The situation with Elliott Elementary Principal De Ann Currin is frustrating. If you aren't aware, the basics are this: Elliott is classified as a "persistently low-achieving school" by the feds and Nebraska. In order to receive a big chunk of grant money -- the minimum amount is $1.5 million over three years -- LPS has to make one of three big changes. The least intrusive of those changes, and the one LPS will choose, is to get rid of the principal. So Ms. Currin will be reassigned.
The trouble is that nobody has a beef with Ms. Currin. She is being universally praised as a tremendous asset at Elliott. For example, despite a 40% mobility rate, Elliott's reading and math scores are in the 65th percentile. In other words, according to No Child Left Behind the 65th percentile is "low-achieving".
What a strange system we have where an excellent principal at a good -- but challenged -- school has to leave her post as a condition for receiving a grant. And consider that other schools around the country with far worse conditions and inferior leadership will not receive this grant money.
It's difficult to turn down $1.5 million. Plenty of folks around Lincoln are saying LPS should do just that. Ms. Currin isn't one of them; she is leaving "voluntarily" so the school can benefit from the new resources it will receive. Lots of people think a little cash isn't enough to replace great leadership.
What do you think about all of this? Does the system make sense to anybody? Should LPS take the cash?
Comments
See what your friends and neighbors have to say about this.
I do think it should be clarified here that she’s not been asked to leave the system, and that she will still be the principal at an elementary school, albeit a different school (Sheridan).
Therefore, she’s still in our school system at the same level and LPS will get $1.5 million dollars.
While I do think it is unfortunate that the move has been forced upon her, perhaps this is a scenario like with football coaches, where every now and then (even though it may be unpleasant) a change of scenery might be good. Maybe someone else can step up and be a positive influence at Elliot, and she can be a positive influence at Sheridan.
I’m not going to debate the “No Child Left Behind” law, as I find it stupid, but the reality is, it’s the law.
The reality is that in order to further improve the educational experience for the kids at Elliott, more resources are needed. Resources cost money. LPS is already short funded. The comment by Dr. Moore
Dr. Currin is a tremendous asset to LPS, and the students and staff at Elliot will indeed miss her tremendously - on a personal level. However, her own assessment of the situation is correct in that the millions in Federal dollars will benefit the students at Elliot in many ways and do things that she could not have on her own, without that money.
The good news is that LPS has a great number of incredibly talented building administrators, any one of whom could step into Elliot and carry the baton. Certainly Jadi Miller fits that profile, and I know for a fact that her Elliot community feels the same way about losing her.
Ultimately, Sheridan will benefit from her personal experiences and Elliot will benefit from the Federal dollars. Good trade.
Here’s the part that is confusing me - as frustrating as this situation is, and as much as I think it is stupid that she has to leave Elliot, in a conservative state like Nebraska I am surprised at the outrage this is being met with. Are we really asking the Federal government to hand out millions of dollars “willy-nilly?” Shouldn’t they have some stipulations and expectations of basic changes before applying new money to an old problem? I happen to disagree 50% with Dr. Moore’s statement. It is “blatant use of Federal power.” However, to say it is “unwarranted” is only true in this particular situation at Elliot. Generally speaking, there is probably good cause to take one of the steps outlined by the Feds. It all reminds me of a teenager (LPS) who wants the keys to the family car (federal $$) but complains when the parents require them to be home by 10PM.
I guess I know the answer. Elliot’s neighborhood is one of the most economically depressed areas in the most liberal city in Nebraska. All politics are LOCAL.
** I meant to say that Jadi Miller was coming from her EVERETT community.
The law is what it is, and always has been. It’s no secret. This is what happens when people vote or call their representative to vote on things ‘for the children’ without knowing what it actually is.
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2010-03-22/news/ct-oped-0321-chapman-20100322_1_john-chubb-math-education-secretary-arne-duncan
This pretty much sums up my thoughts on NCLB, and my reply to why I’m so outraged.
The procedures of NCLB don’t work. It’s expensive and there aren’t funds there to support it, and it’s doing a huge disservice to our children academically by forcing out physical education, art and music classes and recesses.
I’m all for setting standards for schools to meet. But I’m a realist… if you want standards, they have to be obtainable.
Share your thoughts with the community.
Commenting is no longer permitted on this post.