PEORIA, IL -- The debate goes on over whether the Peoria School District 150 Board should fund the public charter school Quest for another five years.
At the August 26 meeting the board heard the arguments in the public comment section of the agenda. Activist Terry Knapp said that contrary to what the board has been told Quest is not a STEM school, teaching science and technology. It's not teaching calculus or advanced chemistry and physics, he said, while all three Peoria high schools offer these classes.
He has been researching Quest, and found board members living out of the school district. And other materials have not been provided to him. "I want a copy of a curriculum guide and a financial statement," he said.
It's teacher retention rate is only 44 percent, while the Peoria high schools have nearly double that rate, he said.
Polly Barton, widow of the late Glen Barton, a former CEO of Caterpillar, Inc. and a founder of Quest, said "I support both schools," meaning Quest and the Peoria schools. "Peoria needs choid because students learn differently."
Activist Sharon Crews spoke about discipline, with her remarks posted below. She was followed by three Von Steuben staff members who said the opening of the school has gone "beyond excellent."
"I'm really proud of you and I believe in you," Supt. Sharon Kherat responded.
Here is a recording of the public comments.
-- Elaine Hopkins
Here are the remarks of Sharon Crews:
Before resolving our district’s discipline problems, the history that led to this mess must be studied. Online articles have convinced me that the issues that spawned discipline problems all over the country are the same that we have and are experiencing.
I taught before these problems started and was still teaching when this difficult period began. Only now have I realized the root cause. For over twenty-five years, I seldom had discipline problems I could not handle. I wasn’t a super teacher, but the central and building administrations supported teachers with policies that actually scared students into behaving.
Today’s superintendents are being fed the lie that exciting online curricula, not consequences, will revolutionize student behaviors.
Two groups are punished by current policies: teachers and the students who come to school prepared to be taught but can’t be taught because teachers spend all their time disciplining. It’s time to help those neglected students. Ask them what to do with misbehaving students; seriously, they will have some very good ideas.
In the 1960’s, state and federal courts passed laws that said schools could not censor students’ First Amendment Rights unless the educational process was disrupted. Where there are laws, there are lawyers. School superintendents and building administrators ran scared and that’s where discipline problems began—out of fear.
All across the nation teachers were told to ignore discipline problems to avoid lawsuits. Some administrators’ policies were based on their pet peeves or prejudices, not on behaviors that caused discipline problems. Those had to end.
For instance, a 1969 Supreme Court decision gave students the right to wear armbands protesting the Vietnam War. In District 150 Whitaker refused to allow a Bradley professor’s son to enroll at Peoria High because he refused to cut his long hair. The student came to Manual and his father sued Whitaker. The district lost because the student’s First Amendment Rights were violated.
There was no reason to change discipline policies in these and other such cases because public school should already have ended policies or practices that violated those rights and did not disrupt teaching. As you know, Terry Knapp also won a case accusing Whitaker of violating his First Amendment rights.
Whitaker had many pet peeves. Of course, the most momentous national case was Brown vs Board of Education, which has spawned many needed laws and changes in how black students were and are treated. I was, also, involved in one of these issues when a student who had just moved here from the South was coerced into participating in one of the riots that were typical of the era. I did not believe he should be up for expulsion, so I contacted Mary McDade. As a result, from then on all students up for expulsion had a right to a hearing with representation to reach a fair decision.
Our district handled that one correctly. There are instances of students exercising their First Amendment Rights that do disrupt classes and must be dealt with. However, administrators have called for unnecessary leniency, and chaos has reigned.
Next time I will discuss the discipline issues spawned by IDEA, the 1975 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. I challenge this administration to help find a solution that can be sold to other schools instead of buying miracle cures being used ineffectively all over the country. - 30 -
,ssters ocr/sgastA recoeria, eria tou,iiibg ansa atublic