by Dave Zornow
School might be out for summer, but a schoolyard fight at Nyack High School is kicking up lots of dirt. A group of parents is speaking out about a pilot program passed by the Board of Education which will curtail a long-standing policy letting students leave campus for lunch. Much like a freshman English assignment, you have to read between the lines to understand the true meaning of the story.
At the July 6 Nyack Board of Education meeting, the trustees voted to adopt a pilot program to limit open campus — the student privilege of leaving campus for lunch and study hall — to just juniors and seniors.
Last March, a committee of school faculty and staff and a community member was formed to evaluate school safety issues. Nyack High School principal Joe Spero told the board, “There were a number of people concerned about open campus as a safety issue.”
Safety — and limiting the open campus policy — is an important issue for new school trustee Dan Juechter. “Cuts are out of control,” said Juechter. “If kids’ job is to learn, how are we supposed to keep them in school? It’s effectively an open campus all day long,” he says.
Juechter says 46% of freshman and 42% of sophomores failed at least one course during the third marking period last year. Pointing to a University of Chicago study that correlates graduation with attendance, Juechter believes that limiting open campus will improve academic performance.
2009-10 School Board President Amy Applebaum thinks the current open campus policy should be maintained. “Open campus gives students a sense of independence,” she says. “It shows trust and gives a sense of responsibility. Applebaum adds that “open campus has been a Nyack tradition for more than 30 years.“
Juechter counters saying that among the ten high schools in Rockland County, only Nyack allows 9th through 11th graders off campus. Three schools (Nanuet, Pearl River and Tappan Zee) allow only seniors to leave. “The other six schools are closed for all four grades of high school,” Juechter adds.
Spero emphasizes that the safety of Nyack’s students is his main concern. “My focus and reason for reviewing the open campus policy is the safety of our students. We all know that there have been several tragic accidents involving young people in the county very recently.”
Parents who oppose the pilot program say they feel the board has violated the public’s trust by not taking input from the community before voting to close the campus for 9th and 10th graders. “The board made this decision without talking to the community,” says one parent. “They changed the policy without telling anyone how it would work and with no clear idea of what it will cost.”
The administration is studying the additional cost of adding security staff, surveillance cameras and two security booths to monitor student traffic during school hours.
Privately, parents and administrators concede that the real concern is about alleged drug use on and off campus. Although the problem is no worse in Nyack than at the average high school, it is a cause of concern. Parents are worried that the open campus debate and additional security expenditures will not address drug use. Skeptical students point out that there’s already drug abuse in school and the board’s action will force even more of it indoors, possibly exposing more teenagers to the activity.
Parents are also concerned that keeping kids in for lunch will not improve student performance as multiple factors affect academic performance. Skeptics of the proposed policy say they don’t believe closing the campus for freshmen will make a difference academically and they say the focus should be elsewhere — a point where sides agree. “Is closing the campus a magic elixir? No, it isn’t,” Juechter says.
Nyack’s Board of Education will hear from the public at its next scheduled meeting on August 24. High School Principal Joe Spero has scheduled a follow up session to meet with parents, students and community members on August 26 in the school’s cafeteria at 7p.
See also:
fingerprints – its not GOING to lunch thats the problem – its what they DO at lunch and where they go afterward that people are trying to address
looking forward to the meeting on August 24th at the administration offices
we should all be there – it affects us all – whether you are a student – a parent – or a taxpayer trying to negate liability so that your taxes dont go up when the district gets sued when a kid gets run over or kidnapped on one of these escapades- by the way I AM a masters degreed teacher – as well as a parent of a kid in district so I DO know
what is going on
okay Im on a roll – ONE more comment – you want to know WHY kids are failing in such numbers here it is – the Board of Regents has set up ridiculously impossible (and in my view abusive) standards for these kids – there is NO middle ground here – you either get a regents diploma -or an IEP diploma which entitles you to flip burgers – the high school is a reflection of the chaos that the Board of Regents is engendering in New York State and unless people go to the source – it will continue
here is the deal – if the parents want their kids to be able to leave the school – let them sign waivers saying that they hold the district harmless if the kids are harmed in anyway while being out there – ALSO let them sign waivers s aying that they have been appraised of the districts cut policy and if their kids violate it and flunk- THEY said it was okay – see – a compromise – the district is not held liable for the kids running around, the parents get to be heros for their kids- AND the kids get to do as they want – EVERYBODY wins
These comments range over all kinds of significant issues that only make clearer why such a vote should not have been called before adequate discussion had taken place. Those in favor of closing the campus (the meaning of which, btw, has not yet been defined at all) might yet be disappointed at the half-assed way it is going to be done. The HS principal on July 6 talked about doing it in phases, and (among many other points) about the importance of the whole school community’s “buying in” to it. Instead, what we have now is a lot of irritated people, and, going by the anecdotal evidence of the points of view of 9th and 10th grade students, a “policy” that will fail to address what it ostensibly is aimed to rectify. Leaving aside the questions of, for example, whether there is a correlation between an open campus and individuals failing a class, or whether closing the campus to young students who cannot drive while leaving it open for the older ones who can will affect safety, the heart of this discussion is whether the Board acted after appropriate and adequate input from the community. Those who already agree with the decision may feel it did, but they might have felt differently had the issue voted on been one on which they took the opposite point of view. When officials act badly it should not matter whether you agree with the outcome. I went to the July 6 meeting because I was interested to hear what the Principal would report from his committee, and without any definite opinion on whether the campus should be open or closed. It was stunning to see the way the Board acted given the cant about transparency and “community” we had been hearing in the months before the latest election. The questions of what exactly is meant by “closed campus” (e.g. what is the difference between that and a lockdown? What is the “campus”? How will we pay for the additional staff required and what will be cut to pay for these new expenses? Etc.) will probably come up on August 24, but we should also ask the Board what they propose doing to regain the trust of those in the community who were surprised by their action on July 6.
I would still like to see statistics and the report related to “46% of freshman and 42% of sophomores failed at least one course during the third marking period last year.”
There seems to be quite a bit of conflicting opinion on this, those opinions formed without the benefit of reviewing the data.
I just wanted to correct two impressions in the article:
I did not say that I think the current policy should necessarily be maintained. I believe that the committee should have had a chance to report on any issues they actually found, rather than just assuming that closing the campus for 9th and 10th graders will magically take care of some real issues. We’ve never heard what the actual safety concerns are.
Second, the High School principal did mention concerns, but he specifically recommended that the campus NOT be closed at this time because no one in the community had a chance to give input, the committee hasn’t finished their work, and the school was not prepared. The superintendent agreed with him.
It is outrageous for a board to take on the job of admistrators, especially when they have no plan.
I fail to see how going to lunch causes students to fail classes.
DZ—
The numbers that you refer to from the athletic elibility was only based on the current standards. The lower numbers reflected how many students failed 2 classes. All of these numbers can be requested under a FOIL request by anyone.
I also believe that the numbers are meaningful, the school should be in the business of educating the students. If a business shipped out products and 1 out of every 3 failed, their reputation would be damaged.
Dave,
I can’t speak to the numbers cited in the story, but as to Math and ELA numbers, and local vs. Regents diplomas, I’ve received spreadsheets from Gail Fleur and would be happy to share them with anyone interested. Gail can provide them through appropriate channels which will give them a “stamp” of authenticity.
I’ve been to many Board meetings where I’ve raised these issues and received “assurances” that the District will “look into it” or I’ve received outraged responses from Valencia Douglas denying the problem is real.
There are deniers in the District who either don’t believe or refuse to believe that a racial/ethnic achievement gap exists. I hope you are not among them.
Rick
Rick –
I have to raise an issue about the numbers to which you refer and that Dan has cited.
After speaking with several people inside the schools and connected to the schools while researching this article, no one was able to verify these numbers. I’ll go farther — most of the people to whom I spoke didn’t think these numbers were credible.
Part of the issue is that they these counts are only for the third quarter, which doesn’t tell you how students ended the year. The year-end two class failure estimate required to determine athletic eligibility is a lot lower casts some doubt on what has been cited.
These numbers might be right. As to whether or not they are meaningful is another issue.
All of the people who might be able to verify this stat are on vacation. I asked Dan to post a comment to address this question, but he referred me to Gail Fleur.
I’m hoping that someone on the board or with the administration can post something which will explain these numbers, put them in context or tell the community what plans there are to address this issue.
-dz
I applaud Dan Juechter’s efforts to try something new.
I’m tired of the “feel good” approach to managing the school district. There are some hard realities: (1) there is a major achievement gap between whites, blacks and hispanics in performance on NYS ELA and Math exams in all grades, especially in the middle school (and especially with the new tougher standards imposed this year); (2) Blacks and Hispanics are disproportionately given a “local” diploma upon graduattion (at a rate 3-4 times white students). When NYS does away with local diplomas in 2012, the District is going to have a lot of minority students headed for a fifth school year or a GED.
Maybe Dan can look at these numbers and get Valencia Douglas and the other administrators to: (1) admit the problem exists; (2) stop blaming the students; and (3) dedicate resources where they are needed.
Keep up the good work, Dan.
How about restricting driving and parking privileges to seniors only.
The high school bus along my route is empty, as most kids drive or are driven to school.
Or save money and recognize these buses are underutilized and cut them appropriately.
If it is correct that “46% of freshman and 42% of sophomores failed at least one course during the third marking period last year” in Nyack High School, something is direly wrong.
I would like to see the original data, or official report, on this.
If the freshman and sophomores have such a high rate of failure, one would expect that they would continue to have a similar rate of failure in their junior and senior years. The problems of a sophomore will likely not be cured by moving from 10th grade to 11th grade.
What are the failure rates for juniors and seniors?
If the failure rate is similar among freshman, sophomores, juniors and seniors, that would legislate for, instead of having an open campus where students leave during the day, having extra classes where students receive additional instruction.