Because the School Board put off a decision on Math Investigations, the board’s meeting on February 4th was less exciting than it might have been. This was probably a good thing, but there are no doubt some who would have preferred more excitement.
Consent Agenda
As usual the School Board approved the Consent Agenda without discussion, and there were some interesting items on it. That included:
- The budget for the Licensed Practical Nurse Program (see item 12 on the February 4th meeting).
- Appropriations for the employee health insurance fund (see item 13 on the February 4th meeting).
- Approval of School Board Meeting Minutes, January 21, 2009 (see item 14 on the February 4th meeting).
Ordinarily, approval of the School Board Meeting Minutes would be noncontroversial. However, the January 21st meeting minutes provided an oddly unbalanced portrayal of the board’s comments. That caused some to wonder. My guess (I have not asked.) is that board members themselves submitted what they wanted to be recorded about their comments. Hence other members felt it would be inappropriate to challenge the content of the minutes.
Citizen Comments
Most of the citizen comments related to the school boundary decision pertaining to Yorkshire Elementary and Signal Hill Elementary. These comments were provided from the Blooms Mill subdivision (Here is what they have on their web site.).
The principal from Yorkshire Elementary School also spoke. While he did not take sides in the boundary debate, he did make it clear that all the new children at his school would be welcomed and given a good education.
The remaining comments primarily related to Math Investigations. These speakers were all parents opposed to the program. The speakers emphasized that Traditional Math works and their belief that Math Investigations dumbs down math instruction. One parent told a story about his child. In order to get his child out of the Math Investigations program, which he stated did not challenge his child, he got permission to have his skip a grade and into a Traditional Math class. Subsequently, that parent’s son did very well indeed.
Agreement to Establish and Operate a Regional Academic Year Governor’s School
The board approved a legal agreement with the School Boards of Manassas City and Manassas Park City (see item 17 on the February 4th meeting) to Establish and Operate a Regional Academic Year Governor’s School. So far the School Board has not committed any money. Nonetheless, the state will apparently provide funds and George Mason University will provide facilities. So this seems to be a no-brainer.
Fiscal Year 2010 Calendar
The board approved the subject calendar (see item 18 on the February 4th meeting).
Yorkshire Elementary and Signal Hill Elementary Boundary Decision
When the School Board debated some amendments offered by Gil Trenum this action item provided most of the evening’s drama. Trenum proposed modifying plan 1a (see item 19 on the February 4th meeting and item 23 on the January 7th meeting) allowing rising 5th graders and their younger siblings (not wanting to break up families) to remain at Signal Hill Elementary. In addition, he proposed giving Signal Hill students priority to participate in the French language specialty program. Because of the precedent it might set, Trenum’s proposal’s alarmed some board members. These board members fretted that if they made this exception for Yorkshire parents, they might have to do the same when future boundary decisions were made.
Johns sided with Trenum, pointing out that neither school was currently above 80 percent capacity. Nonetheless, the majority of the board was adamant. Only rising 5th graders could stay at Signal Hill Elementary (This being already customary.).
Author’s Note: Since both schools have the additional capacity available, I think Trenum’s amendment was reasonable. While I understand some people will always insist upon what they define as “fairness,” life is not fair. When circumstances provide us more latitude, we may as well take advantage. When circumstances force choices on it, we don’t have a choice anyway. Why people cannot tell the difference, I do not know, but I suppose this why Emerson said the following.
- A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines.
Whether we should blame the School Board or the average citizen for adoring consistency is another question.
One other thought. Trenum’s provision also required parents to provide their own transportation. It the two elementary schools provide essentially the same education, how many parents will want to drive their children to school if they do not have to do so?
Trenum also spoke up about the safety issue posed by Route 28 with respect to the boundary decision. He noted that this issue was important but could not be a deciding factor. Eight or nine elementary schools already have students crossing Route 28.
Plan 1a passed 8-0 with one amendment. This allowed only rising 5th graders to remain at Signal Hill Elementary. Note, however, that the parents of Yorkshire Elementary School children can still apply to participate in the French language specialty program.
InsideNova.com covered the story here.
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
The annual audit went well (see item 20 on the February 4th meeting).
Fiscal Year 2010 Proposed Budget & Capital Improvement Plan
Superintendent Walt provide his budget proposal. The details are available here. As usual, the briefing focused on the operating budget which at $805,934,639 will be about $53 million less than last year’s operating budget.
The total proposed FY 2010 Prince William County Schools (PWCS) budget is significantly larger, $1091,665,670 (See page 21 here.). This is expected to be reduced by $83 million. That will make the total per student spending (with a projected 1400 student increase) $14,605. Typically, the PWCS financial people only talk about the cost per student respect to the operating budget. In FY 2010, that number is expected to be $9955.
The papers picked up the story, of course.
In Prince William, the superintendent’s proposal would freeze teacher salaries, cut about 450 positions and raise average class size. Students would pay fees to play sports and pay more to use school parking lots and take driver’s education. As in Loudoun, the school system would no longer pay the fees for Advanced Placement and similar exams.
“We face the greatest budget deficit in our history,” Walts said, noting that never in memory had the fast-growing school system been forced to lower its spending from year to year. The Prince William School Board will vote March 18. (from here)
The position cuts may be less a problem than some anticipate. 450 positions represents about 4.6 percent of the work force. That probably means no one will be fired, but there will be no new-hires and some reassignments.
Board Time
Johns announced the decision to implement Math Investigations next year in the 5th grade would not be discussed at this meeting. Instead, this item would be part of budget discussions.
Otaigbe announced that there will be a work session on Math Investigations on February 10th. InsideNova.com provides details here.
Much of the board indicated a preference for the blended or balanced approach. Lattin wondered allowed if the books still remain that would be need for Traditional Math. So it looks like the parents favoring the Traditional Math Opt In Option still face an uphill battle.
Ramirez encouraged parents to attend the Math Investigations Work Session on February 10th. Other board members made it clear that there will be no citizen comment time. Nonetheless, folks are welcome to come watch and listen. Interested parents may want to sit in on the meeting and email their comments to Chairman Johns and the School Board member representing their district.
Author’s Note: The School Board is in an awkward position. Due to being on the board, each member probably spends more time with the School Staff than with parents. In addition, the School Staff has the expertise to present its case. Most parents, on the other hand, do not have much math expertise. At best, each can only see what works for their child. Moreover, if a parent never has had any children in a Traditional Math program, that parent’s basis for comparison is with the children of friends. Unfortunately, with our monopolistic public school system, that leaves little basis for comparison. Parents have almost no opportunity to shop around or to compare notes with parents with children in a different math program.
So the School Board must rely on a School Staff for expertise, but School Staff has a vested interest in the success of Math Investigations. That means the School Staff has a conflict of interest. We and the School Board must rely on people whose expertise we ordinarily would not trust without first comparison shopping. Such is the nature of government monopolies and socialism; socialism is fair to no one.
Richardson announced that because of the Math Investigations work session he would delay his Town Hall meeting until February 12th. The meeting will be 7 to 9 p.m. at Battlefield High School (probably in the school’s mini-theater).
The Cartoons
What the teacher would sometimes like to say.



Sorry to have to take you to task Tom, but most if not all of the parents opposed to MI have advanced math and science degrees and a career involving maths to a very high level. Some also have education qualifications and there would be a lot of teachers standing with us if that were an option for them. Half of teachers and half of parents thought MI didn’t meet their needs in the last survey.
The math department whose testimony the board relies on has been overjoyed to explain the “belief shift” they went through in getting into MI. Ms Knight even appears in a brochure for the publisher.
Don’t write us off as just a bunch of complaining parents who don’t get the new math. The math department tried that and found out how extensive our research has been.
About 70% of school systems in the publishers “evidence of success” pamphlet have dropped or are dropping MI.
Your opinion matches that of some board members which is why it has taken so long to get to this point.
Ed, I think you are being a little hard on Citizen Tom. Tom did not write you or anyone else off. He did not specifically refer to those speaking out against Math Investigations. He said most parents do not have math expertise.
Several members of the School Board also have engineering and science backgrounds, and one of these, Don Richardson, strongly supports Math Investigations. With Richardson’s support, I don’t think the School Board feels inclined to back down just because the opposition has advanced degrees.
To win, the opposition has to gain the support of MOST of the parents, including those with relatively little math expertise.
Maybe I am but it sounds very similar to the approach the math department used to try and appease and silence us when this all started. An approach which is detailed on Pearson’s web site – how to beat parent opposition (paraphrasing).
At least half of all parents in the county don’t think MI is meeting our needs and that is according to the math dept. survey. Yet they managed to spin that into a positive.
Oh and half of teachers feel the same.
And with one child in each program, I do feel able to shop around. The previous text was a little stuffy but it would have been far better to supplement that with some improvements than throw the whole thing out.
They blame high school students ability to think on the elementary math curriculum as an excuse to bring in investigations. Something stinks.
Here’s the paper:
http://support.pearsonschool.com/data/file_repository/0001/9499/Invest_Parent_Concerns.pdf
It uses divide and conquer; delay questions until the less committed have wandered off.
Oh, and note the math problems done by the kids; 2 got completely the wrong answer.
Concerned yet?
Ed, are you familiar with the following phrase? “You are either for us or against us.” We often fail to see ourselves as others see us. Step back a moment and think about what you are doing. Do you want to wholly uncompromising?
Tom objects the public school monopoly. He specifically stated the School Staff has a conflict of interest. He obviously favors the Opt In Option for Traditional Math. How much of an ally does someone have to be before they are with you?
You obviously have a lot of your ego invested in the fight against Math Investigations. The School Staff has a lot their ego invested in the fight for it. If you want to beat Math Investigations, you have to exercise better control over your emotions than your opposition does over theirs.
Not ego; just time home tutoring, researching, attending school board meetings etc.
If you don’t have kids in the program, you don’t know how damaging and frustrating it is.
Tom has only looked as an outsider; without kids or grand-kids in the program, that’s all he can do.
If you think I attacked him, I didn’t mean to; that’s not my style. I don’t think my comments were emotional. I have always remained pretty calm explaining it to the board and providing well researched evidence only to be ignored for 2 years.
But with the board potential of “allowing them to continue blending but with a bit more direction”, that’s nothing like enough to resolve the issue.
We are not asking for or against. We have proposed allowing both. With the math department survey showing parents split 50/50 (on a fairly small sample), that would seem to be a win-win situation.
They ran dual programs before MI was officially introduced at several schools without even telling the parents; shouldn’t be a problem.
Ed, Your children are your children. Why any of us want the government telling us how to educate our children, I do not know.
Anyway, what is is. All we can do is do try our best to make things better. Thanks for the effort you are making.