They really oughta put a revolving door on the entrance of 801 N. 11th St.... ;-)

Joe Frank

was she ever serious about her job?

Congratulations to Lynn. She has done the City of St. Louis a great service. The programs and policies she brought to the SLPS will allow this district to continue reform and turnaround of the freefall of academic acheivement for thousands of children. The children of Pittsburg are a lucky group of kids.

Good for Her. It is sad that she isn't staying longer, but her specialty is reforming distressed districts. The SLPS must be on the right track.

I work inside one of the SLPS' finest buildings, and believe me when I say this...There were no tears shed for this news. Makes you wonder what is about to come forward considering Vince and Lynn have stepped out of the picture. Believe me, I agree about the revolving door for 801 N. 11th Street.

Thank God we spent all that money on curriculum, testing, and inservice...we are only 27 points away from accreditation!

Bob, I doubt you know anything about accreditation. And Heaven forbid we spend some money on the children!

I am sure some of the rank and file aren't shedding tears for her. She certainly didn't shed tears for the lousy teachers and principals she fired. Looks like she missed one.

Southsider,

It appears you can't help yourself; you have to support and promote what has transpired, good, bad, or worse. Worse is what has transpired. Evidently, you are tied to City Hall.

For the past three years a group of employees trying to help raise the literacy and comprehension levels of students have had to be renamed and have had to reapply for their jobs year after year. Dr. Spampinato spent much time outside smoking according to many employees at 801 N. 11th. She didn't listen to anyone with a sense of history and what does or does not work in St. Louis. She has not remained anywhere for very long and leaves behind a trail of complaints.

Southsider, you must think job hopping is a positive! Read the business sections of the Post and The Wall Street Journal, and you may change your mind.

She brought back a secretary who was caught going into a confidential envelope addressed to the new superintendent and then lying about what she did even though it was caught on tape. In the corporate world, there would be no question--breach of confidentiality and lying -- out the door pronto!

Why not stop supporting or promoting a party line and begin thinking of the children for a change.

Helen Louise

I cannot figure out why almost everyone in the education field in the City of St. Louis has such a problem with the School Board that has test scores at their highest levels in years.

Helen, I am thinking of the children. YOU are the person who continually laments the firing of district employees, I have never read any posting of yours that advocates placing the children first.

Teachable Moment here folks:

Helen,

The SLPS is not a job factory, it does not exist to give inept people jobs (although it used to be). I applaude Lynn and Creg Williams reform agenda. And If actually giving these children a good education is the "party line" I'm all for it!

What in the world is your problem with actually trying harder to teach children?

If you have seen the scores, which I doubt, (because if you did you wouldn't have a problem with these folks) you just might be appalled at the condition of the schools and might actually support folks who want to make them better.

Concerned Citizen, I agree with your statement. The scores are rising so Ms. Spampanato did have a positive effect on the district.

Also, to Helen and Southsider,

The board and its district are not party affiliated so any talk of party lines is out of context.

Helen says "She didn't listen to anyone with a sense of history and what does or does not work in St. Louis."

History of what? Failing our city and our children for decades? I'm a life long city resident and I'm embarrassed and appalled that part of my beloved city's legacy is failing children by not providing proper education and opportunity.

Here's another part of St. Louis history that Helen may be nostalgic for: when parents have children that turn five years old, if they have the means, they move out of the city. Yes, Helen, let's look back fondly and remember that.

It's time to rewrite history.

What does or does not work in St. Louis? SLPS was not working. Finally we have a city leader and school board members that are making it work. Look at the numbers, Helen. It's beginning to turn around. I am outraged at people who criticize school board members who actually have the guts to put children and academic first, even if it meant pissing some inept people.

The only people who are bitching about reform are those who benefited from keeping the status quo, and failing our children.

Southsider, City Momma, and An Academic,

Test scores are high? Why are we farther from accreditation than ever before? I previously was in favor of vouchers and getting out of the system from what I saw from within. Nothing much has changed: the same inept employees are in place while some of the conscientious and hardworking employees are gone.

When I speak of history, I speak of the better days of the system. I agree that it is time indeed to rewrite history but from the standpoint of ethics, morality, and integrity.

Southsider, you say I am the person who laments the firing of district employees. You say the district is not a job factory. Yet, have you checked into how many former employees are on the payroll as consultants? Unfortunately, it is a job factory, but a job factory for the higher and exorbitant salaries.

I do not lament the dismissing of inept employees, which has not really taken place. If that took place, why are secretaries who cheat the payroll and system remain? Why do some from the old guard return as high-priced consultants? Why do the dishonest who cheated the system in what could be termed felonious crimes remain? Why is the hiring of exorbitantly salaried administrators taking place when funding is in danger of being greatly reduced?

Unfortunately, the school district is and remains a job factory. The issue is not keeping inept employees who have been retained (the Commandant of Cleveland Naval Jr. Academy was deemed incompetent and was a friend of Roberti), but moving forward to provide the best public service possible, which entails commitment and dedication to education from the top rather than excessive salaries.

The SLPS is near a ratio where the State can come in and take it over. Is that progress?

I have lived through and worked in the system for 23 years and have seen the nepotism and cronyism that have rendered it into the sorry state that it found itself to be in. I do not applaud what took place in the past, but I cannot respect the dastardly manner in which educators and support staff have been treated in the recent actions either.

I have nothing to gain by what I write, but I do care as an alumnus of the school district, who cares about the children, and one who witnessed firsthand the sad state of affairs before the "quasi-reformation" and the current actions that benefit no one.

Helen Louise
Posted by Helen Louise on Wed., Nov 23, 2005 at 5:27 PM

City Momma and concerned citizen,

If you are truly a "city Momma," tell us where your children attended school and when.

As to party, the Democratic Party rules and runs the city. Though an independent voter, I am friends with someone who was head of his Democratic Party ward who was also an administrator in the school district.

He was so sickeed by what he saw and was made privy to that he is glad to be out of the city politics as well as out of the city itself. Don't kid yourself. Politics are alive and well in the school district business, as is monetary profiteering.

Helen Louise

Where do I even begin to address the people, who like STL Southsider, believe that the total problem with the city schools is based squarely on the shoulders of the teachers?

First, you are completely unaware of my qualifications. I have advanced degrees in not only my core subject area, but I also made my way through a school of education not located in the St. Louis region, therefore, I am not tainted by the politics. Under NCLB and the state of Missouri, I am classified as a "highly qualified teacher."

Second, the reason why teachers are not shedding tears for the loss of Dr. Spampinato is that we were thrown into a curriculum filled with flaws. The curriculum I am teaching makes a lot of assumptions that the kids have previous knowledge about certain concepts. It is true that there are a great deal of inept teachers in the district, and that destroys the learning of the students. Most of the inept teachers are full time subs who barely have a junior standing in college. When teachers are not given support materials, adequate training, or help in disciplinary measures...Education suffers and ultimately fails. Besides, the tests that we give are filled with grammatical errors and factual errors. Teachers don't create those tests, the new curriculum company creates them!

Third, master teachers were asked for their input into the new curriculum, and Dr. Spampinato decided to take her own direction. The curriculum implemented in St. Louis was the same used in Colorado and Philadelphia, where she had previously worked. After 2 years of use in Colorado, the district stopped using it because it was ineffective. Tests scores are a high priority, but if you lok at the DESE website and go through all the schools, there is progress being made in the elementary levels, not in the high school and middle school levels in St. Louis. There is some curriculum that is working and that takes dedicated parents and teacers to implement. Where we are failing is the involvement of the community.

Everyday, I deal with violent children and children who are responsible for their own upbringing. STL Southsider, I challenege you to take on the role of teaching in our city schools and try to be a counselor, teacher, referee, social worker, and parent to these children who need it the most. I have been doing this for more years than I care to share, all while listening to the vicious attacks of people like you.

I support Creg Williams and his attempts at reform, but I do not support the dictatorial style of Lynn Spampinato. For further reading to improve your knowledge, try reading Dr. Lana Stein's comparative study on the school systems in Boston, Pittsburgh and St. Louis. You may be enlightened!

One of the interesting aspects of Creg Williams interview was I noticed the similarity in curriculum choices between the two and asked Williams if this might create a conflict---similar choices mean one is less likely to cut someone under them slack in implementation. Williams response was telling, he said he liked the general curriculum choices, but was concerned about the centralization of Open Court. I then asked how conflict would be resolved, and he said, as Superintendent he wouldn't have a problem with anyone else, they might have a problem with him though.

Someone had a problem with him apparently.

===Test scores are high? Why are we farther from accreditation than ever before?

This is misleading at best. Accreditation significantly changed in 1998 with district performance actually mattering now. Previously, accreditation was a checklist of how districts had particular bureaucratic systems in place and St. Louis did very well.

Accreditation points have fallen at the same time that elementary performance has increased dramatically over the last two years. I'll take students performing better over the district's rating any day. Too bad some past administrator's were more concerned with keeping their jobs than student performance.

In addition, the high school curriculum is being overhauled after years of neglect. Wait a couple weeks and see what a serious plan involves.

Of course, the actual numbers for accreditation in 1999 and 2000 were lower than the current number with accreditation scores of 23 and 32. Given Hammonds had been in the job more than 2 years-as had some current and former board members who think criticizing the current administration is their only responsibility, it's a bit hard to take your criticism seriously.

===When I speak of history, I speak of the better days of the system. I agree that it is time indeed to rewrite history but from the standpoint of ethics, morality, and integrity

Integrity? Perhaps you can explain how the graduation rate didn't drop this year and the dropout rate increased? I already know the answer as to why, and it isn't some past 'integrity'.

Arch Pundit,

Accreditation ratings cannot be easily dismissed, since it allows the State to come in and take over a school district as was the case in Wellston. Both test scores and accreditation ratings count in the real world of education. It is not a case of pitting one against the other. Apparently, the Post-Dispatch editors and the chairwoman of the House Elementary & Secondary Education Committee were somewhat alarmed as well.

I do not and have never defended the past. And I didn't link ethics, morality, and integrity to the past either, so why should you? Those qualities stand on their own across time and various administrations. My point is that it is time for them to play a vital role in any steps at reformation. I originally voted for two members of the slate, I was in favor of the management team coming in--I was for every attempt they could muster to redeem the school district. But when I saw ethics, morality, and integrity go out the window, they lost me. Had the Post-Dispatch been serious about its platform, they could have stopped some of the worst that took place. Just as the Chicago Sun Times has brought out scandals from reform actions in their urban school district (involving our new superintendent's former boss), one day some of our own current scandals will come to light.

Archpundit, I haven't been following your take on the school district business; but from what I have read, it appears you do not always apply fairness and objectivity as to whom you will give a pass for some explained excuse or reason and to whom you will deny a pass. I hope you can begin looking at the present without always comparing it to the past for which nothing can be done.

We can only prevent history repeating itself with focusing closely on decisions being made, greed spreading, children not adequatly supplied or educated, low staff morale, and the numerous infractions of the Missouri Sunshine Law, etc.

Content free Helen. How about addressing the substance of what I said.

To recap:

The current dropout rate is a more honest accounting of what happens to students. Do you suggest in your meanderings above that accreditation points should be put ahead of reality?

Let's look at another example. Williams wants to have every student take the ACT--that will leaed to lower scores and thus, not allow the District to get points for that section of accreditation. Should he worry about accreditation points in that case, or what he feels better prepares students for their future?

The elementary schools have shown dramatic improvement over two years. The high schools are now getting a new curriculum and probably more soon.

We have a dropout rate that is realistic.

In complaining about the accreditation scores, you state it's lower than it's been in many years. Of course, that's not true as I pointed out, yet strangely claim I only look at what I like to--apparently facts aren't objective to you.

The District got a 64 not based on student achievement and improvement or excellence, but by concentrating on those numbers over concentrating on student preparedness. Recreating that 64 could be done, but I'd rather introduce actual reform and worry about the students more than the short run accreditation scores.

Arch Pundit,

I didn't complain about the accreditation scores; I merely asked a question as did the Post-Dispatch and others concerned about education. I hope our high school students graduate with better reading comprehension skills than is sometimes exhibited on this site. I recognize you enjoy debate, but at least don't take someone's statements beyond their simple and clear intention.

As for the dropout rates, some of those who gave wrong information to Cleveland Hammonds were retained by Roberti. A lot goes on behind the scenes where egotistical parties are at work sabotaging one another. I worked in the Alternative Education Department where the issue of dropouts was handled. The head became our new superintendent for a brief period thanks to the man who gave wrong statistics to Hammonds, the management firm, and the mayor's slate of four.

Arch Pundit, I think you choose to believe what you want. Talking with Kent King of DESE might enable you to discern who is telling the truth. It also might make you less belligerent in your discussion of the issues. Talk to Dr. Charles Brown who is now over Wellston and was with the State. He was part of the earlier administrations.

Do I really meander? I have done a lot of writing over the past three years, and I think even those who may disagree with me know my consistent and constant theme has been ethics, morality, and integrity for whomever is in charge of the schools. Those are neutral virtues that touch us all regardless of backgrounds or agendas.

There are honest-to-goodness crooks still in the employ of the district and Roberti hired a felon from another state to a cushy position in order to shut up a relative. With such employment practices, I see continued problems ahead.

You might wish to address some of Bulldog's comments for a change.

And please, stop trying to put words in my mouth that I never spoke and give a try at being fair, objective, and kind. You might be surprised at what weight your opinions could carry with a goodly number of people who care about our city and our children.

Perhaps only time will tell where the truth lies and with whom as to a school district facing a daunting crisis.

And again, no content. What is it about you that when caught in a misstatement of fact, you are unable to admit it?

What misstatement of fact? I asked a question, and you responded with another question. I answered the question. I don't put a priority on accreditation; the State does, and it appears the Post-Dispatch did. Send them a letter to the editor with your facts.

I think the party from Washington University who said she hopes the test scores are real is as right as you are about the dropout rates being more honest: "With respect to test scores rising, I hope that they are real. Unfortunately, I cannot say that I have never caught an education major cheating."

What is it about you that you are unable to admit you don't comprehend fully what you read and project means on another that aren't expressed?

"If you are truly a "city Momma," tell us where your children attended school and when."

Oh geez, you got me Helen. My kids are all currently enrolled in parochial school in the city, which I pay a lot of money for. Don't you dare begin to criticize me for giving my children the best education i possibly can. Don't you dare.

I can tell you how committed I am to the City and our City schools - I STAYED!!! My husband and I have made a concious decision not to leave the city when our kids became school age. I want this city to thrive the way it once did and it will never happen with hordes of young parents leaving because of the school system. I stayed, Helen. And more young parents/taxpayers will stay in the city, but only if the dramatic and rapid reform of our schools continue.

City Momma,

No problem with your children going to parochial schools. I was originally for vouchers because our city schools were failing children and families. Apparently, many parents feel they still are. I was also for the bringing in of the management team, and I voted for two of the mayor's slate.

It wouldn't occur to me to criticize anyone for giving their children the best education possible. I think the criticisms are going both ways, don't you? My main concerns, however, continue to be the presence or absence of ethics, morality, and integrity. Previous boards were aware of my concerns when they were in power too. Those of us who worked and spent years in the system and behind the scenes are perhaps more sensitive to the endemic and systemic problems that continue unabated.

I too would like to see the city thrive, as I was born and raised here and remain here.

Perhaps you haven't read the recent Post-Dispatch editorials, including today's. Criticism is in the air, and it's flying left and right. Hopefully, one day the truth will rise above all the various criticisms and surface to the top and into the beautiful, bright sunlight where it can shine!

It seems to me, many of the criticisms come from parents who feel they are ignored or shut out of any meaningful deliberations. In fact, one very involved parent for several years is now thinking of taking her child out of the school system. I believe she sent you a copy of her communication too. And did you see the letter to the editor from a parent in today's Post-Dispatch. If you didn't see it, here it is word for word: "Parents deserve spot on school board. I am sorry to see that St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay, for the second time, didn't take the opportunity to appoint a parent of a child attending the St.Louis Public Schools to serve on the St. Louis School Board ("Schoemehl quits city school board," Nov. 22).

An obvious choice would have been Peter Downs, who was the fourth-highest vote-getter in the last election. As a parent of one child in the St. Louis
Public Schools with a second soon to enter, I continue to be dismayed at the lack of respect parents are afforded by the school board and the mayor. While it is true that good schools are good for the community, those with the most to gain or lose when the schools rise and fall are the children and their families. This is not a political game for us; it is our future, quite literally. Families of children in the schools should be well-represented on the board. We
should not have to fight career politicians and 'big money'to do so."

Katie Wessling

Perhaps you, Ms. Wessling, and other parents can get together to better the school system. There is also an active Parent Assembly. However, they too have been somewhat critical of decisions made and actions taken.

Do you even read what you write Helen?

===Test scores are high? Why are we farther from accreditation than ever before?

The SLPS is not further from accreditation than ever. Suggesting that you did not state that we are farther away from accreditation than ever because you placed the fact within a question does not change that you claimed that as a fact. It is false.

---I don't put a priority on accreditation; the State does, and it appears the Post-Dispatch did. Send them a letter to the editor with your facts.

---Accreditation ratings cannot be easily dismissed, since it allows the State to come in and take over a school district as was the case in Wellston. Both test scores and accreditation ratings count in the real world of education. It is not a case of pitting one against the other. Apparently, the Post-Dispatch editors and the chairwoman of the House Elementary & Secondary Education Committee were somewhat alarmed as well.

You appear to have a reading comprehension program with what you are writing.

In terms of the Post Dispatch article, the P-D is not even bothering to notice that the strange disconnect between Grad Rates and Dropout rates which illustrates the point I made above.

In 2000, the District had a 8.6% dropout rate and a 52.4 % graduation rate. In 2005 the District had a 15.7% dropout rate and a 58% dropout rate. The dropout rate is across grade levels doesn't account for this difference. Of course, everyone knows that a District can hide the dropout rate by simply not counting students who don't come to school as dropping out and let them age out of the system. That means the dropout rate--an accreditation category--can go down while the grad rate doesn't change much.

For more fun, the 1997 dropout rate is identical to this years in percentage terms--the year before accreditation changes went into affect and a year when the grad rate was far lower. IOW--by most accounts, the 1997 figure was a far more realistic accounting of drop out rates for the District. The only year the District got points for the drop out rate? 2003 and that was based on a rate of improvement in that number that couldn't be repeated ever again--the rolling average is relatively unchanged over the last four years.

It's a bit weird for the P-D to be all of a sudden upset given the High School numbers have been bad for years, but are now criticizing the people who brought in the guy with experience in reforming high schools. He's just now implementing new curriculum and about to make more changes. How have Williams and the current Board failed when they are only now implementing reforms that could have been done ten years ago?

Arch Pundit,

In your 5:58 p.m. posting you say: "You appear to have a reading comprehension program with what you are writing." I'm not sure what "program" I'm supposed to be using. Is it a software program? A hardware program? Perhaps my posting is being censored as indicated on another Arch City Chronicle blog.

Then in the 6:18 p.m. posting you state: "In 2005 the District had a 15.7% dropout rate and a 58% dropout rate." I'm really getting confused if the district had both a 15.7% dropout rate and a 58% dropout rate in the same year.

As I suggested before, I think you should address your issues with the P-D as clearly as possible. Of course, you may have to use your real name.

As for me, I think it's time to "drop out" of this conversation because I have difficulty making sense out of what you are trying to say or prove. None of it really addresses directly my comments. I think an English teacher would understand or, at least sympathize, with the perplexity caused by grammatical and syntax confusion. Perhaps it's a matter of an attorney's legalese used to confound juries. Thanks, but I'm confounded enough. My head is beginning to spin with trying to make sense of it all.

The readership of the P-D might be able to do a better job of understanding what you're writing.

AP - I understand you just fine. Thanks for the content.

It appears City Momma overreacted a bit and went hysterical with "don't you dare begin to criticize me....don't you dare." This whole blog is full of criticisms, including her's. It appears she wants to give it out, but doesn't want to receive it. If she could really understand AP's strange statements that Louise has a comprehension "program" and two percentage points of dropouts are given for the same year in the same sentence, then she has esp powers the rest of us lack.

AP, your communications sound like a Johnny One-Note. You seem to demand specific responses while refusing to respond or address the contributions of some of the other bloggers. Can you really demand what you're not willing to give? If so, then interested parties ought to give up on this blog because it is not a real discussion or debate.

Let's hope City Momma's kids in parochial school learn how to discuss and debate in a non-emotive way. Before responding, say a few "Hail Mary's," breathe in deeply, and engage the gray matter. And yes, presently her kids are better off somewhere else where teachers are respected and treated with a modicum of dignity.

I just read an editorial from the post the Helen Louise sent me and I don't see where it blames the current board. I see that it says we can't let our children show up in 2010 without an education but I don't think the current board wants that either. I know that the current board made some unpopular decisions. That is one of the problems with being left a $90,000,000 deficit. You have to make unpopular decisions to get that number down. They also made some unpopular decisions when trying to turn the education of these children around because they knew that business as usual wouldn't cut it, if it did the children would have already been performing well. And Bulldog Bob if you don't like the situation at which you teach leave the system no one forces you to stay at a job you don't feel safe. If the children continue to not learn year after year can't we deduce the teacher might be part of the problem since children are all different the one constant was the curriculum and the teacher. Change the curriculum and maybe change the teacher then maybe change the outcome?

Concerned Citizen,

I am not in fear of my safety at the school. I am just stating a fact about what teachers deal with on a daily basis. As far as the statement on changing the teacher, that is one of the greatest problems, amongst many, the SLPS is facing. The turnover rate for staff is another problem. I stay in the schools, because I want to help our children succeed. Again, if you read my comments, I believe there are teachers that need to be released for compentency issues.

No teacher is by any means perfect, and I am no different. I agree with just about every perspective on the this blog in some form, even Southsider to a point. What is happening is that there is so many areas in our community and schools that are splintering. Everyone has their own idea of reform, but very few are willing to work together on reform. Even though I may not like the new curriculum, I am committed to implementing the curriculum. Cynics may say I am looking out for my own job, and selfishly I am, but I would be doing a disservice to the students. I am committed to the students, parents and community to do the very best I can to make a difference. There is my personal committment, but the student, parent, teachers, administration and community need to be equally committed.

Education is a very difficult business to be in, and there is no one cure all for the problems. We are all in this problem together and I am happy that dialogue is taking place. Hopefully, the dialogue about these issues can be productive instead of reactive and personal in nature. I speak only for myself, not for the teachers of the district. So, I will retire from further comments...God bless.

Not to drag this out any longer, but one more important thing for Helen. Vouchers suck, and I can't believe you would ever support them. Just because my kids are in Catholic school, doesn't mean I support vouchers. I don't want one penny of my tax dollars taken away from funding public education. Call me altruistic, but it's what I believe.

Concerned Citizen,

I didn't say the editorial blamed this board. I wrote that "criticism is in the air..." It seems to me that when some write under a fictious name, they can say whatever they want and can project interpretations willy-nilly on what others say or write because they remain anonymous. It's a little different when one uses his or her own name and is more accountable. Unfortunately, it takes a bit more courage to say some of what is said in person. Nonetheless, the Post did say this: "Yet the reforms that Mr. Schoemehl helped propel also alienated much of the community, fumbled the superintendent search and - most unforgivably - failed to improve student achievement across the board." That appears to me to be a pretty sharp criticism, especially the words "most unforgivably."

"City Momma," I wouldn't call you anything, as I have not yet decided what to think of the anger and cutting remarks resorted to in order to make a point. Besides, I don't consider myself a name caller.

And the risible comment of my obviously having a "reading comprehension program" still has me somewhat baffled. I've been looking up such programs on the Internet and haven't come across one yet. Now let's see. Should I ask a child going to a parochial school or one attending our public schools to see if any understand this? Or better yet, perhaps I should ask a drop out.

I had hoped to drop out of this conversation, but the inference that I intimated the editorial blamed this board, when I didn't say anything of the kind, beckoned me back for a brief moment.

Adios. Adieu, Tissebahalakhir (Arabic). So long folks.

St. Louis School Watch report: November 28, 2005 ­­ Lynn Spampinato, the chief academic officer of St. Louis Public Schools, is taking an $11,000 a year pay cut to get out of St.Louis and go to another school district with budget and capacity problems.

The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reported that Spampinato will get a $160,000 a year salary in Pittsburgh, which is less than the $171,000 a year she gets in St. Louis.

The Pittsburgh school district has some similar problems to St. Louis. With a student enrollment of 31,000, the Pittsburgh school system is slightly smaller than St.Louis's,where enrollment is about 35,000. Pittsburgh district officials project that they will have a $47 million budget deficit this year unless drastic cuts are made. The superintendent is proposing to close 20 of the district's 86 schools, but open two new ones for a net reduction of 18 schools.

There are some significant differences, however. Pittsburgh spends far more money on education than does St. Louis. The Pittsburgh school system reports that it has an operating budget of $530 million. Depending on what they
include in their operating budget, that compares with the St. Louis school system's operating budget of $342 million or its total budget of $456 million. Pittsburgh spends over $17,000 per student, compared to $11,000 per student in St. Louis. Pittsburgh is a majority white city, 69% white, while St. Louis is majority black. The poverty rate in Pittsburgh in 2003, 15%, was about half of the poverty rate in St. Louis. The free and reduced lunch rate in Pittsburgh schools is about one-third the free and reduced lunch rate in St. Louis schools. Pittsburgh school officials recommended school closings based on school performance rather than building size or age, and they are giving the public 90 days to comment on the recommendations. The St.Louis public had less than a week to comment on school closing recommendations in St. Louis.

While no one yet knows how Pittsburgh will regard Spampinato, the announcement of her resignation in St. Louis was met with near universal joy in the schools. Teachers and principals both took her resignation as a cause
for thanksgiving.

===Then in the 6:18 p.m. posting you state: "In 2005 the District had a 15.7% dropout rate and a 58% dropout rate." I'm really getting confused if the district had both a 15.7% dropout rate and a 58% dropout rate in the same year.

Anyone familiar with the numbers would understand that I typed dropout instead of graduation. The problem is that you don't actually understand the numbers you are trying to discuss.

Let me ask again, how is the District farther from accreditation than ever? You stated that in a question---not as the question, but as an assumed fact. Why did you say it since it is not true?

==AP, your communications sound like a Johnny One-Note. You seem to demand specific responses while refusing to respond or address the contributions of some of the other bloggers. Can you really demand what you're not willing to give? If so, then interested parties ought to give up on this blog because it is not a real discussion or debate

What have I not given? Examples of what I haven't addressed?

===And the risible comment of my obviously having a "reading comprehension program" still has me somewhat baffled. I've been looking up such programs on the Internet and haven't come across one yet. Now let's see. Should I ask a child going to a parochial school or one attending our public schools to see if any understand this? Or better yet, perhaps I should ask a drop out.

Perhaps you should stop wasting everyone's time and address why you said that the District is farther from accreditation than ever when it isn't?

My mistakes were mistakes of not proofreading. Your mistakes are mistakes of actual facts.

===As I suggested before, I think you should address your issues with the P-D as clearly as possible. Of course, you may have to use your real name.

ROTFL--yeah, no one knows what my real name is...

**"ROTFL--yeah, no one knows what my real name is..."

Had to figure out what ROTFL stood for. I got some help; not everyone reads The Riverfront Times. Nonetheless, the P-D would still require a name and not a moniker.

**"Why are we farther from accreditation than ever before?" Not a fact--just a question as well as a figure of speech. In simple English such a figure is referred to as using an absolute for the relative. There may be a more technical term for it. It is a literary figure used for emphasis. Its usage is almost as common as that of metaphors or similes.

If figures of speech can't be used on this blog (and I don't think Dave set up such a principle), then many of the entries should be questioned. Figures of speech are exceptionally common in everyday speech and particularly in writing.

I did learn from the Internet you're an ultra-Democrat. I find ultras of either party lose some credibility, as it appears they don't think for themselves but defend for better or worse the party line. The same can happen in a school district. Leadership that is self-critical recognizes the potholes and attempts to circumvent them. Such leadership is also ahead of the outside critics.

LOL--Helen, why don't you admit you don't understand the accreditation process....

And I use my name in print in many places including in the Arch City Chronicle for many, many stories as well as the Vital Voice now.

It's not a figure of speech to misrepresent facts.

ArchPundit,

LOL--One dictionary defines "arch" as "villain, gaily mischievous," and pundit as "self-professed authority." I guess that entitles you to claim a mischievous authority over literary practices. I could not find Vital Voice Now on the Internet, other than a homosexual-oriented blog; perhaps there is another. Just because some recognize your name and moniker does not mean that all or the majority do. Employ just a bit of humility, please.

I think I read somewhere you are Presbyterian. If so, so am I. I also read you are particularly interested in Illinois politics. I come from an honorable past in Illinois politics, i.e., great, great grandfather strong abolitionist, Abraham Lincoln's law partner, friend, biographer, and now considered most reliable sourch of information on Lincoln with most of his works in the Library of Congress. Once mayor of Springfield, Illinois, president of a school board and set aside four plots of land for public schools and a common English education because he firmly believed in it.

I am a freelance writer with articles published in major national newspapers, which may gain me an infinitesimal right to use literary emphasis to make a point, as do most writers. Shame on you for misrepresenting figure of speech usage as a misrepresentation of facts. Someone could one day investigate your use of figures of speech too. Ultras tend to do use them a lot! You may be a "self-professed authority" in politics, but perhaps you're not the authority you consider yourself to be in grammar.

==I am a freelance writer with articles published in major national newspapers, which may gain me an infinitesimal right to use literary emphasis to make a point, as do most writers

It is not literary emphasis to make up facts. You can continue to complain, but you misstated facts.

The larger problem is that you can't have a fact based discussion and instead rely upon rhetorical garbage to make assertions without support. Whine all you want, but you misrepresented the state of the district.

Excuse me, but I don't see too many facts stated in some of the above-referenced commentaries. Southsider only blasts opinions he disagrees with but contributes nothing of substance. I didn't make up any facts because I didn't spell out any. When I use facts, I use statistics with references. No misstated facts but opinion, which is rife in some of the previous commentaries of others as well.

Who made you player, referee, umpire, and judge? Oh that's right, a pundit is a "self-professed authority." You keep saying I don't understand the accreditation process, when I think you fail to understand Missouri's regard for accreditation points and at what point they will come in and take over a district. Perhaps your expertise (?) or authority relates primarily to Illinois.

=="It is not literary emphasis to make up facts." Sorry, but that seems to be your straw argument because no facts were either made up or expressed.

I'm a concerned parent of children in the Pittsburgh Public School District. Dr. Spampinato is our new Deputy Superintendent and she is creating alot of tension here in Pittsburgh along with Mark Roosevelt our Superintendent. Together they are closing 22 schools and are creating 8 new schools and calling them Accelerated Learning Academies which these schools will also be using a new curriculm called Americas' Choice. Pittsburghers are worried about all the new changes and we want to know the history surrounding Dr. Spampinato. Can any one help us?
Thanks Concerned Parent

Does anyone know why Spampinato left PPS and why did they bring her back on a consultation basis?