Funny question for me because some might think my decision to keep my kids at MME was a selfish choice. While other families left MME, I’ve often wondered if I was doing the right thing for my kids. Have my beliefs in public education and that ALL kids deserve an equitable and excellent education, kept my own kids from a superior experience elsewhere? None the less, I stayed and worked hard to make it a better place. Having gone thru MME k-6 and having a successful and happy junior high student in the DJUSD general ed program, I can tell you that yes, I did the right thing. The big secret is that MME is a wonderful school with strong performance. I believe that’s because the staff works harder than other school’s have to — striving to close a challenging achievement gap. More importantly to me, is that my jr. high student is friends with a diverse group of kids — and states if we had had a k/3-4/6 elem school then it would be great because we would “ALL BE FRIENDS”.

With regard to dual immersion — I am undecided. If there is a strong desire from both native-spanish AND english speaking families, then perhaps it is a good idea. Yet, how will creating another magnet school in Davis effect Patwin? Birch? N Davis? What kind of students will be attracted to the program and detracted from the mix of students at our remaining neighborhood schools? With low enrollment, schools are competing for kids — actually recruiting to their programs. How can we strengthen our neighborhood programs? do we want to?

I would love to not have “racism” be a part of this discussion. Really, to me, it is more about “class-ism”. Poverty exists in Davis. At least this discussion has opened people’s eyes to that. Forget EL for a moment….48% of MME kids are qualified as low-SES. That number increases when you pull out students from the spanish-immersion program. These kids have significant needs for food, clothing, academic support, social services and more. There is a very real impact in the classroom, on the playground, in the breakfast/lunchroom, and the parent support for the school. Does that make it different for anyone? Is it okay for one school to look so different from the rest in our teeny little town?

I cringe when this suggestion is made. Measure C was passed, in part, to make music and science curricula available at all elementary schools; it makes all elementary campuses desirable to the widest range of students. To make a music/arts or STEM magnet creates an environment in which we start thinking that we can pull back from making this available to all students.

One point that was glossed over in some of the media coverage: While the survey addressed the K-3/4-6 split and school closure, there are other options on the table. That portion of the report wasn’t distributed until the day of the town hall on March 5.

“Consider” is an important word in the way the question was structured. When I got the survey, I looked at that specific item for some time because there’s a range of how it could be interpreted. I marked that I’d consider it; I really need to see more evidence that this would be implemented carefully. I am skeptical people will pull it together for the 2012-2013 year, and I still prefer other options.

I like the idea of creating another magnet program. “Another voice” mentioned Dual Immersion. From what I understand, the current MME immersion program is only K-3. Many South Davis families opt into Chavez, and it would be nice to have a program that was closer and went all the way K-6. I’d also support the idea of a STEM or even arts program…something new to draw families in. There are examples of magnet programs working in other schools in the district. Although some Pioneer families might not agree with me, I’d personally be open to moving GATE to MME so that students move to Montgomery for grades 4-6 (it seems feasible, but maybe there are logistical details I don’t comprehend). Even though I find some options more appealing than others, as “another voice” points out, moving forward requires really thoughtful analysis and planning.

“Thinking Bigger” makes important points about planning for the good of all of our children. For me, it all comes down to planning. Hurriedly putting together a plan in a couple of months is not in the best interest of any of our students. I’m not convinced that the primary/intermediate split is the best option. If it is, however, I’d advocate waiting a year so that the two schools have time to strategically work toward implementation. People are currently focused on this instructional year, and the summer will zip by before we know it.

As an outsider to both of these groups, I have to wonder what choices this individual has made with regard to the education of their own children. Are you practicing what you so strongly advocate by enrolling your children in the general education population at MME, or have you made the “selfish” choice to enroll in another program in Davis schools? If the perspective given is coming from someone that has opted to leave the many benefits of being “integrated” with students of differing backgrounds, I would like to know if the reasons were “fear” based or if you are simply “thinking of yourself and not the bigger picture”?

With regard to the SDEC work, I have only the perspective that comes from attending the meeting where the results were presented. It seems that the Board asked many thoughtful questions and was presented with several options to consider. The option that seemed to have the most traction was “Dual Immersion”, which is also a strategy with considerable research behind it. It was also the strategy that seemed to have the greatest support from members of the community of lower income and ESL families in attendance. I applaud the Board for proceeding thoughtfully on this subject and not making a hasty decision that could be disruptive to an entire community. Let the Board do their jobs and stop seeing racism behind every comment. We CAN do better than that.