police need to consider a better approach – get to know the kids and the school before you jump to hard core tactics. Imagine cops getting to know kids and then KNOWING who they pull over because they know the car and KNOW the student should be in school. They would be targeting the truants instead of casting such a wide net that they catch the equivalent of more dolphins than tuna.
I applaud changing the number dialed on the robocalls from the school to cell phones. That would have gotten me in tune with one child of mine who regularly intercepted the calls for a time. Still, why aren’t the letters home warning that “the next step” could be cops at your door in the middle of the day? How about giving that information out as an actual packet to parents rather than just a paragraph to the school board months after it is considered, arranged for, and adopted?
This is really poorly enacted. I am disappointed with Ms. Mari and the school administration on this one.
My kids have always been intimidated by the Davis Police. The frequent stops of just school age appearing drivers is going to futher intimidate the kids, rather than foster any “community policing” style of trust with the kids. Is there any concern about the fact that people are being targeted because of their apparent age? This will lead to the police making frequent stops of freshman college students, and young looking working adults in our community.
The police need to consider a better approach – get to know the kids and the school before you jump to hard core tactics. Imagine cops getting to know kids and then KNOWING who they pull over because they know the car and KNOW the student should be in school. They would be targeting the truants instead of casting such a wide net that they catch the equivalent of more dolphins than tuna.
I applaud changing the number dialed on the robocalls from the school to cell phones. That would have gotten me in tune with one child of mine who regularly intercepted the calls for a time. Still, why aren’t the letters home warning that “the next step” could be cops at your door in the middle of the day? How about giving that information out as an actual packet to parents rather than just a paragraph to the school board months after it is considered, arranged for, and adopted?
This is really poorly enacted. I am disappointed with Ms. Mari and the school administration on this one.
Davis’ War on Truancy(Terror). Bush should consider Pam Mari as his next pick for Attorney General.
Davis’ War on Truancy(Terror). Bush should consider Pam Mari as his next pick for Attorney General.
Davis’ War on Truancy(Terror). Bush should consider Pam Mari as his next pick for Attorney General.
Davis’ War on Truancy(Terror). Bush should consider Pam Mari as his next pick for Attorney General.
If it’s really only a handful of students, and probably not all of them on the same day, why can’t school personnel attempt to call the parents first before getting the police involved? Robocalls, which you have no way of knowing if they were ever heard by the right people, are a pretty haphazard way of trying to get the parents’ attention.
If it’s really only a handful of students, and probably not all of them on the same day, why can’t school personnel attempt to call the parents first before getting the police involved? Robocalls, which you have no way of knowing if they were ever heard by the right people, are a pretty haphazard way of trying to get the parents’ attention.
If it’s really only a handful of students, and probably not all of them on the same day, why can’t school personnel attempt to call the parents first before getting the police involved? Robocalls, which you have no way of knowing if they were ever heard by the right people, are a pretty haphazard way of trying to get the parents’ attention.
If it’s really only a handful of students, and probably not all of them on the same day, why can’t school personnel attempt to call the parents first before getting the police involved? Robocalls, which you have no way of knowing if they were ever heard by the right people, are a pretty haphazard way of trying to get the parents’ attention.
davisite said…
“Davis’ War on Truancy(Terror). Bush should consider Pam Mari as his next pick for Attorney General.”
I hope this isn’t going to be the start of a bunch of abusive personal attacks on school officials. Argue the issues, don’t demonize the administrators.
There are three separate issues.
Anything that would tighten up the notification process would be an improvement. It seems that there are several steps — calls, letters — that attempt to notify the parents that there is a problem. At some level parents have to take responsibility for their child’s attendance. Home visits sound like a great idea. I doubt if there is much controversy about this.
Communication of this new policy to the board seems to have been very poorly done. That is an issue, and I hope Jim and Tim will follow up on making sure that it is vetted by counsel and that there is better explanation to the students and parents.
The big concern seems to be Davis police stopping high school age kids on the street to verify their reasons for not being in school. I’ve always assumed this was current practice, since my son was warned about it when he entered DSIS. The police can pull over a student who is not in school anytime they wish, as far as I know. So I am baffled as to how Pam Mari’s presentation indicates any change in current policy.
davisite said…
“Davis’ War on Truancy(Terror). Bush should consider Pam Mari as his next pick for Attorney General.”
I hope this isn’t going to be the start of a bunch of abusive personal attacks on school officials. Argue the issues, don’t demonize the administrators.
There are three separate issues.
Anything that would tighten up the notification process would be an improvement. It seems that there are several steps — calls, letters — that attempt to notify the parents that there is a problem. At some level parents have to take responsibility for their child’s attendance. Home visits sound like a great idea. I doubt if there is much controversy about this.
Communication of this new policy to the board seems to have been very poorly done. That is an issue, and I hope Jim and Tim will follow up on making sure that it is vetted by counsel and that there is better explanation to the students and parents.
The big concern seems to be Davis police stopping high school age kids on the street to verify their reasons for not being in school. I’ve always assumed this was current practice, since my son was warned about it when he entered DSIS. The police can pull over a student who is not in school anytime they wish, as far as I know. So I am baffled as to how Pam Mari’s presentation indicates any change in current policy.
davisite said…
“Davis’ War on Truancy(Terror). Bush should consider Pam Mari as his next pick for Attorney General.”
I hope this isn’t going to be the start of a bunch of abusive personal attacks on school officials. Argue the issues, don’t demonize the administrators.
There are three separate issues.
Anything that would tighten up the notification process would be an improvement. It seems that there are several steps — calls, letters — that attempt to notify the parents that there is a problem. At some level parents have to take responsibility for their child’s attendance. Home visits sound like a great idea. I doubt if there is much controversy about this.
Communication of this new policy to the board seems to have been very poorly done. That is an issue, and I hope Jim and Tim will follow up on making sure that it is vetted by counsel and that there is better explanation to the students and parents.
The big concern seems to be Davis police stopping high school age kids on the street to verify their reasons for not being in school. I’ve always assumed this was current practice, since my son was warned about it when he entered DSIS. The police can pull over a student who is not in school anytime they wish, as far as I know. So I am baffled as to how Pam Mari’s presentation indicates any change in current policy.
davisite said…
“Davis’ War on Truancy(Terror). Bush should consider Pam Mari as his next pick for Attorney General.”
I hope this isn’t going to be the start of a bunch of abusive personal attacks on school officials. Argue the issues, don’t demonize the administrators.
There are three separate issues.
Anything that would tighten up the notification process would be an improvement. It seems that there are several steps — calls, letters — that attempt to notify the parents that there is a problem. At some level parents have to take responsibility for their child’s attendance. Home visits sound like a great idea. I doubt if there is much controversy about this.
Communication of this new policy to the board seems to have been very poorly done. That is an issue, and I hope Jim and Tim will follow up on making sure that it is vetted by counsel and that there is better explanation to the students and parents.
The big concern seems to be Davis police stopping high school age kids on the street to verify their reasons for not being in school. I’ve always assumed this was current practice, since my son was warned about it when he entered DSIS. The police can pull over a student who is not in school anytime they wish, as far as I know. So I am baffled as to how Pam Mari’s presentation indicates any change in current policy.
“Davis’ War on Truancy(Terror). Bush should consider Pam Mari as his next pick for Attorney General.”
Is it just me, or does this “davisite” character always seem to make inappropriate and even assinine comments on this site? I try to ignore what she says, but her mean and ugly commentary is hard to overlook.
“Davis’ War on Truancy(Terror). Bush should consider Pam Mari as his next pick for Attorney General.”
Is it just me, or does this “davisite” character always seem to make inappropriate and even assinine comments on this site? I try to ignore what she says, but her mean and ugly commentary is hard to overlook.
“Davis’ War on Truancy(Terror). Bush should consider Pam Mari as his next pick for Attorney General.”
Is it just me, or does this “davisite” character always seem to make inappropriate and even assinine comments on this site? I try to ignore what she says, but her mean and ugly commentary is hard to overlook.
“Davis’ War on Truancy(Terror). Bush should consider Pam Mari as his next pick for Attorney General.”
Is it just me, or does this “davisite” character always seem to make inappropriate and even assinine comments on this site? I try to ignore what she says, but her mean and ugly commentary is hard to overlook.
Keltie Jones said in DPD’s piece:
“If there’s any way that we can make the connection to get to them and talk to them and find out what their needs are and find out how we can meet there (sic) needs, then I think this is something that is worth doing and I think it is within the realm of the administration to do it.”
Why isn’t it already the policy of school officials to do their jobs and “make the connection,” i.e., communicate with students…before calling the cops. The school district should focus on its traditional mission, which is communicating with students, and call the police only as a very, very last resort.
“Sweeps?” Police pulling kids over because they are kids? This policy has “unnecessary intimidation” written all over it.
Keltie Jones said in DPD’s piece:
“If there’s any way that we can make the connection to get to them and talk to them and find out what their needs are and find out how we can meet there (sic) needs, then I think this is something that is worth doing and I think it is within the realm of the administration to do it.”
Why isn’t it already the policy of school officials to do their jobs and “make the connection,” i.e., communicate with students…before calling the cops. The school district should focus on its traditional mission, which is communicating with students, and call the police only as a very, very last resort.
“Sweeps?” Police pulling kids over because they are kids? This policy has “unnecessary intimidation” written all over it.
Keltie Jones said in DPD’s piece:
“If there’s any way that we can make the connection to get to them and talk to them and find out what their needs are and find out how we can meet there (sic) needs, then I think this is something that is worth doing and I think it is within the realm of the administration to do it.”
Why isn’t it already the policy of school officials to do their jobs and “make the connection,” i.e., communicate with students…before calling the cops. The school district should focus on its traditional mission, which is communicating with students, and call the police only as a very, very last resort.
“Sweeps?” Police pulling kids over because they are kids? This policy has “unnecessary intimidation” written all over it.
Keltie Jones said in DPD’s piece:
“If there’s any way that we can make the connection to get to them and talk to them and find out what their needs are and find out how we can meet there (sic) needs, then I think this is something that is worth doing and I think it is within the realm of the administration to do it.”
Why isn’t it already the policy of school officials to do their jobs and “make the connection,” i.e., communicate with students…before calling the cops. The school district should focus on its traditional mission, which is communicating with students, and call the police only as a very, very last resort.
“Sweeps?” Police pulling kids over because they are kids? This policy has “unnecessary intimidation” written all over it.
Don: Good points. I would like to urge everyone to keep your heads cool, because this is just the start of this issue and it will get heated.
I have concerns about the way that Pam Mari conducted herself at the meeting, I want to state that very plainly. I don’t think she acted appropriately and I trust that Jim and Tim will move this in a more appropriate direction.
For your other question, I have interviewed several Davis High School students to talk about their concerns. Something is clearly different here and a lot of good kids are concerned about it. Stay tuned.
Don: Good points. I would like to urge everyone to keep your heads cool, because this is just the start of this issue and it will get heated.
I have concerns about the way that Pam Mari conducted herself at the meeting, I want to state that very plainly. I don’t think she acted appropriately and I trust that Jim and Tim will move this in a more appropriate direction.
For your other question, I have interviewed several Davis High School students to talk about their concerns. Something is clearly different here and a lot of good kids are concerned about it. Stay tuned.
Don: Good points. I would like to urge everyone to keep your heads cool, because this is just the start of this issue and it will get heated.
I have concerns about the way that Pam Mari conducted herself at the meeting, I want to state that very plainly. I don’t think she acted appropriately and I trust that Jim and Tim will move this in a more appropriate direction.
For your other question, I have interviewed several Davis High School students to talk about their concerns. Something is clearly different here and a lot of good kids are concerned about it. Stay tuned.
Don: Good points. I would like to urge everyone to keep your heads cool, because this is just the start of this issue and it will get heated.
I have concerns about the way that Pam Mari conducted herself at the meeting, I want to state that very plainly. I don’t think she acted appropriately and I trust that Jim and Tim will move this in a more appropriate direction.
For your other question, I have interviewed several Davis High School students to talk about their concerns. Something is clearly different here and a lot of good kids are concerned about it. Stay tuned.
The biggest change in the policy is police involvement, and involvement of the District Attorney’s office. Pam repeatedly said that the “Traffic Commissioner” for Yolo County said that he was ready to revoke kids’ driver’s licenses. She made it seem like he would do this at her bidding. However, I spoke with Commissioner Dave Reed the next day and he said he didn’t know Pam Mari and has never met or spoken to her.
Pam also stated that as punishment for skipping school, the student would not get credit for any work that would have been assigned during that period. This is fine for the student who skips the odd class, but it becomes a problem for the student who is truancy is just a red flag for other problems. There is no benefit for a child who is so far behind, or has missed so many assignments that there is no possible way to pass the class, to attend the class. It is very clear to the child that his attendance has everything to do with the District getting money for their attendance and little to do with them getting an education.
Pam’s recommendation was that this student could go to a different school such as King or DSIS so he could graduate.
Pam even discussed suspension as a sanction, but quickly backed off from that indicating that it would be silly to suspend a student for not attending. What Pam didn’t say is that Ed. Code prohibits suspension or expulsion for truancy or tardiness. I’m certain that Ms. Mari would also use exclusion from school activities, i.e. clubs, sports, social events as punishment for truancy. Again, appropriate for some students, but inappropriate for students who feel no attachment to their school or would truely benefit from the mentoring and connection through their participation. We don’t know what is happening in these student’s lives to keep them away from school.
The flavor and focus of Pam’s presentation was punitive and threatening. It was all about money and the law and graduated sanctions for not going to school. What was left out was why students weren’t attending, what could be done to get the student to feel more attachment to the school and what needed to be done to help the child achieve. In other words, student services (which ironically is the title of Pam Mari’s job).
Combine the situation that Davis youth are often stopped by Davis police all times of the day, during and after school hours, with the District’s truancy management plan that steps up these stops by police along with home visits by officers is the cause of concern. Police are scary and intimidating to our students – they are not viewed as friends.
Our student representative tried to tell us that all students are being impacted by this policy, not just the truant students. She told us that they are anxious, that they are scared, that they are worried, that they are angry, that they are upset. Why is it that our administrators don’t seem to be listening to them? Pam Mari told the Board that the student’s shouldn’t care about the truancy sweeps because it only would affect a few of them. She is not hearing or understanding what people are concerned about.
The biggest change in the policy is police involvement, and involvement of the District Attorney’s office. Pam repeatedly said that the “Traffic Commissioner” for Yolo County said that he was ready to revoke kids’ driver’s licenses. She made it seem like he would do this at her bidding. However, I spoke with Commissioner Dave Reed the next day and he said he didn’t know Pam Mari and has never met or spoken to her.
Pam also stated that as punishment for skipping school, the student would not get credit for any work that would have been assigned during that period. This is fine for the student who skips the odd class, but it becomes a problem for the student who is truancy is just a red flag for other problems. There is no benefit for a child who is so far behind, or has missed so many assignments that there is no possible way to pass the class, to attend the class. It is very clear to the child that his attendance has everything to do with the District getting money for their attendance and little to do with them getting an education.
Pam’s recommendation was that this student could go to a different school such as King or DSIS so he could graduate.
Pam even discussed suspension as a sanction, but quickly backed off from that indicating that it would be silly to suspend a student for not attending. What Pam didn’t say is that Ed. Code prohibits suspension or expulsion for truancy or tardiness. I’m certain that Ms. Mari would also use exclusion from school activities, i.e. clubs, sports, social events as punishment for truancy. Again, appropriate for some students, but inappropriate for students who feel no attachment to their school or would truely benefit from the mentoring and connection through their participation. We don’t know what is happening in these student’s lives to keep them away from school.
The flavor and focus of Pam’s presentation was punitive and threatening. It was all about money and the law and graduated sanctions for not going to school. What was left out was why students weren’t attending, what could be done to get the student to feel more attachment to the school and what needed to be done to help the child achieve. In other words, student services (which ironically is the title of Pam Mari’s job).
Combine the situation that Davis youth are often stopped by Davis police all times of the day, during and after school hours, with the District’s truancy management plan that steps up these stops by police along with home visits by officers is the cause of concern. Police are scary and intimidating to our students – they are not viewed as friends.
Our student representative tried to tell us that all students are being impacted by this policy, not just the truant students. She told us that they are anxious, that they are scared, that they are worried, that they are angry, that they are upset. Why is it that our administrators don’t seem to be listening to them? Pam Mari told the Board that the student’s shouldn’t care about the truancy sweeps because it only would affect a few of them. She is not hearing or understanding what people are concerned about.
The biggest change in the policy is police involvement, and involvement of the District Attorney’s office. Pam repeatedly said that the “Traffic Commissioner” for Yolo County said that he was ready to revoke kids’ driver’s licenses. She made it seem like he would do this at her bidding. However, I spoke with Commissioner Dave Reed the next day and he said he didn’t know Pam Mari and has never met or spoken to her.
Pam also stated that as punishment for skipping school, the student would not get credit for any work that would have been assigned during that period. This is fine for the student who skips the odd class, but it becomes a problem for the student who is truancy is just a red flag for other problems. There is no benefit for a child who is so far behind, or has missed so many assignments that there is no possible way to pass the class, to attend the class. It is very clear to the child that his attendance has everything to do with the District getting money for their attendance and little to do with them getting an education.
Pam’s recommendation was that this student could go to a different school such as King or DSIS so he could graduate.
Pam even discussed suspension as a sanction, but quickly backed off from that indicating that it would be silly to suspend a student for not attending. What Pam didn’t say is that Ed. Code prohibits suspension or expulsion for truancy or tardiness. I’m certain that Ms. Mari would also use exclusion from school activities, i.e. clubs, sports, social events as punishment for truancy. Again, appropriate for some students, but inappropriate for students who feel no attachment to their school or would truely benefit from the mentoring and connection through their participation. We don’t know what is happening in these student’s lives to keep them away from school.
The flavor and focus of Pam’s presentation was punitive and threatening. It was all about money and the law and graduated sanctions for not going to school. What was left out was why students weren’t attending, what could be done to get the student to feel more attachment to the school and what needed to be done to help the child achieve. In other words, student services (which ironically is the title of Pam Mari’s job).
Combine the situation that Davis youth are often stopped by Davis police all times of the day, during and after school hours, with the District’s truancy management plan that steps up these stops by police along with home visits by officers is the cause of concern. Police are scary and intimidating to our students – they are not viewed as friends.
Our student representative tried to tell us that all students are being impacted by this policy, not just the truant students. She told us that they are anxious, that they are scared, that they are worried, that they are angry, that they are upset. Why is it that our administrators don’t seem to be listening to them? Pam Mari told the Board that the student’s shouldn’t care about the truancy sweeps because it only would affect a few of them. She is not hearing or understanding what people are concerned about.
The biggest change in the policy is police involvement, and involvement of the District Attorney’s office. Pam repeatedly said that the “Traffic Commissioner” for Yolo County said that he was ready to revoke kids’ driver’s licenses. She made it seem like he would do this at her bidding. However, I spoke with Commissioner Dave Reed the next day and he said he didn’t know Pam Mari and has never met or spoken to her.
Pam also stated that as punishment for skipping school, the student would not get credit for any work that would have been assigned during that period. This is fine for the student who skips the odd class, but it becomes a problem for the student who is truancy is just a red flag for other problems. There is no benefit for a child who is so far behind, or has missed so many assignments that there is no possible way to pass the class, to attend the class. It is very clear to the child that his attendance has everything to do with the District getting money for their attendance and little to do with them getting an education.
Pam’s recommendation was that this student could go to a different school such as King or DSIS so he could graduate.
Pam even discussed suspension as a sanction, but quickly backed off from that indicating that it would be silly to suspend a student for not attending. What Pam didn’t say is that Ed. Code prohibits suspension or expulsion for truancy or tardiness. I’m certain that Ms. Mari would also use exclusion from school activities, i.e. clubs, sports, social events as punishment for truancy. Again, appropriate for some students, but inappropriate for students who feel no attachment to their school or would truely benefit from the mentoring and connection through their participation. We don’t know what is happening in these student’s lives to keep them away from school.
The flavor and focus of Pam’s presentation was punitive and threatening. It was all about money and the law and graduated sanctions for not going to school. What was left out was why students weren’t attending, what could be done to get the student to feel more attachment to the school and what needed to be done to help the child achieve. In other words, student services (which ironically is the title of Pam Mari’s job).
Combine the situation that Davis youth are often stopped by Davis police all times of the day, during and after school hours, with the District’s truancy management plan that steps up these stops by police along with home visits by officers is the cause of concern. Police are scary and intimidating to our students – they are not viewed as friends.
Our student representative tried to tell us that all students are being impacted by this policy, not just the truant students. She told us that they are anxious, that they are scared, that they are worried, that they are angry, that they are upset. Why is it that our administrators don’t seem to be listening to them? Pam Mari told the Board that the student’s shouldn’t care about the truancy sweeps because it only would affect a few of them. She is not hearing or understanding what people are concerned about.
I left a similar comment a few days ago, but it seems wise to repeat. The automated calls go on and on without any other intervention from the school, even when parents are proactive and go to the school and try to get their buy-in with the student. We took our child out of DHS and sent to boarding school (GATE student) partly because of this very frustrating issue. I am not abdicating our responsibilty as parents b/c I realize much was due to our child and us….but again the school even when approached several times to help. acted unaware and uninterested. I think DHS should also explore WHY there are truants. Some I believe are skipping b/c DHS is very insular…either you fit the overachiever mold or you feel alienated.
Getting the police involved to do sweeps is NOT the answer to any of this.
I left a similar comment a few days ago, but it seems wise to repeat. The automated calls go on and on without any other intervention from the school, even when parents are proactive and go to the school and try to get their buy-in with the student. We took our child out of DHS and sent to boarding school (GATE student) partly because of this very frustrating issue. I am not abdicating our responsibilty as parents b/c I realize much was due to our child and us….but again the school even when approached several times to help. acted unaware and uninterested. I think DHS should also explore WHY there are truants. Some I believe are skipping b/c DHS is very insular…either you fit the overachiever mold or you feel alienated.
Getting the police involved to do sweeps is NOT the answer to any of this.
I left a similar comment a few days ago, but it seems wise to repeat. The automated calls go on and on without any other intervention from the school, even when parents are proactive and go to the school and try to get their buy-in with the student. We took our child out of DHS and sent to boarding school (GATE student) partly because of this very frustrating issue. I am not abdicating our responsibilty as parents b/c I realize much was due to our child and us….but again the school even when approached several times to help. acted unaware and uninterested. I think DHS should also explore WHY there are truants. Some I believe are skipping b/c DHS is very insular…either you fit the overachiever mold or you feel alienated.
Getting the police involved to do sweeps is NOT the answer to any of this.
I left a similar comment a few days ago, but it seems wise to repeat. The automated calls go on and on without any other intervention from the school, even when parents are proactive and go to the school and try to get their buy-in with the student. We took our child out of DHS and sent to boarding school (GATE student) partly because of this very frustrating issue. I am not abdicating our responsibilty as parents b/c I realize much was due to our child and us….but again the school even when approached several times to help. acted unaware and uninterested. I think DHS should also explore WHY there are truants. Some I believe are skipping b/c DHS is very insular…either you fit the overachiever mold or you feel alienated.
Getting the police involved to do sweeps is NOT the answer to any of this.
Don Shor said:
“Argue the issues, don’t demonize the administrators.”
Public accountability and oversight are KEY to process and a valid area for discussion. We have all witnessed what is the result of the Bush administration’s expanded powers without public scrutiny, accountability and oversight by our elected representatives. DPD’s School Board/Pam Mari narrative struck me as quite similar to the Senate Judiciary Committee/ Ex-Attorney General Gonzalas exchanges.
Don Shor said:
“Argue the issues, don’t demonize the administrators.”
Public accountability and oversight are KEY to process and a valid area for discussion. We have all witnessed what is the result of the Bush administration’s expanded powers without public scrutiny, accountability and oversight by our elected representatives. DPD’s School Board/Pam Mari narrative struck me as quite similar to the Senate Judiciary Committee/ Ex-Attorney General Gonzalas exchanges.
Don Shor said:
“Argue the issues, don’t demonize the administrators.”
Public accountability and oversight are KEY to process and a valid area for discussion. We have all witnessed what is the result of the Bush administration’s expanded powers without public scrutiny, accountability and oversight by our elected representatives. DPD’s School Board/Pam Mari narrative struck me as quite similar to the Senate Judiciary Committee/ Ex-Attorney General Gonzalas exchanges.
Don Shor said:
“Argue the issues, don’t demonize the administrators.”
Public accountability and oversight are KEY to process and a valid area for discussion. We have all witnessed what is the result of the Bush administration’s expanded powers without public scrutiny, accountability and oversight by our elected representatives. DPD’s School Board/Pam Mari narrative struck me as quite similar to the Senate Judiciary Committee/ Ex-Attorney General Gonzalas exchanges.
What this story may be exposing is a current DJUSD adminstration mind-set that would be well-served by the countervailing input of Spector and Schelen on the School Board with their demonstrably superior communication and empathetic skills when compared to the other two candidates.
What this story may be exposing is a current DJUSD adminstration mind-set that would be well-served by the countervailing input of Spector and Schelen on the School Board with their demonstrably superior communication and empathetic skills when compared to the other two candidates.
What this story may be exposing is a current DJUSD adminstration mind-set that would be well-served by the countervailing input of Spector and Schelen on the School Board with their demonstrably superior communication and empathetic skills when compared to the other two candidates.
What this story may be exposing is a current DJUSD adminstration mind-set that would be well-served by the countervailing input of Spector and Schelen on the School Board with their demonstrably superior communication and empathetic skills when compared to the other two candidates.
Pam’s recommendation was that this student could go to a different school such as King or DSIS so he could graduate.
I think Sharla is on to something. One wonders if the actual motivation is to get these students out of Davis High, and the punitive sanctions appear to be clearly designed to make it impossible for any truant to succeed in class even if they returned.
Something strange is going on here.
Especially when you consider Sharla’s other remark:
What was left out was why students weren’t attending, what could be done to get the student to feel more attachment to the school and what needed to be done to help the child achieve. In other words, student services (which ironically is the title of Pam Mari’s job).
Curiouser and curiouser.
Or consider the remark by anonymous:
I am not abdicating our responsibilty as parents b/c I realize much was due to our child and us….but again the school even when approached several times to help. acted unaware and uninterested.
Looking forward to future posts on the topic.
–Richard Estes
Pam’s recommendation was that this student could go to a different school such as King or DSIS so he could graduate.
I think Sharla is on to something. One wonders if the actual motivation is to get these students out of Davis High, and the punitive sanctions appear to be clearly designed to make it impossible for any truant to succeed in class even if they returned.
Something strange is going on here.
Especially when you consider Sharla’s other remark:
What was left out was why students weren’t attending, what could be done to get the student to feel more attachment to the school and what needed to be done to help the child achieve. In other words, student services (which ironically is the title of Pam Mari’s job).
Curiouser and curiouser.
Or consider the remark by anonymous:
I am not abdicating our responsibilty as parents b/c I realize much was due to our child and us….but again the school even when approached several times to help. acted unaware and uninterested.
Looking forward to future posts on the topic.
–Richard Estes
Pam’s recommendation was that this student could go to a different school such as King or DSIS so he could graduate.
I think Sharla is on to something. One wonders if the actual motivation is to get these students out of Davis High, and the punitive sanctions appear to be clearly designed to make it impossible for any truant to succeed in class even if they returned.
Something strange is going on here.
Especially when you consider Sharla’s other remark:
What was left out was why students weren’t attending, what could be done to get the student to feel more attachment to the school and what needed to be done to help the child achieve. In other words, student services (which ironically is the title of Pam Mari’s job).
Curiouser and curiouser.
Or consider the remark by anonymous:
I am not abdicating our responsibilty as parents b/c I realize much was due to our child and us….but again the school even when approached several times to help. acted unaware and uninterested.
Looking forward to future posts on the topic.
–Richard Estes
Pam’s recommendation was that this student could go to a different school such as King or DSIS so he could graduate.
I think Sharla is on to something. One wonders if the actual motivation is to get these students out of Davis High, and the punitive sanctions appear to be clearly designed to make it impossible for any truant to succeed in class even if they returned.
Something strange is going on here.
Especially when you consider Sharla’s other remark:
What was left out was why students weren’t attending, what could be done to get the student to feel more attachment to the school and what needed to be done to help the child achieve. In other words, student services (which ironically is the title of Pam Mari’s job).
Curiouser and curiouser.
Or consider the remark by anonymous:
I am not abdicating our responsibilty as parents b/c I realize much was due to our child and us….but again the school even when approached several times to help. acted unaware and uninterested.
Looking forward to future posts on the topic.
–Richard Estes
The communication problem on this issue lies with the school administration, not the Board. While Kelty Jones seemed to back up Pam Mari, the other School Board members had reservations or concerns and have taken steps to agendize the matter. The report (if you can call it that, because there really was no written report submitted to the Board other than a paragraph summarizing the plan) was agendized as “informational”, so there was no action to be taken, no approval or disapproval asked for or expected.
I am certain that there is much happening behind the scenes right now on this truancy management plan, if only to find out exactly what it is in order to be able to communicate the policy and actions and responsibilities of all players to the community.
I do think that consideration about the ability to assume the role of oversight of school Administration should be part of determining the best candidate for school board, whether it be school discipline, curriculum, finances or personel issues, etc.
The communication problem on this issue lies with the school administration, not the Board. While Kelty Jones seemed to back up Pam Mari, the other School Board members had reservations or concerns and have taken steps to agendize the matter. The report (if you can call it that, because there really was no written report submitted to the Board other than a paragraph summarizing the plan) was agendized as “informational”, so there was no action to be taken, no approval or disapproval asked for or expected.
I am certain that there is much happening behind the scenes right now on this truancy management plan, if only to find out exactly what it is in order to be able to communicate the policy and actions and responsibilities of all players to the community.
I do think that consideration about the ability to assume the role of oversight of school Administration should be part of determining the best candidate for school board, whether it be school discipline, curriculum, finances or personel issues, etc.
The communication problem on this issue lies with the school administration, not the Board. While Kelty Jones seemed to back up Pam Mari, the other School Board members had reservations or concerns and have taken steps to agendize the matter. The report (if you can call it that, because there really was no written report submitted to the Board other than a paragraph summarizing the plan) was agendized as “informational”, so there was no action to be taken, no approval or disapproval asked for or expected.
I am certain that there is much happening behind the scenes right now on this truancy management plan, if only to find out exactly what it is in order to be able to communicate the policy and actions and responsibilities of all players to the community.
I do think that consideration about the ability to assume the role of oversight of school Administration should be part of determining the best candidate for school board, whether it be school discipline, curriculum, finances or personel issues, etc.
The communication problem on this issue lies with the school administration, not the Board. While Kelty Jones seemed to back up Pam Mari, the other School Board members had reservations or concerns and have taken steps to agendize the matter. The report (if you can call it that, because there really was no written report submitted to the Board other than a paragraph summarizing the plan) was agendized as “informational”, so there was no action to be taken, no approval or disapproval asked for or expected.
I am certain that there is much happening behind the scenes right now on this truancy management plan, if only to find out exactly what it is in order to be able to communicate the policy and actions and responsibilities of all players to the community.
I do think that consideration about the ability to assume the role of oversight of school Administration should be part of determining the best candidate for school board, whether it be school discipline, curriculum, finances or personel issues, etc.
There are multiple issues floating around here. Based on my reading of the single paragraph in the School Board agenda and from watching the meeting, there are two separate types of “absence from school” that attempts are being made to address by the district dumping its responsibilities on the PD (and the PD agreeing to this, for some odd reason).
First, there is the problem of kids who have a huge number of unexcused absences or are just not attending school at all. It seems that the district’s approach to this is automated “contact” with families, followed up by police visits. As Sharla and others have pointed out, this is a misguided approach because it fails to really get the families involved and it fails to address what is likely to be a serious underlying problem that is contributing to the truancy. The first step in such cases should obviously be real effort by the school, through personal contact, to have a meeting(s) with the kids and family to figure out what the problem is. The only appropriate role of the police in such cases might be to get the kids & their parents to a meeting at the school if all other serious attempts to get them to such a meeting have failed.
The second “absence” problem is the huge number of kids who skip classes or days frequently. Apparently the district wants to delegate its responsibility to deal with this to the police, as well, by having the police increase how much they stop and harass young people on the streets — which the police were already doing to an excessive degree before the district asked them to step it up.
There is another new police policy that is contributing to their recent harassment of young people. The PD has taken the position that they will stop every driver who is carrying young passengers if the driver looks young enough to still have restrictions on their drivers license. This violates the Motor Vehicles Code, which states that drivers shall not be stopped for suspicion of such a violation, and shall only receive a citation for such a violation if they were stopped for a separate violation. But the Davis PD has decided to proceed in this fashion anyway.
I suspect the latter policy is at least part of the reason for the increased police presence around DHS recently, although it may be partly the district asking the PD to stop school-aged kids who are not in school. It all needs to stop if our goal is to teach kids to trust the police in particular and government authority in general.
As for the dynamics at the School Board meeting, I think people are coming down a little hard on Pam Mari. I believe this was her first presentation to the School Board in her new administrative role, and she seemed to believe that the Board had received the back-up material she was referring to throughout the meeting. Since David Murphy left, the School Board has had consistent problems getting adequate written prep materials from the Superintendent and Deputy Superintendents prior to School Board meetings, so this problem needs to be attributed to Pam Mari’s supervisors, not to her.
Since she is new to this District Office position, one can only assume that Pam was following instructions from her supervisors in coming up with this plan, and that the plan and presentation were approved in advanced by her supervisors (or even suggested by them). She may have assumed that the School Board had already signed off on the general approach she was being told to follow. Pam seemed to be listening to the concerns expressed by the Board, and stepped back from her proposals when she heard those concerns. Ginni Davis (Pam Mari’s supervisor) was the one who came close to saying that administration could do what they want w/o the approval of the School Board. I had the benefit of watching the meeting on TV and seeing Ginni’s highly inappropriate facial expressions during comments by Board members.
I am optimistic that much of this attitude on the part of the administration will change when the new Superintendent (focused on collaboration) starts. It seems outrageous for the administration to be undertaking such a huge — and potentially destructive — change in approach (appointing the PD as the lead agency re school absences) just a few months before a new Superintendent is starting.
There are multiple issues floating around here. Based on my reading of the single paragraph in the School Board agenda and from watching the meeting, there are two separate types of “absence from school” that attempts are being made to address by the district dumping its responsibilities on the PD (and the PD agreeing to this, for some odd reason).
First, there is the problem of kids who have a huge number of unexcused absences or are just not attending school at all. It seems that the district’s approach to this is automated “contact” with families, followed up by police visits. As Sharla and others have pointed out, this is a misguided approach because it fails to really get the families involved and it fails to address what is likely to be a serious underlying problem that is contributing to the truancy. The first step in such cases should obviously be real effort by the school, through personal contact, to have a meeting(s) with the kids and family to figure out what the problem is. The only appropriate role of the police in such cases might be to get the kids & their parents to a meeting at the school if all other serious attempts to get them to such a meeting have failed.
The second “absence” problem is the huge number of kids who skip classes or days frequently. Apparently the district wants to delegate its responsibility to deal with this to the police, as well, by having the police increase how much they stop and harass young people on the streets — which the police were already doing to an excessive degree before the district asked them to step it up.
There is another new police policy that is contributing to their recent harassment of young people. The PD has taken the position that they will stop every driver who is carrying young passengers if the driver looks young enough to still have restrictions on their drivers license. This violates the Motor Vehicles Code, which states that drivers shall not be stopped for suspicion of such a violation, and shall only receive a citation for such a violation if they were stopped for a separate violation. But the Davis PD has decided to proceed in this fashion anyway.
I suspect the latter policy is at least part of the reason for the increased police presence around DHS recently, although it may be partly the district asking the PD to stop school-aged kids who are not in school. It all needs to stop if our goal is to teach kids to trust the police in particular and government authority in general.
As for the dynamics at the School Board meeting, I think people are coming down a little hard on Pam Mari. I believe this was her first presentation to the School Board in her new administrative role, and she seemed to believe that the Board had received the back-up material she was referring to throughout the meeting. Since David Murphy left, the School Board has had consistent problems getting adequate written prep materials from the Superintendent and Deputy Superintendents prior to School Board meetings, so this problem needs to be attributed to Pam Mari’s supervisors, not to her.
Since she is new to this District Office position, one can only assume that Pam was following instructions from her supervisors in coming up with this plan, and that the plan and presentation were approved in advanced by her supervisors (or even suggested by them). She may have assumed that the School Board had already signed off on the general approach she was being told to follow. Pam seemed to be listening to the concerns expressed by the Board, and stepped back from her proposals when she heard those concerns. Ginni Davis (Pam Mari’s supervisor) was the one who came close to saying that administration could do what they want w/o the approval of the School Board. I had the benefit of watching the meeting on TV and seeing Ginni’s highly inappropriate facial expressions during comments by Board members.
I am optimistic that much of this attitude on the part of the administration will change when the new Superintendent (focused on collaboration) starts. It seems outrageous for the administration to be undertaking such a huge — and potentially destructive — change in approach (appointing the PD as the lead agency re school absences) just a few months before a new Superintendent is starting.
There are multiple issues floating around here. Based on my reading of the single paragraph in the School Board agenda and from watching the meeting, there are two separate types of “absence from school” that attempts are being made to address by the district dumping its responsibilities on the PD (and the PD agreeing to this, for some odd reason).
First, there is the problem of kids who have a huge number of unexcused absences or are just not attending school at all. It seems that the district’s approach to this is automated “contact” with families, followed up by police visits. As Sharla and others have pointed out, this is a misguided approach because it fails to really get the families involved and it fails to address what is likely to be a serious underlying problem that is contributing to the truancy. The first step in such cases should obviously be real effort by the school, through personal contact, to have a meeting(s) with the kids and family to figure out what the problem is. The only appropriate role of the police in such cases might be to get the kids & their parents to a meeting at the school if all other serious attempts to get them to such a meeting have failed.
The second “absence” problem is the huge number of kids who skip classes or days frequently. Apparently the district wants to delegate its responsibility to deal with this to the police, as well, by having the police increase how much they stop and harass young people on the streets — which the police were already doing to an excessive degree before the district asked them to step it up.
There is another new police policy that is contributing to their recent harassment of young people. The PD has taken the position that they will stop every driver who is carrying young passengers if the driver looks young enough to still have restrictions on their drivers license. This violates the Motor Vehicles Code, which states that drivers shall not be stopped for suspicion of such a violation, and shall only receive a citation for such a violation if they were stopped for a separate violation. But the Davis PD has decided to proceed in this fashion anyway.
I suspect the latter policy is at least part of the reason for the increased police presence around DHS recently, although it may be partly the district asking the PD to stop school-aged kids who are not in school. It all needs to stop if our goal is to teach kids to trust the police in particular and government authority in general.
As for the dynamics at the School Board meeting, I think people are coming down a little hard on Pam Mari. I believe this was her first presentation to the School Board in her new administrative role, and she seemed to believe that the Board had received the back-up material she was referring to throughout the meeting. Since David Murphy left, the School Board has had consistent problems getting adequate written prep materials from the Superintendent and Deputy Superintendents prior to School Board meetings, so this problem needs to be attributed to Pam Mari’s supervisors, not to her.
Since she is new to this District Office position, one can only assume that Pam was following instructions from her supervisors in coming up with this plan, and that the plan and presentation were approved in advanced by her supervisors (or even suggested by them). She may have assumed that the School Board had already signed off on the general approach she was being told to follow. Pam seemed to be listening to the concerns expressed by the Board, and stepped back from her proposals when she heard those concerns. Ginni Davis (Pam Mari’s supervisor) was the one who came close to saying that administration could do what they want w/o the approval of the School Board. I had the benefit of watching the meeting on TV and seeing Ginni’s highly inappropriate facial expressions during comments by Board members.
I am optimistic that much of this attitude on the part of the administration will change when the new Superintendent (focused on collaboration) starts. It seems outrageous for the administration to be undertaking such a huge — and potentially destructive — change in approach (appointing the PD as the lead agency re school absences) just a few months before a new Superintendent is starting.
There are multiple issues floating around here. Based on my reading of the single paragraph in the School Board agenda and from watching the meeting, there are two separate types of “absence from school” that attempts are being made to address by the district dumping its responsibilities on the PD (and the PD agreeing to this, for some odd reason).
First, there is the problem of kids who have a huge number of unexcused absences or are just not attending school at all. It seems that the district’s approach to this is automated “contact” with families, followed up by police visits. As Sharla and others have pointed out, this is a misguided approach because it fails to really get the families involved and it fails to address what is likely to be a serious underlying problem that is contributing to the truancy. The first step in such cases should obviously be real effort by the school, through personal contact, to have a meeting(s) with the kids and family to figure out what the problem is. The only appropriate role of the police in such cases might be to get the kids & their parents to a meeting at the school if all other serious attempts to get them to such a meeting have failed.
The second “absence” problem is the huge number of kids who skip classes or days frequently. Apparently the district wants to delegate its responsibility to deal with this to the police, as well, by having the police increase how much they stop and harass young people on the streets — which the police were already doing to an excessive degree before the district asked them to step it up.
There is another new police policy that is contributing to their recent harassment of young people. The PD has taken the position that they will stop every driver who is carrying young passengers if the driver looks young enough to still have restrictions on their drivers license. This violates the Motor Vehicles Code, which states that drivers shall not be stopped for suspicion of such a violation, and shall only receive a citation for such a violation if they were stopped for a separate violation. But the Davis PD has decided to proceed in this fashion anyway.
I suspect the latter policy is at least part of the reason for the increased police presence around DHS recently, although it may be partly the district asking the PD to stop school-aged kids who are not in school. It all needs to stop if our goal is to teach kids to trust the police in particular and government authority in general.
As for the dynamics at the School Board meeting, I think people are coming down a little hard on Pam Mari. I believe this was her first presentation to the School Board in her new administrative role, and she seemed to believe that the Board had received the back-up material she was referring to throughout the meeting. Since David Murphy left, the School Board has had consistent problems getting adequate written prep materials from the Superintendent and Deputy Superintendents prior to School Board meetings, so this problem needs to be attributed to Pam Mari’s supervisors, not to her.
Since she is new to this District Office position, one can only assume that Pam was following instructions from her supervisors in coming up with this plan, and that the plan and presentation were approved in advanced by her supervisors (or even suggested by them). She may have assumed that the School Board had already signed off on the general approach she was being told to follow. Pam seemed to be listening to the concerns expressed by the Board, and stepped back from her proposals when she heard those concerns. Ginni Davis (Pam Mari’s supervisor) was the one who came close to saying that administration could do what they want w/o the approval of the School Board. I had the benefit of watching the meeting on TV and seeing Ginni’s highly inappropriate facial expressions during comments by Board members.
I am optimistic that much of this attitude on the part of the administration will change when the new Superintendent (focused on collaboration) starts. It seems outrageous for the administration to be undertaking such a huge — and potentially destructive — change in approach (appointing the PD as the lead agency re school absences) just a few months before a new Superintendent is starting.
Please oh righteous parents of Davis. Think back to when you were in high school… How often did you skip or forge a note? Yee all of very short term memory. I was a student who now probably would have been in GATE, but HATED school. I hated it for the social clicks, the fancy cars, the big parties on the weekends and all the drunken garbage in general. Me I was tagged a stoner when I was a little goody two shoes who felt sentenced to attend a social prison. I had teachers drop my grade from A to B simply because they stated they didn’t like me. I had others send me to honors classes because I corrected them in class and this was punishment. I had coaches drop me from sports for missing workouts for medical reasons. I attended faithfully each and every chemistry class unless too sick to do so, then I split and read on the beach. Highschool was pure HELL and thankfully at that time getting into a UC school did not require the ridiculous amount of clubs, activities, money and ridiculous grades it does now. I never could get an A in PE so my GPA would never rate today. High school stinks and with all the competition and pressure in Davis and the inability of good talented gifted kids to get into a UC school unless they have on top of a 4.3 GPA money, looks, personality and devoted parents (mine had no idea what to do for college or when I was even going and no they were not oblivious they just were not Davis parents they were average parents for the time in a wealthy school district) High school sucks. Kids will want to cut class, even good smart law abiding kids. The pressure and social BS was too much 25 years ago and is worse now.
We should be finding ways to get them through school and get the work done even if we let that work be done outside of attendance. It is not about the money for attendance, but about educating kids and helping them create a future and having a good time with time off to play interact with friends and work for money when necessary even in this wealthy community.
Threatening stops by power hungry cops will not help. Again think back how many times were you hassled as a kid doing absolutely NOTHING by bored cops? Me a handful and it wasn’t pleasant and I didn’t drink, smoke or stay out late roving in groups. I was stopped on my way home from work, while shopping etc… But interestingly never while cutting class which happened on a daily basis.
Get out of the ivory tower and think abut what makes kids cut class especially those not dropping out? They have a desire to succeed HELP them don’t torment and scare them. Let them work at home, skip class, but above all graduate with a sense of self and a sense of purpose. Enforcement BAAHHH! Stop with the rules, the testing the closed campus (except at lunch) forget the funding and daily tally start making education work for each kid and examine the reasons it doesn’t here in pressure status city.
Please oh righteous parents of Davis. Think back to when you were in high school… How often did you skip or forge a note? Yee all of very short term memory. I was a student who now probably would have been in GATE, but HATED school. I hated it for the social clicks, the fancy cars, the big parties on the weekends and all the drunken garbage in general. Me I was tagged a stoner when I was a little goody two shoes who felt sentenced to attend a social prison. I had teachers drop my grade from A to B simply because they stated they didn’t like me. I had others send me to honors classes because I corrected them in class and this was punishment. I had coaches drop me from sports for missing workouts for medical reasons. I attended faithfully each and every chemistry class unless too sick to do so, then I split and read on the beach. Highschool was pure HELL and thankfully at that time getting into a UC school did not require the ridiculous amount of clubs, activities, money and ridiculous grades it does now. I never could get an A in PE so my GPA would never rate today. High school stinks and with all the competition and pressure in Davis and the inability of good talented gifted kids to get into a UC school unless they have on top of a 4.3 GPA money, looks, personality and devoted parents (mine had no idea what to do for college or when I was even going and no they were not oblivious they just were not Davis parents they were average parents for the time in a wealthy school district) High school sucks. Kids will want to cut class, even good smart law abiding kids. The pressure and social BS was too much 25 years ago and is worse now.
We should be finding ways to get them through school and get the work done even if we let that work be done outside of attendance. It is not about the money for attendance, but about educating kids and helping them create a future and having a good time with time off to play interact with friends and work for money when necessary even in this wealthy community.
Threatening stops by power hungry cops will not help. Again think back how many times were you hassled as a kid doing absolutely NOTHING by bored cops? Me a handful and it wasn’t pleasant and I didn’t drink, smoke or stay out late roving in groups. I was stopped on my way home from work, while shopping etc… But interestingly never while cutting class which happened on a daily basis.
Get out of the ivory tower and think abut what makes kids cut class especially those not dropping out? They have a desire to succeed HELP them don’t torment and scare them. Let them work at home, skip class, but above all graduate with a sense of self and a sense of purpose. Enforcement BAAHHH! Stop with the rules, the testing the closed campus (except at lunch) forget the funding and daily tally start making education work for each kid and examine the reasons it doesn’t here in pressure status city.
Please oh righteous parents of Davis. Think back to when you were in high school… How often did you skip or forge a note? Yee all of very short term memory. I was a student who now probably would have been in GATE, but HATED school. I hated it for the social clicks, the fancy cars, the big parties on the weekends and all the drunken garbage in general. Me I was tagged a stoner when I was a little goody two shoes who felt sentenced to attend a social prison. I had teachers drop my grade from A to B simply because they stated they didn’t like me. I had others send me to honors classes because I corrected them in class and this was punishment. I had coaches drop me from sports for missing workouts for medical reasons. I attended faithfully each and every chemistry class unless too sick to do so, then I split and read on the beach. Highschool was pure HELL and thankfully at that time getting into a UC school did not require the ridiculous amount of clubs, activities, money and ridiculous grades it does now. I never could get an A in PE so my GPA would never rate today. High school stinks and with all the competition and pressure in Davis and the inability of good talented gifted kids to get into a UC school unless they have on top of a 4.3 GPA money, looks, personality and devoted parents (mine had no idea what to do for college or when I was even going and no they were not oblivious they just were not Davis parents they were average parents for the time in a wealthy school district) High school sucks. Kids will want to cut class, even good smart law abiding kids. The pressure and social BS was too much 25 years ago and is worse now.
We should be finding ways to get them through school and get the work done even if we let that work be done outside of attendance. It is not about the money for attendance, but about educating kids and helping them create a future and having a good time with time off to play interact with friends and work for money when necessary even in this wealthy community.
Threatening stops by power hungry cops will not help. Again think back how many times were you hassled as a kid doing absolutely NOTHING by bored cops? Me a handful and it wasn’t pleasant and I didn’t drink, smoke or stay out late roving in groups. I was stopped on my way home from work, while shopping etc… But interestingly never while cutting class which happened on a daily basis.
Get out of the ivory tower and think abut what makes kids cut class especially those not dropping out? They have a desire to succeed HELP them don’t torment and scare them. Let them work at home, skip class, but above all graduate with a sense of self and a sense of purpose. Enforcement BAAHHH! Stop with the rules, the testing the closed campus (except at lunch) forget the funding and daily tally start making education work for each kid and examine the reasons it doesn’t here in pressure status city.
Please oh righteous parents of Davis. Think back to when you were in high school… How often did you skip or forge a note? Yee all of very short term memory. I was a student who now probably would have been in GATE, but HATED school. I hated it for the social clicks, the fancy cars, the big parties on the weekends and all the drunken garbage in general. Me I was tagged a stoner when I was a little goody two shoes who felt sentenced to attend a social prison. I had teachers drop my grade from A to B simply because they stated they didn’t like me. I had others send me to honors classes because I corrected them in class and this was punishment. I had coaches drop me from sports for missing workouts for medical reasons. I attended faithfully each and every chemistry class unless too sick to do so, then I split and read on the beach. Highschool was pure HELL and thankfully at that time getting into a UC school did not require the ridiculous amount of clubs, activities, money and ridiculous grades it does now. I never could get an A in PE so my GPA would never rate today. High school stinks and with all the competition and pressure in Davis and the inability of good talented gifted kids to get into a UC school unless they have on top of a 4.3 GPA money, looks, personality and devoted parents (mine had no idea what to do for college or when I was even going and no they were not oblivious they just were not Davis parents they were average parents for the time in a wealthy school district) High school sucks. Kids will want to cut class, even good smart law abiding kids. The pressure and social BS was too much 25 years ago and is worse now.
We should be finding ways to get them through school and get the work done even if we let that work be done outside of attendance. It is not about the money for attendance, but about educating kids and helping them create a future and having a good time with time off to play interact with friends and work for money when necessary even in this wealthy community.
Threatening stops by power hungry cops will not help. Again think back how many times were you hassled as a kid doing absolutely NOTHING by bored cops? Me a handful and it wasn’t pleasant and I didn’t drink, smoke or stay out late roving in groups. I was stopped on my way home from work, while shopping etc… But interestingly never while cutting class which happened on a daily basis.
Get out of the ivory tower and think abut what makes kids cut class especially those not dropping out? They have a desire to succeed HELP them don’t torment and scare them. Let them work at home, skip class, but above all graduate with a sense of self and a sense of purpose. Enforcement BAAHHH! Stop with the rules, the testing the closed campus (except at lunch) forget the funding and daily tally start making education work for each kid and examine the reasons it doesn’t here in pressure status city.
One way administrators have handicapped board members is to NOT provide adequate written material before meetings. This was a repeated problem when David Murphy was superintendent, and is not new under interim superintendent Whitmore. Ginni Davis and Pam Mari were BOTH rude to particular board members who had serious concerns. One has to ask WHO decides what goes in to the board packets prior to meetings? Whitmore wasn’t at the meeting. Was Ginni Davis responsible for getting, or in this case, not getting, more informationto the board?
One way administrators have handicapped board members is to NOT provide adequate written material before meetings. This was a repeated problem when David Murphy was superintendent, and is not new under interim superintendent Whitmore. Ginni Davis and Pam Mari were BOTH rude to particular board members who had serious concerns. One has to ask WHO decides what goes in to the board packets prior to meetings? Whitmore wasn’t at the meeting. Was Ginni Davis responsible for getting, or in this case, not getting, more informationto the board?
One way administrators have handicapped board members is to NOT provide adequate written material before meetings. This was a repeated problem when David Murphy was superintendent, and is not new under interim superintendent Whitmore. Ginni Davis and Pam Mari were BOTH rude to particular board members who had serious concerns. One has to ask WHO decides what goes in to the board packets prior to meetings? Whitmore wasn’t at the meeting. Was Ginni Davis responsible for getting, or in this case, not getting, more informationto the board?
One way administrators have handicapped board members is to NOT provide adequate written material before meetings. This was a repeated problem when David Murphy was superintendent, and is not new under interim superintendent Whitmore. Ginni Davis and Pam Mari were BOTH rude to particular board members who had serious concerns. One has to ask WHO decides what goes in to the board packets prior to meetings? Whitmore wasn’t at the meeting. Was Ginni Davis responsible for getting, or in this case, not getting, more informationto the board?
Anonymous at 2:44 PM said…
“One way administrators have handicapped board members is to NOT provide adequate written material before meetings. This was a repeated problem when David Murphy was superintendent, and is not new under interim superintendent Whitmore. Ginni Davis and Pam Mari were BOTH rude to particular board members who had serious concerns.”
Good comment anonymous.
I believe there was only a partial “house cleaning” done when they got rid of Murphy. Apparently Davis and Mari and some other administrators should have been shown the “front door” too.
The School Board needs to hold them accountable if Whitmore is not going to do his job. I cannot blame students and parents for being upset about this.
This is a waste of resources. No wonder we have banks downtown getting robbed in the middle of the day. The officers are at the high school stopping students. Priorities are not in order.
It sounds like students and parents need to learn what their rights are under the law, so that students will not be improperly detained.
There is absolutely no excuse for this.
Anonymous at 2:44 PM said…
“One way administrators have handicapped board members is to NOT provide adequate written material before meetings. This was a repeated problem when David Murphy was superintendent, and is not new under interim superintendent Whitmore. Ginni Davis and Pam Mari were BOTH rude to particular board members who had serious concerns.”
Good comment anonymous.
I believe there was only a partial “house cleaning” done when they got rid of Murphy. Apparently Davis and Mari and some other administrators should have been shown the “front door” too.
The School Board needs to hold them accountable if Whitmore is not going to do his job. I cannot blame students and parents for being upset about this.
This is a waste of resources. No wonder we have banks downtown getting robbed in the middle of the day. The officers are at the high school stopping students. Priorities are not in order.
It sounds like students and parents need to learn what their rights are under the law, so that students will not be improperly detained.
There is absolutely no excuse for this.
Anonymous at 2:44 PM said…
“One way administrators have handicapped board members is to NOT provide adequate written material before meetings. This was a repeated problem when David Murphy was superintendent, and is not new under interim superintendent Whitmore. Ginni Davis and Pam Mari were BOTH rude to particular board members who had serious concerns.”
Good comment anonymous.
I believe there was only a partial “house cleaning” done when they got rid of Murphy. Apparently Davis and Mari and some other administrators should have been shown the “front door” too.
The School Board needs to hold them accountable if Whitmore is not going to do his job. I cannot blame students and parents for being upset about this.
This is a waste of resources. No wonder we have banks downtown getting robbed in the middle of the day. The officers are at the high school stopping students. Priorities are not in order.
It sounds like students and parents need to learn what their rights are under the law, so that students will not be improperly detained.
There is absolutely no excuse for this.
Anonymous at 2:44 PM said…
“One way administrators have handicapped board members is to NOT provide adequate written material before meetings. This was a repeated problem when David Murphy was superintendent, and is not new under interim superintendent Whitmore. Ginni Davis and Pam Mari were BOTH rude to particular board members who had serious concerns.”
Good comment anonymous.
I believe there was only a partial “house cleaning” done when they got rid of Murphy. Apparently Davis and Mari and some other administrators should have been shown the “front door” too.
The School Board needs to hold them accountable if Whitmore is not going to do his job. I cannot blame students and parents for being upset about this.
This is a waste of resources. No wonder we have banks downtown getting robbed in the middle of the day. The officers are at the high school stopping students. Priorities are not in order.
It sounds like students and parents need to learn what their rights are under the law, so that students will not be improperly detained.
There is absolutely no excuse for this.
Interesting. Woodland’s response to this same problem is to explore parenting classes for parents of truant teens. The problem is not so much getting the truants to school as it is keeping them there. There was no mention in the school board meeting (as afar as I can tell) of services to be provided to identify, let alone address, the root causes of the truancy. Is this all about ADA money and declining enrollment? Perhaps the district would be better served counting the dozens of Davis kids who have left DJUSD for private schools in the last three years, and why. A quick look at the student directories for Jesuit, Loreto, Christian Brothers, Woodland Christian, etc. might be in order. Getting those families back into our public schools would reverse the falling enrollment.
Interesting. Woodland’s response to this same problem is to explore parenting classes for parents of truant teens. The problem is not so much getting the truants to school as it is keeping them there. There was no mention in the school board meeting (as afar as I can tell) of services to be provided to identify, let alone address, the root causes of the truancy. Is this all about ADA money and declining enrollment? Perhaps the district would be better served counting the dozens of Davis kids who have left DJUSD for private schools in the last three years, and why. A quick look at the student directories for Jesuit, Loreto, Christian Brothers, Woodland Christian, etc. might be in order. Getting those families back into our public schools would reverse the falling enrollment.
Interesting. Woodland’s response to this same problem is to explore parenting classes for parents of truant teens. The problem is not so much getting the truants to school as it is keeping them there. There was no mention in the school board meeting (as afar as I can tell) of services to be provided to identify, let alone address, the root causes of the truancy. Is this all about ADA money and declining enrollment? Perhaps the district would be better served counting the dozens of Davis kids who have left DJUSD for private schools in the last three years, and why. A quick look at the student directories for Jesuit, Loreto, Christian Brothers, Woodland Christian, etc. might be in order. Getting those families back into our public schools would reverse the falling enrollment.
Interesting. Woodland’s response to this same problem is to explore parenting classes for parents of truant teens. The problem is not so much getting the truants to school as it is keeping them there. There was no mention in the school board meeting (as afar as I can tell) of services to be provided to identify, let alone address, the root causes of the truancy. Is this all about ADA money and declining enrollment? Perhaps the district would be better served counting the dozens of Davis kids who have left DJUSD for private schools in the last three years, and why. A quick look at the student directories for Jesuit, Loreto, Christian Brothers, Woodland Christian, etc. might be in order. Getting those families back into our public schools would reverse the falling enrollment.
I know six families who left Davis becaise of the schools. Three of the families left in the last two years alone. Their children have done very well in school but they did not like some of the policies/practices or administration. This needs to be looked at when considering reasons for declining enrollment.
These are all good families who want the best for their children. I feel bad that they had to leave.
I know six families who left Davis becaise of the schools. Three of the families left in the last two years alone. Their children have done very well in school but they did not like some of the policies/practices or administration. This needs to be looked at when considering reasons for declining enrollment.
These are all good families who want the best for their children. I feel bad that they had to leave.
I know six families who left Davis becaise of the schools. Three of the families left in the last two years alone. Their children have done very well in school but they did not like some of the policies/practices or administration. This needs to be looked at when considering reasons for declining enrollment.
These are all good families who want the best for their children. I feel bad that they had to leave.
I know six families who left Davis becaise of the schools. Three of the families left in the last two years alone. Their children have done very well in school but they did not like some of the policies/practices or administration. This needs to be looked at when considering reasons for declining enrollment.
These are all good families who want the best for their children. I feel bad that they had to leave.
Folks, I have very little tolerance for anonymous posters calling others names. If that continues, it’s a very short road before I start requiring registration. It’s that simple. If you want to call someone an idiot or a liar or stupid, put your real name behind it and I may consider keeping it on the board.
Folks, I have very little tolerance for anonymous posters calling others names. If that continues, it’s a very short road before I start requiring registration. It’s that simple. If you want to call someone an idiot or a liar or stupid, put your real name behind it and I may consider keeping it on the board.
Folks, I have very little tolerance for anonymous posters calling others names. If that continues, it’s a very short road before I start requiring registration. It’s that simple. If you want to call someone an idiot or a liar or stupid, put your real name behind it and I may consider keeping it on the board.
Folks, I have very little tolerance for anonymous posters calling others names. If that continues, it’s a very short road before I start requiring registration. It’s that simple. If you want to call someone an idiot or a liar or stupid, put your real name behind it and I may consider keeping it on the board.