Deciding the Future

Tuesday, April 25, 1995

Today was the big day. The staff met as a whole to go over the new proposed schedule. Before the meeting, many of the Leadership Team seemed to be running scared. What if the staff revolted? What if the staff gave a collected "thumbs down"? No one on the Team wanted to give the d.o. that kind of vindication. Yet, the Team was loath to try to cram any schedule down the throats of the staff.

During fourth period, when I was attempting to find out if I could load my copy of a software program onto a computer lab computer, so that my students could put together an electronic portfolio for their final senior projects, I ran into Aimee, who was struggling to put together a flyer for the meeting. I put my stuff aside to give her a hand, veritable technophobe that she is. For the proposed schedule, the flyer put forth the Pluses (90-minute blocks, semester schedule, continuity, fewer classes per day, fewer classes missed for activities, students/staff remain on campus later, fewer students per class ["Will District support us for advising that students take only six (6) classes?"], and more sections available [possibly reducing class size]), the Minuses (not conducive to production-oriented and SPED classes, teach one (1) extra class, fewer Homework days" for students, and some flexibility lost for students), and the Interesting points (forces students to stay on-track for graduation [no more checking out of classes and saying, "I can make it up next term"], and C.H.S. students receive the same opportunities as all other PVUHSD students). At the bottom of the sheet was a tear-off survey, asking the staff member to choose either the traditional, six-period day or some variation of the 90-minute block schedule. Above the tear-off portion was the disclaimer: "This survey is NOT binding... it is merely an information-gathering tool so that we can Discern what direction the staff wishes to pursue." A good piece of propaganda: More Pluses than Minuses, more Minuses than those pesky Interestings. A non-vote vote, yet one that could be referenced if the vote was overwhelmingly positive. Very good.

We were on a rally schedule today, so that staff could attend the meeting on the school’s time, not their own (There is Power in a Union, again), so at quarter-till-two the Library was full, with only a handful of staff absent. Joan Grey introduced the meeting, telling us of administrative minutiae and the probability that the WASC accreditation will be released in the next week or so. We will, she tells us, need to keep a good public face on, no matter how bad the report may be. The press, no doubt, will pounce on a negative report, and they may attempt to interview teachers. Thus, no talking bad about "the old lady," as Grey refers to Chumash. "She"’s treated us well, our fearless leader notes, and we must treat her well in return. Yeah, right. This is a veiled reference and reprimand to those teachers who responded with interviews for the change-of-schedule stories in the papers. It seems Grey is her own little preemptive-strike spin doctor.

Then the Leadership Team takes over. Lori gives an overview of where the Team has been and where it’s going, a recap of the meetings of the past month. Bob then takes over, to show the staff the constraints under which any rescheduling takes place—-the Board wants continuity and no early leaving; the State demands a minimum number of instructional minutes per day and per year; and our contract dictates the number of student contacts and the number of preps we can have as teachers. Any reform of our teaching day must work within the prescriptions of those three entities.

Following Bob is Andrew Baird, a young science teacher, newly elected to the Leadership Team (and herein lies a potential problem. Some teachers—-mostly old-timers and OF’s—-have been grumbling lately that there should be more "seasoned" and experienced teachers on the Team. [Then why the hell didn’t they run?]). Soft-spoken yet strong, Andrew leads the introduction of the proposed schedule as Aimee hands out her flyer. He discusses the schedule then begins to go over the PMI (Plus/Minus/ Interesting). If the Team was expecting that this would be the moment at which they would lose some of the control of the meeting, they were right. Staff begin kicking in PMI’s of their own. During this longest portion of the nearly hour and a half meeting, Grey chimes in with her view of the proposed schedule; while she is supportive of her staff’s efforts to retain aspects of the 90-minute blocks, it is becoming increasingly obvious that she is a staunch proponent of the traditional six-period day. And as she vents her personal view, others take her "lead"—-not all proposing a return to six, but it seems that half the faculty is ready to discuss how the new proposal impacts their individual program—-as opposed to the student body as a whole. And it goes on and drags on.

Finally, Andrew and Aimee push into the survey—-but not before one teacher asks what kind of majority the Leadership Team is looking for the continue its efforts in restructuring. This is obviously something that the Team hadn’t fully discussed. They seem at a loss for numbers, for an answer. Bob says that anything close to fifty-fifty would tell him-—personally—-that it’s not worth looking into alternate schedules anymore; he says he would be more comfortable with something around seventy-five or eighty percent. This is lower than the faculty buy-in of ninety-two percent that accompanied the original shift to the block schedule six years ago, but no one believes that kind of consensus is possible now (not without Frankie as a galvanizing force). The surveys are collected.

And counted quickly. Sixty-six for the 90-minute blocks; twenty-seven for a return to the traditional six-period day. Seventy percent. A strong majority, but no landslide, no overwhelming mandate, no real consensus. But there are thirteen missing teachers and a handful of other school staff who are not there to vote. This could bring the percentage up, the Team hopefully proposes. Some members are happy with the seventy percent, others clearly are not.

Others of the Team are clearly ambivalent. They had expected harder or at least more vocal—-if not numerically greater—-opposition. The lack of real fight in the traditionalists is nearly as disconcerting as the lack of rah-rah enthusiasm in those for the proposal. It all seems rather anticlimactic.

So they’ve won this vote. But the war? Who knows. And what will happen tomorrow night at the Board meeting when a group of parents intend to march from C.H.S. to the d.o.? No one is sure of anything.

Let alone the future.