Below you will find the agenda for the Williston Schools Reconfiguration Community Forum. We want to reassure all attendees that we haved worked very hard to assure that this is an organized and civil meeting by enlisting the services of a highly skilled moderator, Dr. Mark Banks, Ph.D.. We want a productive and respectful evening which we hope to complete in 2 hours or less. We look forward to seeing you all there.
Agenda for Community Forum on Monday, May 5th
at the Federated Church at 7:00pm
7:00 Welcome and Introductions
**Dr. Mark Banks, Ph.D., moderator, presents expectations of behavior for the evening
**Powerpoint Presentation of Data and Facts
**Statement of Goal/Desired Outcomes
**Open Discussion/Questions
8:50-9:00 Closing Remarks
Please arrive on time. Ample Parking available behind the church, across the street in the dirt parking lot or at Williston Central School Field House Lot.
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Agenda for the Community Forum
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I am writing in support of the person who asked the reconfiguration group not to discount the parents who are happy.
Looking at your Power Point slides which show the results of the Community survey from the Fall of 2007 it is stated that:
"44% of parents do not support current upper-house structure"
"47% of parents do not support fifth-grade students being with older students"
"42% of parents do not support having four-year houses"
Well, the other side of each of these percentages show that:
56% of parents DO support current upper-house structure
53% of parents DO support fifth-grade students being with older students
58% of parents DO support having four-year houses
Yes, there are things we could be doing better, but the majority of parents are supportive of our current system. Working together, I'm sure we can enhance our current structure.
In response to the anonymous post above regarding....Part of the problem started with the survey itself. The reconfiguration survey was written and presented in much the same fashion as a political "push poll." Many questions were prefaced with how much other schools were happy with their own house systems. From the outset, the results were going to be biased for an outcome favorable to the current structure. With the obvious built in bias of the survey, the results still do not show much overwhelming support for the status quo. Factor even a small 5-10% margin of error because of the bias and those percentages are instantly flip-flopped with the unsatisfied group the majority - certainly not what I would call a resounding vote of confidence.
We are trying to get the administration to understand that having nearly 50% (or possibly more) of your customers/constituents unhappy with your service is completely unacceptable. The current reconfiguration proposal does not adequately address the issues and concerns of half of the survey respondents.
I don't believe we need to dismantle everything, but obviously the current system is leaving many families disenfranchised and even more students in situations that are far from optimum for obtaining the best education.
There was definitely survey bias in how the questions were positioned. Going a step further, the entire survey was invalid from a market research standpoint. Why? Because, it was self selecting. The respondents were community members who were in some way motivated to respond. In market research, self-selected respondents are typically those with strong opinions one way or another and their opinions do not reflect that of the population as a whole. The survey design was not based on standard, market research methodology. There was no statistically representative sampling of the various population/demographic groups in the community (students, parents, residents without children, teachers, etc.). Therefore, the findings do not accurately represent the population and should not be used to make sweeping conclusions or decisions. GIGO is a saying commonly heard in the market research industry. It stands for Garbage In, Garbage Out. That's exactly what this survey provided. If the administration wanted research it could hang its hat on that truly reflected the opinions of the Williston residential and educator populations, it should have commissioned a market research firm to conduct a professional and valid research study. Without that data, no one should be making general conclusions about what the community (or population subgroups) wants its education to look like. The data provided can only be used to indicate possible trends in opinions and to identify areas of concern for further exploration. We are splitting hairs to argue that 47% of people feel one way and 53% feel the other way because they do not represent the relevant population as a whole.
Thank you both for writing about the forum. The reconfiguration committee absolutely respects and recognizes the fact that there ARE people who are happy with the current house structure. It is vital, however, that we ALL respect and recognize each other and try to look at the school as a whole.
I personally advocate for choices. The community needs an opportunity to dialogue with the administration, learn more about their decision making process, provide them with our concerns and get some answers to our innumerable questions!
It's time to find common ground and bring this community back together.
Thank you for writing.
Ann Smith
Post a Comment