CPS Paying $6-7 For Each LSC Candidate
"Each candidate recruited will be worth
an additional $6 or $7, up to a total grant of $2,500, says Jose
Alvarez, director of external affairs and LSC relations," according to this new Catalyst story (Seeking 10,000 LSC candidates). "To earn the
full grant, a group would have to recruit more than 300 candidates." 
Digg
Del.icio.us
Thu Mar 6, 2008 at 7:15 PM
CPS Paying $6-7 For Each LSC Candidate
God knows they need some new ones at Ray. The situation there is horrid.
Thu Mar 6, 2008 at 7:46 PM
CPS Paying $6-7 For Each LSC Candidate
You know, they should produce a list of schools that really need candidates--and then sent these lists to all of the aldermen of Chicago, all the universities with public policy/teaching/political science programs, retirement communities--groups that say they have an interest in social change and/or the people who have the desire/motivation/time to be a part of change and see what happens.
I happen to work at a university where I have been amazed by kids' (19, 20 year olds) passion and energy, and I see it as untapped. They FLOCK to things where they feel they can make a difference, and since they want LSCs to grow by about 3000 people, why not ask them to contribute here?
I happen to work at a university where I have been amazed by kids' (19, 20 year olds) passion and energy, and I see it as untapped. They FLOCK to things where they feel they can make a difference, and since they want LSCs to grow by about 3000 people, why not ask them to contribute here?
Thu Mar 6, 2008 at 10:21 PM
CPS Paying $6-7 For Each LSC Candidate
Am I correct in reading that, as an employee of the Board, one cannot be any sort of member of an LSC other than a teacher rep for the school at which you teach? It looks like Board employees are banned from being the community rep for their attendance area school and banned from being a parent rep at the school your kid attends.
Fri Mar 7, 2008 at 2:14 AM
CPS Paying $6-7 For Each LSC Candidate
"[They should] send these lists to all of the aldermen of Chicago, all the universities with public policy/teaching/political science programs, retirement communities..."
Here are a few random observations:
1. Any alderman who cares about his or her job knows the principal of every school (public, private, and other) in his or her ward, as well as most of the LSC members. The problems come in the wards where the alderman thinks that a quid pro quo should be roughly one job per school. That adds up quickly.
2. The issue about teachers (and other staff) not being eligible to serve on LSCs even at schools where their own children attend. That's been true for the 20 years since the LSC law was passed. The fear expressed by many school reform groups at the time (1988) the LSC law was passed was that teachers would pack the LSCs and overwhelm the parents. It's also been litigated.
The only way to change the fact that CPS staff can't serve on LSCs (except as teacher reps or as the principal) is to change the law. Springfield (i.e., Michael Madigan and Emil Jones) plus Governor Blagojevich.
3. When did the Board approve a Board Report making UNO's guy in Arne's Office chief of LSC relations? And how much is he now getting paid?
Here are a few random observations:
1. Any alderman who cares about his or her job knows the principal of every school (public, private, and other) in his or her ward, as well as most of the LSC members. The problems come in the wards where the alderman thinks that a quid pro quo should be roughly one job per school. That adds up quickly.
2. The issue about teachers (and other staff) not being eligible to serve on LSCs even at schools where their own children attend. That's been true for the 20 years since the LSC law was passed. The fear expressed by many school reform groups at the time (1988) the LSC law was passed was that teachers would pack the LSCs and overwhelm the parents. It's also been litigated.
The only way to change the fact that CPS staff can't serve on LSCs (except as teacher reps or as the principal) is to change the law. Springfield (i.e., Michael Madigan and Emil Jones) plus Governor Blagojevich.
3. When did the Board approve a Board Report making UNO's guy in Arne's Office chief of LSC relations? And how much is he now getting paid?
Fri Mar 7, 2008 at 7:20 AM
CPS Paying $6-7 For Each LSC Candidate
"The fear expressed by many school reform groups at the time (1988) the LSC law was passed was that teachers would pack the LSCs and overwhelm the parents."
Yes, but if the teacher or CPS secretary or Janitor or anyone else who works for the board IS a parent or IS a community member, then how are the overwhelming the "parents" or "community member"? And potential members still have to be elected. So is it better to have seats unfilled or have a parent or community member who might actually know something about education?
How do suburban districts that have elected school boards handle who's allowed to run for elected office? I suspect in the same manner (e.g. if you're a teacher or janitor in the district, you can't run for office). It just doesn't make sense to me. It seems it should be the opposite of what it is. I understand that a teacher on an LSC has some minor power over a principal. So we allow a teacher to be on the LSC in their own school. If we're worried about exerting undue pressure, that seems the place where it'd happen. "You can't fire me because I run the LSC and we can fire you." But if you're a teacher on an LSC at another school, there's no quid pro quo likely.
Ah well. I guess Richie and Arne and Rufus(ey) will have successfully eradicated the LSC in the not-so-distant future anyway.
Yes, but if the teacher or CPS secretary or Janitor or anyone else who works for the board IS a parent or IS a community member, then how are the overwhelming the "parents" or "community member"? And potential members still have to be elected. So is it better to have seats unfilled or have a parent or community member who might actually know something about education?
How do suburban districts that have elected school boards handle who's allowed to run for elected office? I suspect in the same manner (e.g. if you're a teacher or janitor in the district, you can't run for office). It just doesn't make sense to me. It seems it should be the opposite of what it is. I understand that a teacher on an LSC has some minor power over a principal. So we allow a teacher to be on the LSC in their own school. If we're worried about exerting undue pressure, that seems the place where it'd happen. "You can't fire me because I run the LSC and we can fire you." But if you're a teacher on an LSC at another school, there's no quid pro quo likely.
Ah well. I guess Richie and Arne and Rufus(ey) will have successfully eradicated the LSC in the not-so-distant future anyway.
Fri Mar 7, 2008 at 8:33 AM
CPS Paying $6-7 For Each LSC Candidate
Craig,
What's the problem with Ray School?
What's the problem with Ray School?
Fri Mar 7, 2008 at 10:31 AM
CPS Paying $6-7 For Each LSC Candidate
didn't a lot of Ray people leave last year? principal retired, teacher/s and admin/s left? why? is that change what's been a problem?
Sat Mar 8, 2008 at 7:19 PM
CPS Paying $6-7 For Each LSC Candidate
After all the mantra at Juarez, Curie, High School and others who would want to run for the LSC. You have to vote for what the principal wants, if you don't look what happened to Tom Ramos. Remember, he had all the data of the former Curie principal, and Otis Davis (a black pastor) used the race card. Look what happened, the principal bailed out at Curie. Look at juarez, ravenswood. Parents be careful. Look what CPS did in getting rid of the once City Wide Parent Advisory Council and the board adopted a new parent group. Why? Because they will be a rubber stamp. So LSC's are just a waste of time and if you do run and plan to be a rubber stamp. Waste of time and taxpayer money.
