http://www.change.org/petitions/ccsd15-school-board-listen-to-constituents-re-late-arrival-early-dismissal-schedule-enrichment-time-end-of-the-day-friday-no-lost-instruction-time

Petition link above. Please sign if you have not and come on Saturday.

LIsa,
Thank you for being our voice!
Parent of three

Thank you for writing such powerul and informative letter, Lisa. Thank you for communicating so effectively the frustration that so many of us are experiencing. The lack of concern by the BOE has left a bitter taste in many mouths. Their unwillingness to have dialogue about such an important issue will not easily be forgotten.
Parent of 4 at Paddock

Why do these teachers need enrichment time?? What are the numerous institute days for?? There is not one month that our children go to school without at least one day off. How many of us put in extra hours at our job after or before normal business hours and don't get paid for it?? These teachers can't put in a few extra minutes or a little extra time without having to be compensated for it?? The excuse not to have this at the end of the day is absolutely pathetic!! I would like to leave when I'm done with my job on Friday, or any day for that fact, but I stay and get done what needs to get done. This issues sounds like a poor work ethic and not something I try to teach my kids. This is an absolutely pathetic display of entitlement mentality that, unfortunately, that we are seeing more of in our educational institutions and our young people.

Excellent letter Lisa. You are correct. Why won't these elected officials come to an important meeting? Perhaps they don't want to hear feedback. They have made their minds up and that is it. This is very upsetting!

I am equally disgusted. I sure hope the people who aren't attending are reading all of your letters, articles, as well as the comments. Personally, if I didn't visit Palatine Patch, I'd have had no idea about this issue at all. Very very poor communication on the part of the district IMO.

None of the Board of Ed members are on the decision-making committee as to whether it will a late start or early release.

The 6 decision-makers are made up of Administration, PTA, and CTC.

It is really hard to grasp how any of those 6 would not make it a top priority to attend Saturday's forum.

Lisa,

I read with interest your letter to the editor, and would like to take a moment to clarify some things.

First, my role on the late start/early release committee is as a parent representative. I am not a decision maker. I work hard to represent the interests of the 12,000 students within our district. As you know, we have members with many different ideas about the best option for late start/early release. PTA takes no side in the issue; its role is to be sure all voices are heard.

Second, the forum date was chosen without input from me - as would be appropriate. It is a District 15 Board of Education Communications Forum, not specifically designed for the late start/early release committee to hear from parents.

Third, I am a volunteer who has worked every single day for months to solicit opinions from our members (parents, students, faculty, staff and administration), and believe I have an accurate picture of the views held within our 20 PTAs. I have a family event the entire weekend that has been on my calendar for a solid year. As such, I felt it was extremely important to honor my family obligation. Be assured my absence is due to being otherwise engaged, not due to a lack of commitment or a lack of interest.

Finally, I admire your dedication to the late start/early release conversation, and look forward to seeing you again soon.

Julie O'Hara
President
NWSC PTA PTSA

In a nutshell:

1. My preference is NO change to the schedule because as Jim said above, I too work full-time plus and get paid for full-time regardless of whether I work 40 or 70 hours. I am stunned that educators and administrators would sacrifice children's education and well-being to benefit the adult teacher's pocket and schedule. Children, especially young children, need consistency. My compromise is a late start on Monday which extends the weekend and causes no disruption from start time Monday to end of day Friday. Yet again, a benefit to the teachers to the detriment of the children.

2. Communication is terrible. I didn't even know substitutes were sent in so that teachers could meet DURING school! I don't understand why they can't meet after school. Oh, but then they might have to incur the extra child care cost they are forcing on us.

3. Outsourcing the busses? This is a serious consideration? Anyone who works for a company who has used outsourcing knows the result: a decline in quality. Our children do not merit a decline in the safety of the bus system!

4. We need voices on the board who are willing to fight for our children.

Agreed PalatineResident. Let's see who shows up.

What do teachers do during the summer break?
The 2.5 month summer break is the perfect time for taking enrichment courses.

Thank you Lisa for the information in your letter. Please remember that half of the people that are identified as decision makers are in jobs that directly represent the teachers not children, families, nor taxpayers. Hopefully the needs of all those affected are balanced.

From my understanding based on an email from the superintendent's office, the late start/early release was a concession made to the union in order to balance the budget. Responsibility always cost when you deal with unions & liberals.
For ExPalatineRes, what is being said here is most of us who have professional jobs would love to have it as teachers do. Since I'm really blessed with work, I am often home by 4:30 and a former teacher asked me if I was a teacher since I was home so early. I said, no, I get in @ 7 & can work from home if needed. Most are not as fortunate as I am. Until unions are eliminated we will never really see the quality children deserve.

This is a direct quote from Dr. Thompson, the brain child of this debacle from the District 15 newsletter.

"He also added that early dismissal on Friday afternoons was not included as an option in the survey because the end of a long work week is not considered an optimal time for professional development."

Dr. Thompson, I work for a Fortune 50 Company and we have Friday afternoon Teleconferences EVERY WEEK at 4PM CST. Last time I checked ~63% of my tax dollars go to Education in Dist 15. It's time you listen to your constituents that pay YOUR salary. Not the Teachers Union.

Wake up get with the REAL world that works 365 Days a year.

I think the reason for officials being MIA at the meeting is because this issue was included in the new contract and agreed upon by both sides and can't be taken back now. Professional Development should have been discussed more before the contract was approved and signed. I am curious if any residents knew that this enrichment provision was in the new contract and if so how was it presented. I don't think Mr Thompson and the board communicated to residents of the consequences of this provision of the contract before it was signed. I don't like it either and would have rather paid more in taxes than have multiple start/dismiss times. The teachers are not the bad guys here though. Our school board and district leaders should be held accountable for creating this mess. They did not tell the public that "Professional Development Time" = multiple start/ dismiss times before the contract was ratified. If so this outrage would have came out earlier and something else could have been negotiated such as more $$$$ instead of this "Professional development Time"

It would be nice if all parties INVOLVED attended this meeting so something acceptable could be discussed.

Shawn, so what your telling me is the organic thought process came from ---- ???? No one is accusing the "teachers" as "bad guys"? God forbid...seems there is a lot of missing transparency. Also, just the term "enrichment provision" screams opportunistic. Shawn, it seems to me you have a vested interest in the decision. May I ask where? A "Friday" early release is the most obvious and equitable decision that seems to be most vocal. But for the majority of board members to not attend - is a slap in the face. Lisa's letter is spot on.

I think the issue here is not that parents aren't embracing making time for teacher collaboration--who doesn't want a better prepared and enriched teacher for their child? But instead, parents would prefer our administrators provide our teachers with time to meet during their contractual day that doesn't create a childcare hardship for families. If the administrators and the teacher's union do the research, there are ways to create regularly scheduled weekly time for collaboration during the contractual day while students are on campus in ways that do not cost money and that result in little or no loss of instructional time. The issue of finding time has been addressed effectively and often in professional literature and is readily available for those who are sincerely interested in exploring alternatives. The National Staff Development Council alone has addressed the issue hundreds of times in its publications, and the www.allthingsplc.info website lists over 150 schools that have created time for teachers to collaborate in ways that don't require the school to be shut down, don't cost money, and don't result in significant loss of instructional time--adjusted start/end time with supervision by noninstructional staff until classes begin; shared classes; group activities, events, and testing; and more. Perhaps the administration and the teacher's union should take another look at these solutions before creating childcare hardships for so many parents in the district.

While personal preferences are interesting and childcare issues are important, my concern is the students are going to effectively lose 40 minutes of instruction.

On paper, we won't because they will get it back in four 10 minute increments. However, in reality, those 10 minutes will likely disappear into thin air.

We are already at the state-mandated minimum amount of instruction time.

So, if any part of any day is to be taken away from the children, shouldn't logic suggest it be the least productive part of the week? Namely, Friday afternoons?

Let's remember for whom the schools exist.

Given that none of the CTC members on the decision making committee (3/7ths of the committee) are attending it sounds like the Saturday meeting is an exercise in futility. If the CTC thought Friday was an option they would be there to hear about it.

per article XXVII of the teachers contract this issue can be deleated from the contract. It requires agreement from the union and the District, but it can be removed.
Contact everyone you can and let's get this issue truly resolved in the best interest of the students schedule.
Let's remember for whom the schools exist.
In the current schedule K-6th grade teachers have a 30 minute planning time 4 days a week and a full hour on the 5th day. Jr.High teachers have a 35-45 minute personal planning time and a 35-45 minute team planning time EVERYDAY.
With an early release or late start a Jr. High teacher would have 2 1/4 hours of planning time and a 30 minute lunch in their 6 1/2 hour day. It will be hard for them to find the time to teach on that day.
If the parents and students don't want it. The teachers are not in favor of it. Why are we doing it?
ASK THE COMMITTEE
Superintendent Scott Thompson and Deputy Superintendent James Garwood,
Northwest Suburban Council PTA President Julie O'Hara, Lisa Nuss CTC Teachers Union President, Anne Bridges CTC Teachers Union Executive Director and Mary Beth Landerman CTC Teachers Union Exec Board Member.
If the district isn't representing the interest of parents and the CTC isn't representing the teachers let them know they can leave anytime they want!
DO WHAT'S RIGHT FOR THE STUDENTS or expect to be replaced.

I attended the forum this morning. I witnessed a great deal of passion from parents and other stakeholders. My focus continues to be on how these changes will affect our children. What kind of emotional or educational turbulence will children experience as a result of scheduling changes? The changes in the Common Core Standards require that teachers need more training to teach to those new standards. The debate today was more about the "when" and "how" that time is allocated. Many parents are in favor of early release, some of late start, some say there should be no schedule changes. Many pointed out the fact that the district missed a great number of parent responses because the survey was sent via email and did not provide an opportunity for all families to respond. Mr. Thompson did say that another survey will go out and include a Friday early release option. I am anxious to see what proposals the committee comes back with after today's forum.

Brenda, I agree with you 100%. I would also add that I think people are majorly over-reacting. This is not that big of a deal. (see my earlier post). My wife and I have been following this for some time now, with my wife attending the public forum. For some reason, this has been misconstrued as the teachers wanting something more and it's simply not. As for the kids "not having structure", we are talking about a few minutes here and there. I know my kids won't care.

I attended forum..it was great discussion from different perspectives and couple of feedback from non D15 school. Contracts should avoid ambiguities if possible. Overwhelming opposition clause allowed this debate. Am sure it stated there because negotiations anticipated this. All of us respect and care about our teachers..their growth is our children growth. First thing i read on Friday in my private email is email update from 7th grade teacher.

Today's Tribune has an article. Lisa Nuss (CTC) has finally emerged and issued comments. She is now defining the contract language which states "overwhelming opposition" to be (in her words) "extreme" opposition. She states that early release is a safety issue - but what about late start safety issues? She also states "we knew there would be scheduling issues for parents.... " Lisa Nuss has spoken. It shall be what the CTC union leaders demand, too bad for parents, families and children.

LS made a very telling comment in that same article, which BPA kindly ignored.

"In the big picture, it should be what's best for (the children) and what's best for them is what's best for their families."

In this regard, what's best for the children is not what's best for their families. My taxes are going to the school district to provide the best education possible, not daycare. I want my money used well and appropriately and that means I want the kids to learn and receive a good education. I'll support whatever means achieve that end.

What's in the best interest of the family is up to the family. What's in the best interest of education is up to the schools. I don't want the schools telling families what's best for them and I don't want families telling schools what's best for education.

Hi Maryb and all,

Am one of the 9 candidate for April school board elections, i have been in touch with this issue, for me both overwhelming and extreme is same and vague , a poor choice of clause for a contract. If I was sitting in there, i would have suggested some quanitfialbe statements, like 60% of registered parents who participate in written survey or 70% oppose by online survey or a statement like, Committe should draft a addendum to the contract on guidelines on interpreting the "overwhelming" clause. our time having clarity on this, and I intend to work on avoiding to getting into these type of siuations.
Both me and my wife signed Lisa's petition for Friday, we love and respect the teachers of our childer in 3rd and 7th grade, they are awesome.
But what is vague is vague and community, teachers, administration coming together to solve is nothing wrong.
Hope my position is clear on this.
Thanks for asking.
Abdul Javid