Sarah Hibbler's Letter to the Board (4/21/2008)

Hi All,

Below is the text of a letter I sent yesterday to the School Board, Williston Observer, and school administration in support of configuration change. Ann Smith asked me to share this with you in the hopes of encouraging others to express their support and opinions with the school community.

I hope that you, too, will consider giving feedback. Jeff's guest column last week laid the groundwork for all of us to speak out on this important issue. Please don't let this opportunity slip away.

Regards,
Sarah Hibbeler


================================

To the Williston School Board:

I wish to register my extreme disappointment in the school administration's proposed changes to the house configuration in the Williston schools. Rather than addressing the limitations inherent in the four-year structure, the changes will actually amplify certain problems in the current system, particularly the issue of educational equality. The creation of several oversized houses (a six-classroom team in the Lower Houses and two five-classroom teams in the Upper Houses) only serves to increase the differences between teams.

My main purpose in writing to you, however, is not to argue for configuration change, although I wholeheartedly endorse the points made by Jeff Smith in his thoughtful guest column in the Williston Observer last week. Rather I am writing to express my frustration over the lack of inclusion of parents in the discussions of configuration this spring and the limited role of the School Board itself in the process.

The only input parents were allowed to contribute to the process was through the configuration survey. Not only did the survey employ the questionable technique of prefacing questions with selective survey data, but it failed to offer anything other than the current four-year model for people to consider. If given the opportunity, respondents might have registered even greater enthusiasm for other configurations that would work within our physical structure, such as two-year houses.

Moreover, the administration has chosen to ignore certain survey results. Most notably, the survey indicated strong (78%) support for housing same-grade students under one roof, a finding that the administration is radically choosing to ignore in creating a completely separate lower elementary school within WCS. And as Jeff Smith pointed out, the administration has also discounted the opinion of a majority of Upper House parents who registered their desire for change in the four-year structure on previous satisfaction surveys.

All subsequent discussions of configuration models between teachers and the administration were--and continue to be--explicitly kept secret from parents and the community. This is a marked departure from what was done when I served as a member of the Williston Conceptual Frameworks Committee in 2004. That committee comprised School Board members, teachers, administrators, and community members, and the group met weekly throughout the summer to discuss configuration and other issues.

The administration often refers to the findings of the Frameworks Committee as proof of parental endorsement of the current system. In fact, a number of parents on the committee, particularly those with Upper House students, expressed longstanding concerns about the lack of equality among houses, academic inconsistency, and the lack of interaction with similar-age peers. These are the same concerns that emerge continually over the years as new families experience the four-year system. The committee did support the principle of multi-age teaching and the overall concept of a house system, but it also charged the school district with evaluating the appropriateness of four-year groupings and with ensuring that students have increased interaction with same-age peers.

As a parent and taxpayer, I am especially distressed by the limited role this School Board has chosen to take in considering the issue of configuration, particularly given the long history of parental concerns. The balance of influence in this district is entirely weighted toward the administration and teaching staff. When parents who do make an effort to attend School Board meetings speak up to voice opinions, they are frequently interrupted and invariably come away with the sense that their input is unimportant.

It is healthy for some natural tension to exist within a school district--between teachers, administration, the board, and community members. And it is the responsibility of the School Board to engage all parties in the decision-making process. I acknowledge that educators are trained and paid to consider best teaching practices. However, the administration and School Board must acknowledge parents as partners in making the decisions that affect the education of our children.

I urge the Williston School Board to consider what parents are saying about configuration. Only through true collaboration can our district lay claim to a reputation for being a great place to teach and to learn.

Sincerely,

Sarah Hibbeler