Forgive me if I lose attention during the run up to the runoff, but trying to pick between The Construction Magnate and the Trinity Toll Road Cheerleader is like picking between a broken arm and a broken leg. (Which means I'll have to agree to disagree with Back Talk pal Mike Davis.)
Yesterday, Tom Leppert said the mayor didn't have the authority to tear down crime ridden apartment buildings, which is one of Ed Oakley's campaign pledges. No kidding. Just like the mayor doesn't have the authority to meddle with the Dallas schools? (A friend of mine, who works for the DISD and is a native Texan, noted that Leppert is obviously not from here. Otherwise, he would know that that the Independent in DISD is there to stop municipalities from interfering with the way the schools are run.)
Can I write in Marvin Crenshaw on June 16?
Jeff, more has to be done about education. This shrug our shoulders attitude about education has to stop. I love Lakewood and East Dallas spend a lot of time there. But not everyone is as fortunate to have public schools to send their kids to a Stonewall, Lee, or Zaragoza elementary, and then be able to go to a Long MS and to Woodrow.
If I want to live in Oak Cliff, why should I have to shell out $1,000s to private school for my kids? Maybe the Mayor can't swing the gavel at DISD board meetings and singlehandedly change policy, but more can and must be done. The status quo isn't acceptable.
Posted by: Michael Davis-Dallas Progress | Jun 01, 2007 at 07:58 AM
Just finished watching Leppert's video on improving education.
My interpretation of this message is that he's saying he will leverage those areas where he does have influence (economic development, city budgets, law enforcement) to benefit the education system. I'm pretty cynical, so I don't really believe anything any politician (or business leader for that matter) says. I think *he* earnestly believes what he's saying, and who knows, maybe he will be an asset to our education system.
Nevertheless, the bottom line is that our schools cannot improve without significantly more parental and community involvement. The reason the elementary schools in East Dallas do well is because they are swarming with involved parents (i.e. Lakewood Mommy Mafia). As for Long and Woodrow, I haven't made up my mind. My son just finished 6th grade at Long (no comment on how the district or school handled the transition) and I'm alarmed at how many 6th grade and 8th grade families (some of the most involved and outspoken advocates for neighborhood schools) are sending their children to private or magnent schools.
It's easy for us as parents to give lip service to the ideal of neighborhood schools, but it's our kids that have to deal with all the shortcomings of the current public school system. We will continue to be as involved as possible in our son's academic and extracurricular life; I'm certainly not leaving his future in the hands of the mayor OR the superintendent. Maybe what I see will turn out to be an anamoly instead of a trend. On the other hand, do I really want to risk my child's future for an ideal?
Posted by: Quentin Mendoza | Jun 01, 2007 at 10:33 AM
Just finished watching Leppert's video on improving education.
My interpretation of this message is that he's saying he will leverage those areas where he does have influence (economic development, city budgets, law enforcement) to benefit the education system. I'm pretty cynical, so I don't really believe anything any politician (or business leader for that matter) says. I think *he* earnestly believes what he's saying, and who knows, maybe he will be an asset to our education system.
Nevertheless, the bottom line is that our schools cannot improve without significantly more parental and community involvement. The reason the elementary schools in East Dallas do well is because they are swarming with involved parents (i.e. Lakewood Mommy Mafia). As for Long and Woodrow, I haven't made up my mind. My son just finished 6th grade at Long (no comment on how the district or school handled the transition) and I'm alarmed at how many 6th grade and 8th grade families (some of the most involved and outspoken advocates for neighborhood schools) are sending their children to private or magnent schools.
It's easy for us as parents to give lip service to the ideal of neighborhood schools, but it's our kids that have to deal with all the shortcomings of the current public school system. We will continue to be as involved as possible in our son's academic and extracurricular life; I'm certainly not leaving his future in the hands of the mayor OR the superintendent. Maybe what I see will turn out to be an anamoly instead of a trend. On the other hand, do I really want to risk my child's future for an ideal?
Posted by: Quentin Mendoza | Jun 01, 2007 at 10:33 AM