Advertisement

Overcrowding Challenges Mini-Districts to Fulfill Their Mandate

Share
Maureen Foster, a resident of Sherman Oaks, is a Los Angeles Unified School District substitute teacher. She is the parent of one child attending Sepulveda Middle School and another attending Van Nuys High School

One year ago, I and other parents of students at Sepulveda Middle School begged the Los Angeles Unified School District not to place our school on a year-round calendar. The board gave us a brief extension to find other solutions to overcrowding, but ultimately our suggestions were rejected. The year-round schedule was adopted.

This year, I find the situation repeated as my son’s school, Van Nuys High. On Jan. 9, I joined other parents at a school board meeting to plead our case for alternatives to a year-round calendar. Again the board gave us an extension, placing the burden upon us, the parents, to find other options.

Based upon last year’s disappointment at my daughter’s school, I might expect the same outcome, but here’s the difference: In the year since Sepulveda’s case was rejected, LAUSD has broken up the school district into 11 mini-districts, each with its own superintendent. This plan was touted by the district as a way of making the enormous LAUSD more responsive to the needs of local schools. It also appeared to be an attempt to temporarily derail the movement to break up the district, a way of telling the residents of the San Fernando Valley that they don’t need their own district to get things done.

Advertisement

Well, now it’s time to prove that these mini-districts are capable of doing just that. LAUSD should give Robert J. Collins, the superintendent of District C, which includes Van Nuys High, one year to work with the school to find space for the students without implementing a year-round calendar.

Solutions already proposed by parents include moving the adult school on the campus to another location, acquiring one or more small satellite buildings near campus, and experimenting with other schedules.

What’s so bad about year-round school for Van Nuys High?

* Summer jobs, which some students need for income, and summer school for remedial programs, would no longer be available to two-thirds of the school’s students. Intersession programs on year-round school calendars are not an acceptable equivalent; there is less time and far less space.

* Many of the school’s students attend summer enrichment classes, college classes or other academic programs necessary for their success. These would not be available during fall and spring breaks.

* Van Nuys High has not one but three excellent magnet programs: math / science, medical and performing arts. These programs, along with its award-winning music program, benefit the entire school. They would be compromised by a year-round calendar.

* Families with siblings on different tracks would have virtually no vacation time together. Families who depend on older siblings for child care during summer months would be at a loss.

Advertisement

*

In a recent interview, Gov. Gray Davis’ new secretary of education, Kerry Mazzoni, was quoted by The Times as saying that “we want all our students to have basic skills,” and that the state sets standards “to ensure children have access to a quality education.” She also confirmed support for class-size reduction and higher standards.

Year-round calendars do nothing to achieve any of these goals, and it could be argued that they work against them.

The governor has requested an additional 30 days on middle school calendars to help student achievement; on year-round calendars, there is no such room.

LAUSD has not built a high school in 30 years. Among the many reasons is the daunting challenge of acquiring sites large enough for a high school campus. Until new schools are built, the district should stop using year-round as a temporary solution that ends up being long-term. Administrators should pursue other options, starting with Van Nuys High.

If it addresses Van Nuys High’s needs with creative, individual solutions, LAUSD will demonstrate that mini-districts can fulfill their mandate to respond to local needs. Otherwise, they just add bureaucracy that wastes our money and fuels the argument that only breaking up LAUSD will provide the Valley with the schools it needs and deserves.

Advertisement