Rejecting the Daniel Sullivan approach to public education

Today the Oregonian published three excellent letters to the editor speaking out for "excellent schools in all neighborhoods for all students."

Thank you Leanne, Lakeitha, and Valeurie!

Portland schools: Pride, strength for all
Monday, May 21, 2007

Unlike Daniel Sullivan and the parents profiled in the article "Drills propel kids but chafe some parents" (May 11) who choose not to "sacrifice" their children to our neighborhood schools, I am proud to send my children to our local elementary.

At our Jefferson cluster school, my children not only receive excellent basic skills instruction from highly qualified teachers,
but they also learn to write poetry, have written and performed class plays, worked in the school garden and painted in the style of Van Gogh. Perhaps best of all, they are
learning in a wonderful community of caring students, families, staff members and educators.

Articles like this only serve to perpetuate gross stereotypes about our Jefferson cluster schools and the families whose children attend them. It's time to stop scapegoating our community as less interested in and dedicated to our children's educational needs.
LEANNE SERBULO Northeast Portland

I am the parent of a student who attended Martin Luther King Jr. Elementary School from pre-kindergarten though the middle of her fourth-grade year, a PTA leader and an advocate for strong schools in every Portland neighborhood. In regard to the article "Drills propel kids but chafe some parents," I am concerned about the thought that low-income and minority students need something different from what every student in the district needs.

Do our students not need "character education and teacher creativity alongside reading and math" like the students at Abernethy Elementary?

I am also concerned about the perception from the guy who lives four blocks from King who will not send his child there because in his eyes it's for those people -- the ones who aren't highly educated and don't read to their children.
Like the parent from Abernethy, low-income and minority parents are trying to raise their children to be creative thinkers and good citizens. Don't we deserve schools in our neighborhoods that encourage and support that? Or should we be stuck with rote memorization, drills and skimpy art and music programs?
LAKEITHA ELLIOTT Northeast Portland

Susan Nielsen's column, "Portland schools can win over parents, but not by force" (May 6), vastly oversimplifies the problems with Portland Public Schools' transfer system.
In fact, according to a June 2006 audit by Multnomah County and the city of Portland of the transfer policy, the current open transfer process does not improve diversity or equity, but in fact undermines the district's stated goals of maintaining strong neighborhood schools and investing in poorly performing schools.

The report concludes that the process is due for an overhaul to better align it with the goals and objectives of the district.
Many neighborhood schools have been closed, and many others have become uneasy under the informal school size policy (400 to 600 students at the elementary level) that has driven the most recent closures. The pressure is on neighborhood schools and focus-option programs alike to survive through enrollment growth.

Sure, there's lots of choice, but the district is spending time, money and energy shuffling kids from one building to the other when these resources could be much better spent truly increasing diversity and equity by ensuring excellent schools in all neighborhoods for all students.
VALEURIE FRIEDMAN Southwest Portland