Crenshaw Update

What a year!

This time last year I was working my network to find out what was going on at Crenshaw. Anyone who knows or has followed me knows how much my alma mater means to me. A lot had changed since Crenshaw came to Georgia ranked #2 in the nation. Even more has changed in this past year. When I finally figured out what GCEP was and attended my first board meeting Crenshaw was up against maybe the biggest challenge of all the challenges this school has been through. That’s huge when you include accreditation crises, a name change, and super low test scores as well as low enrollments. HUGE! After all, Fremont was no more. And now, Crenshaw  (the name, the school, the building, the students) are safe for years to come.

What happened at this meeting was more than verification of all the things I’ve been seeing this year. Egomaniacs have brought my school to the edge of ruin. Thank God for Superintendent Dr. John E. Deasy. Only an egomaniac or a moron would not understand and try to find a problem with him. And we’re talking about teachers so they can’t be morons… I offered my seat to some Beaudry [LAUSD headquarters] women. They didn’t take it. I just kept standing for 90 minutes. And then I walked home. I wanted to shout out quite a few times. And contrary to what I imagined a year ago, it was the faculty I wanted to yell at. They reminded me of my friends who keep dating the wrong person and don’t want anyone to tell them they need to change. It’s not their fault. They must be allowed to continue doing what’s not working. I’m calling bullshit!

Here’s what I saw and heard:

Both times the Superintendent showed up to Crenshaw he was more than on time and thoroughly prepared. Being of your word is paramount. I can tell from the way he speaks that Dr. Deasy lives by that.

He started out with the numbers, which we know are poor. But he added emphasis that I was unaware of. Number one was that our API was the lowest in the district. Then our passage rate for the exit exam was virtually half of the LAUSD average. I was under the impression that the entire LAUSD was in trouble. The truth is that only a few schools are still struggling. And then he mentioned an issue that took center stage in the rest of the meeting and was near and dear to my heart. There are 2417 students in the attendance area of Crenshaw high. We only get 900 of those. We lose 150 to Westchester, 180 to Hamilton, 80 to University… all across the LAUSD where the large majority of that 1500 still go to public schools. We are not losing to private schools. I went to Westchester and I had a sister and two nieces go there. I know firsthand, no matter how diverse the faculty is, some communities just aren’t as concerned with the success of our children as the people in our own community.

So the plan is to “improve outcomes” (that’s better test scores) and bring students back to Crenshaw. [So you mean you don’t want to close Crenshaw or sell our building out to charter schools? You want to actually make the school stronger than ever?] With three new Magnets: Information Technology, Media and Entertainment and a STEMM (That’s right Science Technology Engineering Mathematics AND Medicine! [Medicine is HUGE]) Dr Deasy hopes to bring back students to Crenshaw High. Essentially, bringing these magnets in is the way to get more money in to help the school. And THIS IS THE BIG PART Dr. Deasy said, flat out, we (Crenshaw) are getting more money than any other school in the district because we need and deserve it. I almost came to tears at this point. More money, more students, more attention, POSITIVE attention, more all around Love, just for us.

And Dr. Deasy anticipated what I didn’t, fear and dissent. So, he challenged the staff not to fight overtly or covertly. As soon as he said it though, it became obvious that some staff members are afraid of not fitting in.

The first teacher to speak waved her ego flag proudly. She wrote questions down because she was probably the only person able to handle multiple thoughts at once. Dr Deasy would obviously need interpreters and tutors to be able to answer them. I didn’t even write them down. I expected Dr. Deasy to reread them but instead the teacher distracted him with some more flag waving and negated her own questions. He actually answered them but they were distorted as she spoke over him to offer more of her credentials.

Then next teacher, Christina Lewis had been there for eight years and had exceeded growth targets all eight years. She was afraid of this new plan. She liked last year’s model. She wanted a guarantee that HER children would continue to excel. (In the last eight years Crenshaw has had seven principals. If she could excel through those changes, what was she worried about?) Marguerite LaMotte stepped in to say that sure, there were pockets of excellence all over the school, but the entire school was failing. She passionately expressed her Love for the school and said ALL of the community should want to go to Crenshaw. If the teachers weren’t already riled up to fight the board they may have clapped for her. Dr. Deasy responded by guaranteeing that we will work to achieve for ALL students. He indicted the room by saying that we should not fail with all the talent in this room.

Some other lady stood up and blah blah blah… she agrees with the other lady who was scared of change… Crenshaw means 60s to the students… Can you differentiate between transformation and reconstruction? How is an IEP in Encino different from and IEP at Crenshaw? Blah blah blah…

At this point I was clear. Although Dr. Deasy had made it clear multiple times that no one’s job was in danger, I would have been quite alright if he fired every single one of the teachers and only kept the administration. It had been quite a while since I was around this much douche baggery. The questions…

And they continued…

Question: Why is it necessary to change the entire staff?
Deasy: That decision is not made [yet]. That will be made by the administration of the building… It’s not working.
Q: Are we a part of the problem?
D: All teachers must apply to one of the three magnets.

I’m adding to that. And when YOU do, dumb question asking lady, be prepared to end up at Henry Clay. (Is that a bad school? I don’t know. Send them to a really bad school) Go back to the “It’s not working statement”.

Then Mr. Schafer got a pass for reciting his credentials because they actually were directly related to his question…

Q:  The Gifted magnet has performed very well. What are the criteria for this decision(to replace the gifted magnet)?
D: That history of excellence, throughout the LAUSD, is why. AND Gifted Magnet is underperforming the rest of the LAUSD.

I didn’t know that. Good info. So even the “pockets of excellence” can do better!

Now back to the douches…

Q: Are you looking at the data? Accreditation and merger as they affect the potential of Gifted Magnet as outside influences
D: Both older data and recent data are considered. I don't know how to respond to outside forces. "There are a lot of lessons to be learned at Fremont. We didn't do it as well as we could have."

Q: Afraid it will scare students (leaders) away. What will keep the students we need here to stay here?
D: We need every student here. We need to figure it out. We will see a gifted component across all three magnets.

Q: What is the timetable of success? 13 principals in 17 years
D: Let's work to make that happen.

Q: Why three magnets? Why these three?
D: No even numbers. Three is the most the school could handle, five would be too many. Similar magnets are attracting OUR students who have decided to leave.

Q: (Coach Maxey) It's a misnomer to think that the magnets will attract the students. Magnets need to be more practical to the community. We need skills (auto shop, wood shop...)
D: The 1400 (who go to other schools) are going to college at a higher rate. Don't choose the future for students. The economy is not suited to support "just getting a job" out of high school. We are losing kids to schools (Manual and Dorsey) with higher crime rates [Because Coach Maxey reiterated the crime rate in my neighborhood.]

Q: De-stabilizing effect of reconstitution. What guarantee do we have of a stable admin?
D: There isn't. [After he invited the entire staff to be included in the process of KEEPING the admin] Admin is also reapplying but I hope they all stay.

Q: Will students have to reapply?
D: That’s not a good idea.
Q: Will teachers experience effort to stabilize turnover?
D: If you're doing a good job, yes. If not... Henry Clay…

Then Alex Caputo Pearl came with a little bass in his voice:
Q: Why wasn't moral imperative there in the summer? Where was it in the entire two years you've been here?
[A little indignation]
What about the data?
D: [Don't challenge a Boston Irish man!]
Of course, he didn’t say that. That’s what I was thinking as Dr. Deasy responded with equal or more bass in his voice and a short back and forth ensued.
Q: How can you say this is a done deal? Without having consulted staff, parents, community...
My Answer: There are too many divisive factors. The data is the only reason the school is not closed.
D: We are NOT improving
“I am responsible to the youth in the community [and no one else.]”

A thirteen year douche bag:
Q: How can you make a decision without consulting the students who are here? Is the main focus on the students who aren't here? When will we have a written plan?
D: My staff and you will do that (make the plan). My decision is based on what is going on here AND what is going on elsewhere. Students don't know what they don't know. So, they may not have the best plans for themselves.
[My Answer: Teenagers are stupid. Dr Deasy won’t fall for you using them as pawns.]
My goal for plan is January

Q: What is the guarantee that faculty will stay diverse?
D: We want the faculty to stay diverse. Period.

I’ll add that nearly all faculties are diverse.

Q: Where has this worked before?
D: The very schools where these students are going and Huntington Park

Q: Were the Grade level assemblies a listening meeting?
D: No. They should have been. This meeting was late

Q: Who will interview the staff?

D: HR on site
Q: How will new admin make an informed decision on hiring?
D: They won't that's why we hope admin will choose to stay.

Q: Came up in IEP meetings. Where do moderate to severe kids fit into plan?
D: They won't be phased out. It will be at guidance of faculty but no conversion into magnets. That (conversion into magnets) won't work

Q: Will the magnet attract kids from all over?
D: Yes. Residents get priority. We will provide buses (for kids from farther out).
Q: Will support staff have to apply to a certain magnet.
D: That has not been decided yet.

(Most of that is paraphrased as I was typing on my Blackberry. But it is VERY accurate.)

I just don’t get it. This school year started with most of us concerned about there being a school next year. Now, there most certainly will be and, along with that, a commitment: in words, in resources, in money, in deeds from the LAUSD to make our school much better. Have the teachers been beat down so much by negativity that they can’t see this for the opportunity this is? The principal has said over and over that he wants to stay at Crenshaw as long as he can. The Superintendent just said he wants the principal to stay. Why are we asking if the administration will stay the same? THEN, how hard is it to apply to one of the three magnets? Do you not think you’ll get in? It’s up to the principal who’s already there because he IS staying. Ask him. Or do you think he sees that you have been sabotaging his efforts already with your negativity?

This is an optimal opportunity. We have a young principal who can and will stay for more than a few years. We still have A TON of notoriety and good press working for us. We have the money… Mrs. Florence Avognon, teacher of the year, (Wouldn’t it be great to get her back?) said to vote for more money for schools and it passed. The Superintendent of the LAUSD directly stated that he planned things this way so that Our school could get the most money, more than any other school in the district. And he stripped GCEP of their authority. And who cares about that anyway? They must not have had any money anyway since they admitted to never having performed an audit once in their five years of operation. Who does that?

And Crenshaw wants to bicker. Well, Crenshaw’s teachers this time. I’m tired of it. I’ve been seeing it since I was a student and my father was the community/parent activist. Too many people are worried about bonuses and titles. Too many others are just worried about what they can get, even if they have to steal it. I look forward to “The Snakes” being revealed. The rest of this year will be interesting.

As alumni, the opportunity is MAJOR! So many of us have found niches to fit into and help out. There is much, much room to continue helping. And the pressure is off. So we can get organized. No more four and five Facebook groups. No more! No more refusals of our self appointed leaders to cooperate with one another. Need I remind people older than me that we aren’t in high school anymore? The cliques are over. We are supposed to be on that campus guiding its future, not begging for pats on the back. There is no time for egos. NEVER is there time! I’m just saying it once. Grimble says I get too long winded and most of yall won’t read this far anyway so I’ll be brief. A few people should expect calls from me and then the next 2500 words I write will be about the snakes within the alumni. And we have a few.

We’ve been in Love with Crenshaw since Junior High (everyone wasn’t fortunate enough to go to Audubon). All I want to do is to keep Loving my school. Join me. Let’s Love Crenshaw again. Now is the time. We’re getting ready to win, again, BIG!!!