Well said, Jeff.

I know a lot of people on both sides of this issue. The school I work at is one of the ones closing over this. I love my school.

But let me comment on a few things here. Yes, I love my school. Yes, I'm devastated it's closing. Yes, I thought they would delay the vote.

But, maybe it's just me. I just don't see the evil in this plan. The kids who were formerly zoned to the Hillwood cluster have a choice. Right now, if they want to go to school closer to home, they have to apply to the lottery. Their parents or guardians have to fill out a form. Then they have to mail it or deliver it to central office. As you can imagine it, the number of steps involved to do this impede it from happening. As a result, the beautiful John Early Middle sets mostly empty.

If you look at the statistics, were' bleeding middle class students. In 1996-1997, we had 47% on free and reduced lunch (about 33,000 students, meaning that 36,000 were NOT on free and reduced lunch). A decade later, it's closer to 70% and 50,000 students. That's a 23% gain in 10 years. In other words? We've lost 16,000 middle class students in 10 years, people. Yes, you read that right - in 2006-2007, out of the approx. 70,000 students in Metro schools, only 20,000 weren't on free and reduced lunch. You can check out the Tennessee Department of Education yourself and compare statistics.

Let me tell you what is happening with the Hillwood cluster. People are not sending their kids to public school. Or they might do elementary, but not middle. Why?

Honestly, people haven't been asking that question. They assume. We've given up on the middle class, people. Central office doesn't ask. They think they know, but no surveys. No principal calling to check on students who chose not to return. We need facts, not accusations or assumptions of racism. And once the middle class leaves, what's left? Well, I'll show you what's happened in the Hillwood cluster. Neighborhood schools which are mostly bussed in students from N. Nashville. Those who can afford to go to private schools, do. So, let's think about it a while. Bussing students from N. Nashville out of their neighborhood to schools far away that are increasing NOT diverse because middle and upper class parents are each year sending their children to private schools. It might level off some, but I think it will continue unless something is done. We're losing 1600 middle class students a year, people. Got that? So not only are the N. Nashville kids not going to school close by, the schools they go to are increasingly not diverse because middle class parents are not sending their kids to public school.

You've never been in the office when a student can't go home because his mom can't come pick him up. Many of our N. Nashville students can't play sports because they have no way to get home after school. They can't be in anything after school, including tutoring. Their parents can't come to conferences. We do our best to go to them, but there's a disconnect. I'm not saying that going to school close to home will solve all problems, but at least it's a start. And maybe some middle class parents will not leave because they will feel that their school is truly a neighborhood school.

As far as resources, the N. Nashville schools will get a ton of money because they will be Title 1 schools. They will get about $500 per student a year. I don't know of many suburban schools whose PTO can raise that sort of money (about $150,000 a year for a school of 300) My kids go to Eakin and my school (because of Title 1) has much more money than Eakin raises through the PTO. In fact, in schools today it's the Title 1 schools who have everything that you can imagine, and the suburban schools that are dependent on spaghetti suppers and carnivals to provide copy paper for teachers!

It's true that I suppose they can't guarantee that they will have social workers and low student-teacher ratios and the such in the years to come. But it would be political suicide to not provide enhanced options to the Pearl-Cohn cluster. Plus the rezoning task force meets twice a year and can tweak as needed. And if it doesn't work you can always go back. But let me tell you, if the next 10 years go like the past 10, we'll be looking at a school system that is 90% free and reduced lunch in 10 years. Let's start asking middle class parents why they leave and listen. It might not be for the reasons that you think.

Well, if you want to rationalize the school zoning, you would send kids in Sylvan Park and the blocks west of 21st Ave and north of Blair Blvd to Pearl Cohn. But that would rile up the politically active, good government liberals whose kids currently go to Hillsboro. That allow north Nashville kids to not be sent all the way down to Hickory Valley and Davidson. While we're at it, we could move NSA to Glencliff, and divide the kids who live in Napier and South Nashville between Hillsboro, Overton, and McGavock, depending on which wedge of that area they live in.

But that NEVER came up, did it? Instead, we saw Hillwood becoming the designated school for salving white liberal guilt, with hardly any other changes on that side of the Cumberland. No wonder Bellevue votes from the gut for horrible grandstanding jerks like Crafton. Don't get me wrong, I think diversity within schools is desirable, but the burden of the falling quality shouldn't fall unfairly on people who can't afford USN or MBA or Harpeth Hall tuition.

Good points, mnpsteacher. I have another point to raise. Diversity has been decreasing across MNPS for some time under the current zoning plan. So does it really serve diversity? Jeff, you raise the question of where the city's progressive white elite were. This city's progressive white elite opted into the "white flight" to private schools years ago. How are any of them going to take a stand for school diversity when they choose for their kids to go to schools far less diverse than Hillwood will ever be? These folks pay big bucks to make sure their kids hobnob with the affluent elite, then pat themselves on the back for embracing diversity by eating out on Nolensville Rd twice a year and thinking about how broadminded they are. And we have heard from the Scene repeatedly that we have no business questioning their choices of schools for their kids or examining the racial makeup of those private schools. The real segregating factor in Nashville is not any zoning plan. It's a white flight culture and the private schools that market themselves to that culture. That's something the Scene has never addressed b/c it would hit to close to home for some of the Scene's pet politicians.

Larry Woods is white and is a civil rights activist and a progressive leader whose 3 children all graduated from Metro Schools. Larry Woods was at the NAACP press conference yesterday and at the school board meeting last night in opposition to the proposed plan plus he sent out many emails in opposition to the plan. There are many white southern liberals left in the south and Nashville is fortunate to have Larry Woods out there and involved.

When Larry Woods proposes a fair and comprehensive plan for schools that doesn't favor elite neighborhoods and preserve the right of people who live in Hillsboro-Belmont and Green Hills to send their kids to a far better public school than the wreck that Hillwood has become, I'd be happy to support his plan. But as it is, citing Larry as paragon of reason and virtue is (a) anecdotal, and (b) terribly out of date-- didn't his kids graduate from high school two decades ago?

Constant tension and mistrust is unavoidable in any centrally controlled system, a system where "officials" draw lines to determine where kids will go. Isn't there a better way? Shouldn't we leave it up to parents to choose where to send their children? Shouldn't we leave it up to the market to supply the variety and quality of schools that the market demands?

I am hopeful that one day we'll look back at the ecucation factories we call middle schools and shake our heads in disbelief.

DG, I don't think Product was being anecdotal or out of date. I think the point was in response to Jeff's article which questioned why none of the white, liberal progressives were willing to take a stand on this issue and Product is pointing out that Larry Woods did. I'm also fairly certain that Larry's youngest daughter is 29 or 30, so that hardly means his children were only in the public school system in the eighties. Plus, he's been an advocate for divesity in public schools his entire career (which I think makes his speaking out and questioning the rezoning plan relevant) and I know he volunteered to teach speech and debate in many public high schools in town even after his children had graduated. We need more people like him and the NAACP raising questions regarding this action

Speaking of cowardly white liberals, it's particularly galling for the mayor to sit on his hands on this. After yammering incessantly about education during the entire mayoral campaign and forever afterward, he's suddenly struck mute as the school board makes this historic decision.

I asked the mayor's office for Dean's position on the rezoning. Here's his statement: “I believe everyone involved in this process had very honorable intentions. Clearly it was a difficult decision for the Board of Education. The members of the community task force worked very hard on this plan for a number of months. It's important that we all stay focused on the goal – providing schools in which every student has a chance to succeed.”

Now that's taking a bold stand. But everyone staying focused on the big picture ... I'm thinking that's going to be a little hard to accomplish now that we've basically told the city's black leadership to fuck off.

I should have been more careful with my wording about Larry Woods, who has been a true conscience for Nashville, and I didn't know his youngest daughter was only a dozen or so years out of Metro schools. I stand corrected, and apologize for any implication.

And (Jeff) Woods, you're right about the gutlessness of Dean's position.

Of course, I'd argue that the fact that a disproportionate share of black students who were zoned for "white" schools were in fact zoned for Hillwood, and that a solution that would have identified Pearl-Cohn as a "neighborhood" school for Sylvan Park and a good chunk of Hillsboro-Belmont, would have diversified the Pearl-Cohn, and also accounted for demographic change in neighborhoods near Hillwood, like Bellevue, Charlotte Park, and even western parts of West Meade, which have been getting less white for years, while much of the northeast part of Hillsboro's zone is getting MORE white (Sunnyside, for example, which barely exists as a name anymore as white people have taken over).

For Dean (and I'd argue a lot of the west Nashville good government liberal base that became self-aware around the time of Bredesen and Eskind, it's much easier to tell the less well-connected folks in Bellevue and Charlotte Park that their obligation is to send their kids to a school where a significant percentage of students have no family support and whose disruptive behavior has changed Hillwood from the school I attended in the 1980s, where both professors kids and strivers from families whose dads worked for Ford, with a mix of Asians, Jews, Baptists, Sikhs, etc., who got a pretty good education in a remarkably diverse school. Lots of kids went to some good colleges, and about a half dozen kids went to Ivies every year. That barely happens now.

I do believe in the value of racial and economic diversity in schools, and I consider myself a fairly reliable liberal voter. I don't, by the way, have any personal stake in Hillwood's school zone. But to me, the gutless elitism of many in the Hillsboro cluster is a big middle finger to working and lower middle class whites in the southwest of Davidson County (Crafton's consituency). It's very easy to tell the NAACP you're against the new zoning plan when the changes have little to no positive effect the schools your kids go to.

I wonder if all the white middle-class families will now flock to Hillwood? Or will this latest moment of crisis and instability at MNPS just confirm that Ensworth or Williamson County is worth it? I think the latter - although I hope I am wrong.

The sickness is not the zone or the resulting demographics at Hillwood - its just a symptom. The sickness is the constant state of crisis (which drives marginal families out of the system), multigenerational poverty (which presents us with more complicated cultural and educational problems) and refusal to follow through on anything we ever start (for example, implementation of the 2001 MGT study of MNPS would have done virtually everything that Mayor Dean is now proposing to deal with drop outs but we did not fund the last year of the study's recommendations). Changing the Hillwood zone as part of the latest crisis does nothing to confront the real underlying problems - it may even make them worse.

We are all used to the politicians attacking the symptom instead of the sickness - so no big deal there. What is troubling about this instance is that the symptom being attacked is so closely associated with racism and such a sop to an already over-represented constituency.

"What is troubling about this instance is that the symptom being attacked is so closely associated with racism and such a sop to an already over-represented constituency."

Yeah, it's a tough thing to say that the relic of dealing with Jim Crow is a failure. That doesn't mean that eliminating large-scale non-continguous zoning (which for the most part affected two of Nashville's public high school clusters) is a return to segregated schools, any more than saying the zoning committee is the contemporary equivalent of Casey Jenkins, who was an overt Wallace-style rabblerouser.

But either we're trapped by the ugly history of segregation (and while it was far less ugly in Nashville than many other places, it is still a blemish), or we try to figure out how to rectify it in a way that doesn't wreck decently-performing schools.

Not sure who you meant by "over-represented constituency." White folks? Rich folks? If it's the latter, I don't disagree, as (in addition to the magnet lottery) rich folks in West Meade have one solid out (many excellent private schools within twenty minutes' drive), and rich folks in the Hillsboro cluster have two (private schools AND good public schools that haven't been filled with disinterested and disruptive students from neighborhoods nowhere near the school grounds).

But if it's the latter, calling the balance of the Hillwood cluster (Bellevue and environs, Charlotte Park, Annex, etc.) "over-represented" is ridiculous. What services are they allocated disproportionately? The park and ride? The Old Hickory bus that was taken away? A shabby, tiny public library branch with short hours? Most of the people in Bellevue live in rental apartments, and many live paycheck to paycheck. Implying they're a bunch of bigots, when they're trying to do for their schools what the concerned parents of the Hillsboro cluster have managed, is what gives pricks like Crafton an audience for his resentment-based agenda.

Until there's a remedy where everyone shares in the obligation of improving schools in de facto segregated neighborhoods, it's elitist to demand that the burden fall on Hillwood cluster parents.

Let me address something I failed to mention in my long-winded comment: I don't think there's going to be a flood of Brentwood families moving to the Hillwood cluster, and I don't think that the people on Post Road who can afford MBA or Ensworth or Harpeth Hall, or even Father Ryan (all the value at a third of the price!) will pull their kids out and send them to Hillwood. I would say that a lot of the families who send their kids to-- let's face it-- third-rate Christian academies will, however, reconsider Hillwood. These are folks who this recession will start hurting. And I do think that some of the people who move to Spring Hill, or Rutherford County, will consider moving to Bellevue instead, directly as a result of improving Hillwood by rezoning many of the worst behaving, most disruptive students.

It takes a pretty snobby perspective to hiss at parents, many of whom moved to the south in the last decade, and care primarily for their kids' futures, because white supremacists blew up Looby's house and Hattie Cotton five decades ago.

Just to add to your discussion: it could happen. Hillsboro has actually been very racially diverse for several years reflecting the city as a whole and continues to draw families from the Hillsboro district in addition to transfers. Hillwood was selected by the then Board members who were looking ahead to unified status because it was a stable, high performing school also. Probably if it were located more geographically centered in the district, it might have stabilized. Lot of history in all of this and unfortunately no one has been tracking the changes and their impact very well.

IMHO, this re-zone had virtually nothing to do with "Bellevue and environs, Charlotte Park, Annex, etc." It's all about politicians responding to an unvetted Chamber agenda item which may or may not be in the best interest of the City. It's the symptom identified by the Chamber. It's no different from their previous adenda items - getting rid of Garcia - and before that keeping Garcia - and before that the sales tax referendum - and before that implementing the MGT study. None of which have addressed the underlying problems as far as I can tell. For God's sake the State has taken over our system and says Mephis is doing better. How embarrassing. Over-represented = Chamber of Commerce.

I have not seen any concrete evidence that re-zoning Hillwood will do anything other than change the racial make up. No evidence that the kids spending less time on the bus will do better. No evidence that more middle class families will return. No evidence that families want this change. No evidence - just conjecture. The only thing we know is that Hollwood will be whiter. So . . . that's why people might think this is all about prejudice and racism.

You folks are right and it's up to the Hillwood district to change the city's perception. No one else can do it for them. And the Chamber certainly can't do it: they've been shoving things down everyone's throats for years and what did we get? The Garcia & Co. disaster! If you watched the Board meeting last night as the woman from the state explained the downward trend in achievement numbers starting in 2003, you also remember the cheerleading from the Chamber and some of the Board about the great improvements that were happening all over the system. It was like a Kafka novel with MNPS as the subject.

Say what you wish about Crafton, but he called their hand when the achievement numbers were being cooked and that was probably 2 yrs ago.

Proficieny? Those numbers are suspect, too.

Okay, fair enough, the Chamber of Commerce, which doesn't have the best interests of the community in mind (e.g., how the hell does the convention center get the highest priority?), should not be guiding the agenda. But even a blind squirrel finds a nut etc.

And I think it's fair to point out that the decline of Hillwood was at the very least correlated to earlier zoning changes. Will undoing those changes revive Hillwood? Maybe not, but the alternative is a school that is total failure.

Thanks DG for some very balanced comments. This entire thing is about so much more than some racist plot. Pearl Cohn makes AYP, Hillwood does not. Pearl Cohn gets Title 1 money, a day care, extra social workers and has great sports. Hillwood has none of these. Pearl Cohn has a community that cares and Hillwood does not. Hillwood is a hair breadth away from state takeover, pearl Cohn is not. If the families now zoned to Pearl Cohn prefer all that Hillwood has to not offer over their zoned school, well, then they have that choice. But by almost every measurable standard, Hillwood is a failing school. All the whiteness that still remains there has done no student any favors. A shake up of any and all kinds is long overdue.

And why does just the Pearl Cohn cluster get all the extra goodies? Why not Stratford or Maplewood or Glencliff? Talk about favortism, if I was in one of these other clusters watching Pearl Cohn get this windfall I'd be somewhere between jealous and resentful.

I read a long New York Times article a year or two ago about the school board in Little Rock, and I thought it may speak to our situation in Nashville as well. The article detailed some of the divisions that were occurring in LR along racial lines. Ideas for "reforms" presented by white board members (and supported by middle-class and affluent whites) were being rebuffed by African American board members, whose attitude more or less seemed to be: "You white people fled for the suburbs in the 60s and left us here, and now there's no way we're letting you come back in and take over."

Whether this reflects the actual workings in our own school board I will let others judge. But I think the behavior I have seen from Kindall and Thompson is sure as hell consistent with the attitudes of black school board members in Little Rock. My strong impression, based on attending board meetings and hearing them speak, is that Kindall and Tyson (like Pedro) don't give two hoots in hell about whether white middle-class families return in large numbers to Metro schools. (For all of their attempts at manipulating the composition of the board, I do at least give the Chamber of Commerce credit for recognizing the increasing exodus of white affluent families as an economic issue the business community in Nashville should be concerned about.) I have heard some long-time board observers suggest that Kindall and Thompson actually derive their power from being seen as champions of black families trapped in underperforming (OK, let's be honest -- "failing") schools rather than as champions of new ideas that could genuinely improve school performance but won't be universally popular. It's a harsh charge, but I'm not finding much evidence to prove the critics of Kindall and Thompson wrong. Certainly, the carefully timed unveiling of the Pedro memo suggests that Kindall chose to make the whole discussion about racial politics rather than address the larger complexities that thoughtful posters like DG and MNPS teacher raised. (Shame on the Scene, by the way, for uncritically accepting Pedro's spin that he was ousted because of the zoning issue and not because of the myriad other well justified reasons to kick him to the curb.)

I find much to criticize in Marsha Warden's performance, but I have seen absolutely nothing to suggest that resegregationist zeal played any part in her actions. She sent her own kid to Hillwood (when he had been at Meigs Magnet and thus on track for Hume-Fogg), based on the preposterous claim by Hillwood's principal that the boy would get an education there every bit as good as he could get in the magnets.

Couple of other observations:

Lost in all the lauding of diversity by the opponents of the rezoning plan is the reality that our currently diversified schools landed us under state control because of their poor performance. Even if the plan truly were going to resegregate schools (which appears to be something of an overblown claim), would they really be any worse than they are now?

I don't think that neighborhood schools are a panacea. For one thing, we have too many parents who can't or won't participate in their children's education (for a variety of reasons, from indifference to ignorance and lack of resources). The deck is stacked against these children whether they're close to home or bussed across town. But as MNPS Teacher notes, neighborhood schools do offer a lot of advantages that our currently system mostly loses. Not mentioned in this discussion either is that, nationally, no small number of African Americans seem to think that neighborhood schools are preferable even if it means that these schools will be heavily segregated, because at least they will provide more opportunities for involvement by the larger community.

MNPS also provides a revealing statistic that undercuts some of the particularly offensive arguments about white flight. As she notes, the exodus of affluent whites is increasing in the past few years. These people are not leaving because of racial prejudice. The percentage of the white population for whom that was a primary motivation left the county or went to private schools years ago. The rising tide out of Metro Schools now is better explained by parents for whom ensuring their kids get the best education they can afford is a top priority. So if they're zoned for a failing school like Hillwood, they'll try for a magnet school if they qualify; or they'll move to a zone for a better school (which may mean Williamson County); or they'll bite the financial bullet to pay for private school. I believe the percentage of affluent and middle-class whites who won't let their kids go to a school where 30-40% of the students are black is pretty small. The percentage of these parents who won't let their kids go to a school with gang problems and a culture of low expectations is rather high. Let's give parents some credit. Most of them who have education and financial means will do all they can to see their kids get a good education in a good school. I don't think you'll find many black parents with financial means and educational attainment who are letting their kids go to Maplewood.

On the whole, I'm kind of ambivalent about the rezoning plan. I see some potential pluses and minuses. Our schools have lots of problems that will still be there after this plan takes effect. I think it was a reasonable idea to have deferred the final vote so that more dissenting voices could be heard and could offer ideas that would remove their specific objections.

But spare me the bullshit that Pedro died for white people's sins and that Ed Kindall, who has been on the bridge of this sinking ship far longer than any other board member, is somehow part of the solution and not part of the problem.

Boyd, very well stated comment. Nuance gets a bad rap, nowadays, but two sentences you wrote go a long way toward addressing the inference that the board vote completes Casey Jenkins' agenda:

"I believe the percentage of affluent and middle-class whites who won't let their kids go to a school where 30-40% of the students are black is pretty small. The percentage of these parents who won't let their kids go to a school with gang problems and a culture of low expectations is rather high."

I think you're right about that, and about much else. Thanks.

Invariably, the best--and most detailed--comments we receive are from our posts on education. I wonder why that is?

Anyhow, keep the comments coming. I'm learning a lot here.

Here's the irony of the whole "resegregation" argument: Metro schools are now segregated by class and income level, since most parents who genuinely care about ensuring each of their children receives a quality education that's suited to their needs and aptitudes and who have the means, however slim, do one of two things: (1) Work within the Metro system, through lotteries, transfers and other available means, to get their child into a public school that offers a good academic program, or (2) send their child to a private school, often with the help of grandparents or other relatives, if means are limited.

I know many families with one child in a Metro school and another in a private school because option 1 didn't work, and the public school available to them was unacceptable to them.

And let me emphasize clearly that the school's unacceptability never has anything to do with the racial make-up of the students. It has everything to do with the quality of the academic program, the options available to kids who need advanced coursework, class size and options, the quality of the teachers, discipline issues, drug issues (anyone else opted out of Hillsboro in part because of its unfortunate nickname, Pillsboro?), management issues, the quality of the actual physical facility (does it occur to anyone that an attractive, well-maintained facility might have a positive impact on kids' perception of how important education is, their attitude toward education and their behavior at school, and that our unwillingness to fund decent facilities makes a powerful statement about the priority we as a society place on the education of our kids -- all of our kids?) and parental involvement.

The weight parents and students (and don't think parents alone make the decision of where to send their kids to school) assign to each of the various factors on the list above depends on their priorities and needs.

Here I'll choose to harp on one factor, the factor missing from this discussion for reasons I can only think are political: Parental involvement. Students at schools where parents are actively involved do better and have a better experience than students at schools where parents are unwilling or unable to be involved. And parents who understand this and place a high priority on educational achievement will opt out of any school, regardless of its racial make-up, if most of the parents of the students there don't place a priority on education, don't insist that their children do their homework, don't have books in their homes and read to their children, don't protest overlarge classes and 'inclusion' that reduces the quality of education for 25 students in order to accommodate the 26th, and don't support teachers and administrators by insisting and ensuring that their child be at school on time, homework done, and properly dressed, each day.

The year Pedro Garcia became director of schools, I was at a public forum where he stated, unequivocably, that people who could afford private schools were "rich," and he wasn't worried about them. At that time, I was sending my child to a private elementary school for the simple reason that the public elementary school available to our family was unstable. Metro was having trouble predicting enrollment, and for two years running, the result had been "combined" second and third grade classes that didn't do a good job for students in either grade. My parents helped us pay for private school. When my second child entered school, I opted out again because of an unfortunate incident that happened in the previous year's kindergarten class. The unemployed father of one student was spending his days watching pornography at home, in his son's presence, and his son began exposing himself to other kindergartners on the playground. The school didn't handle the incident well, and I was spooked.

What galls me about this entire discussion is that Ed Kindall and George Thompson -- who have done absolutely nothing to improve the quality of Metro schools during their entire tenure as school board members -- are trying to color this as a racial segregation battle when, in fact, the segregation has long since occurred for quality reasons. 70% of kids attending Metro schools receive free or reduced-cost lunches, a clear indication that those who have the means to opt out of Metro -- even parents like me who are products of public schools themselves and are sincerely motivated to support the public school system -- are doing so because the quality -- of facilities, of teachers, of course options -- is lacking.

If you doubt that quality is an issue, look at the number of applicants for the city's magnet schools. At least twice and often four times the number of students for whom there are available slots apply for the city's academic and arts magnets, where a quality education and/or an educated suited to a child's aptitudes and interests IS available. Parents of all income levels and races will send their kids to public schools when those schools offer a good education. Right now, that's not happening at many Metro schools, and the fault lies with parents who either can't or won't advocate for their child's education by creating a home environment conducive to supporting that goal as well as with board members like Messrs. Kindall and Thompson who think poor or mediocre performance is acceptable.

Here's an example of why parents are opting out of Metro schools -- someone edited this condenscending letter from Sandra Tinnon to parents explaining why algebra will no longer be offered to 7th graders who are ready for it:

May 18, 2008
Dear MNPS Parents and/or Guardians:
The Metropolitan Nashville Public School System is committed to providing a program to meet the changing needs of young adolescents. All students, regardless of their race/ethnicity, gender, social-economic or disability status, will have an opportunity to complete an academically rigorous middle-school curriculum.

Mediocrity is an unacceptable goal in Metropolitan Nashville Public Schools. Certainly, every parent wants the highest quality education for his or her child. It is also both the professional and moral obligation for every teacher, administrator, and every school to likewise desire [split infinitive] and provide a quality education for every student. Educational programming [Jargon: I assume this means curricula?] must be profoundly challenging, if used with rigor and relevance [usage error – one does not "use" programming with "relevance," one uses relevant programming], and passionately delivered. [AWK]

Creating a more rigorous curriculum and combating a culture of low expectations are initial steps this District must take in order to better provide a quality education for all students. [AWK structure] To this end, the middle school language arts and mathematics programs are currently being strengthened both in content and expectations. Standard or mediocre courses will not be the norm. [Implication: as they have been in the past.]

The MNPS middle-school Comprehensive Literacy initiative is designed to begin with the Basic Reading Inventory to be used as a diagnostic assessment so that students can access text at their independent reading level and encounter texts at their instructional level with teacher support. [Huh? I assume this means: Middle School students will take a Basic Reading Inventory diagnostic test to determine their independent reading level, and then be assigned text based on their assessed reading level. "Encounter" make it sound like they might bump into it in the hall, while striving to find someone who can tell them that "access text" really means to read it.]

Bookrooms have been stocked in each middle school have been stocked with leveled [does this mean they are level on the shelf, or that they reflect a specific grade level?] readers ranging from second grade to the twelfth grade, severing [this verb is out of left field – presenting?] a diverse array of student reading levels. [Translation of this last and the next couple of sentences: Each middle school now has a book room that offers readers at every level from 7th to 12th grades, which teachers can use to work with small groups of students on reading. Students who have reached junior high and still can't read can work on specific skills, while more advanced students will sit in the classroom, reading independently, and thus fail to receive instruction.] The bookroom provides teachers access to leveled texts to be used with small groups of students in guided reading. Struggling readers can work on the specific skills necessary to increase their reading levels while advanced students can access high leveled texts appropriate to their maturity level. As students move into the language arts classroom, the information provided from diagnostic reading assessments guides teachers in differentiating instruction by identifying texts that will provide a challenge for students with diverse reading levels. [Huh? At this point, I think I've made my point about grammar, so I'll simply translate what I read in this letter]:

Metropolitan Nashville Public Schools are offering a 21st century mathematics education for 21st century students. [Translation: We have bought a new math curriculum that (1) makes math fun and relevant because (2) you don't have to do boring stuff like add, subtract, multiply and divide.] Mathematical concepts will be taught in conceptual and collaborative ways that are embedded in problem solving applications. [Translation: Since students work together in groups, the ones who can add and subtract will do the work, while the ones who can't don't learn.]

Much emphasis is on student inquiry and on the communication of the students' thinking as they work together to produce presentations that clearly articulate their findings and conclusions. Simple individual pencil-and-paper, skill-driven tests are not accurate measure of how students will perform in situations like the ones listed above. [This is a particularly pernicious sentence, because here's the translation: You don't have to add, subtract, multiple or divide to learn math.] Thus, the idea of students "testing out" of particular grade levels or courses before being exposed to the year's content could deny them of pertinent concepts needed for future success in mathematics. [Trnaslation: Parents and students, you don't have a choice: We have bought this curriculum, it looked great at the curriculum vendor fair, and by golly, we're going to use it.] The 7th grade math curriculum for next year is much more challenging than this year's Algebra I course. We are meeting the needs of advanced students, perhaps now more than we ever have in the past. [Editorial commentary and translation: We are meeting the needs of advanced students by making sure they leave the school system, because their parents are afraid of the type of math instruction they'll receive if they remain in Metro Schools.] Teachers are expected to do what is best for each student within their classes, as they have always done.

Elevated expectations for every student are the target. [AWK & Translation: We have high-igh-igh hopes, high in the sky-y-y hopes, for your child's education.] Regardless of quartile performance, movement from "below proficient," and "proficient" to "advanced" is the goal for every student. [Translation: Our goal is for every student to graduate from school knowing how to read and write and maybe do some rudimentary math.] In addition, improved course curriculum designed by teachers along the lines of the criteria for State honors courses represent a goal of more rigorous, deeper, and challenging content, delivered by knowledgeable, well-prepared teachers who are passionate about helping all students succeed. [I can't translate this – what does "along the lines of State honors courses" mean?]

Effecting positive and permanent change to benefit the students in MNPS is our task, [translation: Parents, please put up and shut up] and the urgency for this work is clear [Translation: Our schools aren't performing very well]. The results of this work will become evident in our middle and high schools and in the lives of our students [Translation: we hope this works!]. Mediocrity will not be accepted because all students - all children - richly deserve much more. [Editorial comment: Mediocrity would be step up in many schools.]

Sincerely,



Sandra Tinnon

couple of things -- if i remember correctly marsha warden's older child did not qualify for hume fogg that is why he went to hillwood;

the citizens panel for a community report card has been screaming for years about the deteriorating trends in this district; the panel pulled together the data the board had been begging the district for to show the city what was really happening in the system; the panel pulled out the academic magnet high school results from the zoned high schools so people would see the real picture rather than have the district continue to hide behind the results of a few schools...the data showed middle schools struggling with math (algebra I and the gateway), graduation rates were very low, attendance rates lower, etc...

it was very sad tuesday evening listening to the state continue its 100% take over of the district and tell the board it was going to force it and the district to use the data it has had at its finger tips for years but would never use...

if only people had listened and done what was right for the students years ago...

there was a time in this district when the results of ALL, yes ALL students were rising...not any more the results of all students are declining...not good...

CB: There were some School Board members who were targeted to not be reelected for pointing out the same information consistently over their tenure. Odd isn't it how business types don't want to use data? Scary would be a better word.

This is something of an aside, but I'm just wondering.

Seems to me that the Pearl Cohn Cluster kids got the biggest prize. They are the ones who get the windfall, with all kinds of promises for their schools, not Stratford or Maplewood or Hunters Lane clusters, etc. Not only that, they still get all the choices to still go to Hillwood, Bellevue Middle School, or Harpeth Valley Elementary if they want.

For those who live out in Bellevue (or anywhere else in Davidson County for that matter), how come we don't have the choice to send our kids to John Early? Then, our kids would also get the free pass to go to Hume-Fogg, and so get the prize of bypassing the lottery, since their chances have just been greatly reduced for a chance at that school under this plan?

By the way, I think the Board did the right thing, voting in favor of the plan that the Task Force worked on so diligently and in good faith over these months. While not a perfect plan, it is, at least, a step toward neighborhood schools, which is a good thing.

I think one of the next tasks the Board should undertake is eliminating the whole idea of automatic feeder schools into either Hume-Fogg or MLK. Every seat is earned by lottery. Every student has the same chance. No automatic slots for anybody.