EDUCATION ISSUES — AN IMPOTENT SCHOOL BOARD

In response to the Monday article, “Campuses feel housing crunch,” I need to ask the members of the Clark County School Board if they understand their responsibility to the students of the nation’s fifth-largest school district.

First, they spend untold time and resources visiting two rural elementary schools that house a total of 20 children. Their mission was to close these schools to save money for the district. When the vote on the issue was held, they decided to postpone the vote for one year.

These 20 students represent a tiny share of the 313,000 students in the school district. Yet the board allowed the parents of these students to make a decision that negatively impacts the entire student population.

Now it seems the board is willing to let the population of Coronado High School reach 3,500 students because some parents are opposed to rezoning their children to Liberty High School.

My son attended Silverado High School from 1999 to 2001. Silverado had 3,500 students then. As a junior, he was rezoned to Coronado. He did not want to go to a new school, but the School Board made the tough decision to reduce the number of students at Silverado. My son adjusted and made new friends.

Today, my daughter attends Liberty High School, after attending Del Webb Middle School. Many of her friends from Del Webb attend Coronado. My daughter loves Liberty and is able to enjoy the school because it is not overcrowded. Although some perceive Liberty as a second-tier school to Coronado, that perception is false.

I do not understand why the School Board would allow one high school to be 500 students over capacity, while another, five miles away, is 700 students under capacity. Has anyone considered the health, fire and safety issues of 3,500 teenagers under one roof?

I do not understand why parents would want their children to attend a school that is so crowded. Teachers have more discipline problems when too many teenagers are in one classroom. I do not care how well-behaved a parent believes their child is, teenagers are a difficult group to control.

I do not understand why we elected members to the Clark County School Board who cannot make the tough decisions necessary to properly educate the students in the nation’s fifth-largest school district.

Terri A. Jones

LAS VEGAS

Sink or swim

To the editor:

School construction bond money for a swimming pool (Tuesday Review-Journal)?

Are all of the school improvements and repairs that were supposed to be funded by the bond done? Are all of our schools in tip-top condition? No, they are not. But money for sports is there?

I have a child at the Southeast Career Technical Academy (formally Vo-Tech). Several years ago, the restaurant was closed due to structural support weakening. The restaurant is part of the culinary program. Recently, the counselors’ offices were closed, as well as the cafeteria restrooms due to sewer gas leaks, and I heard that the welding class has no argon gas.

This school has one of the highest graduation rates despite all of this and more. I guess swimming is more important than a fine high school like SECTA.

Caren Levenson

HENDERSON

Administrative waste

To the editor:

School Board President Terri Janison made a public comment at the Feb. 7 education rally that has riled me. In the Review-Journal’s Feb. 8 report by James Haug, Mrs. Janison bemoans the fact the Clark County School District was initially promised $179 million in federal aid as part of the stimulus package but stood to lose it as part of House-Senate negotiations.

The Clark County School Board and the district’s administration have received and wasted many billions of dollars in state and federal funds for education over the past decade. The money received has been squandered on the hiring of extensive numbers of administrators, consultants, supervisors, mentors and other superfluous personnel to fill offices on Flamingo Road and Sahara Avenue.

For the past few years, this district has faced a dramatic shortage of teachers in specific, vital fields of math, science, special education and technology education. There are always ample funds for administrative positions and the hiring of an independent district police force.

Why should taxpayers continue to foot the bill for continuing outrageous and irresponsible waste of tax dollars in this district? Why is the district continuing to enrich administrators? Why is the district seeking teachers in foreign countries when it is a simple matter of upgrading the teacher pay scale to attract and retain the very best teachers in this district? Why are our students without ample textbooks, classroom supplies and other vital materials while administrators occupy more and more office positions in this district?

I say enough is enough. It is time to stop the waste of our tax resources and to demand strict accounting of every single dollar spent on education by this district.

Can you imagine how they would waste another $179 million from Washington, D.C.?

Virgil A. Sestini

LAS VEGAS

School skippers

To the editor:

If the Clark County School Board and district administrators are serious about improving academic achievement, then the district’s attendance policy must change. Currently, students are allowed 10 unexcused absences per semester without any repercussions. This is 11 percent of the academic year, or one day every two weeks, a student can be absent without an excuse. This does not include the seemingly unlimited number of days they can be absent with an excuse.

Teachers are allowed 15 sick days per school year with an excuse. What do district officials think this policy is telling students about their perceived emphasis on attendance?

How many workers could miss one day every two weeks without an excuse or any repercussions? How many employers would tolerate an employee doing such? This district policy is catastrophic to academic achievement. What “real world” does the school district think this attendance policy is preparing students for?

I propose students be allowed zero unexcused absences. If they are absent from a class, they must turn in a valid excuse within three days of returning. Failure to do so would result in a mandatory parent conference and detention. Subsequent unexcused absences would be followed by progressive discipline, ending in placement at a behavior school and potential referral to child protection services.

If parents can’t, or won’t, get their child to school, then they are endangering their welfare.

I can provide the best lessons, the most motivation and the highest level of rigor and relevance. All of these efforts will only have an impact if the student is present. When 25 percent of my students are absent from a class, how can I, or anybody else, expect 100 percent achievement?

As long as this policy remains in place, district officials will continue sending the message that attendance is optional. The only thing this policy guarantees is truancy.

Changing it will cost nothing. It will increase achievement and attendance at every school. Failure to do so tells me, and every other teacher, that this district has priorities which trump attendance, education, and achievement.

Travis Bowker

LAS VEGAS