Show of support for the superintendent
by Paul Socolar on Jan 13 2010
A series of nine speakers at Wednesday's School Reform Commission came to the defense of Superintendent Arlene Ackerman, praising her Imagine 2014 agenda, while members of a group of parents raised signs saying, "We support our superintendent," and "Dr. Ackerman's way or no way!"
The speakers directly and indirectly alluded to the fact that the superintendent has come under criticism recently, particularly for her handling of the recent violence at South Philadelphia High School.
Four of the speakers and a half dozen sign-holders in the small crowd at the meeting were from one of the District's newer advocacy groups - Parent Power, a group organized in 2009 and led by President Sylvia Simms.
"Dr. Ackerman made parents feel welcome," said parent Anna Figueroa of FitzSimons Home and School Association, the first of the Parent Power speakers. "She lets parents go into the classroom to visit and get more education." Figueroa had high praise for the District's Parent University initiative.
Another Parent Power speaker, Lea School parent Hydiya Brown, said afterward that she came out to support the superintendent because "she has built a bridge between parents and the school - she's making it a lot more accessible." In her testimony to the SRC, Brown said that now "parent contact is up close and personal.... Parents are equal partners."
One elected official, State Rep. Tony Payton, was also there to back up Ackerman and Imagine 2014. "I am in full support of what you're trying to do and I'll continue to be a voice in support of additional resources for the District," he said in his testimony.
Others in the group of speakers praising the superintendent and urging her to persist included Dorothy Gaines of Mothers in Charge, Dwayne Ming of P.O.W.E.R., Kenneth Salaam of Freedom Fighters, and Venard Johnson of the Southeast Pennsylvania Network for Family Health, Education and Welfare.
Comments (13)
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 01/13/2010 - 20:42.
Just like Arlene's dog and pony shows out in San Francisco. How can anyone take the Imagine 2014 agenda seriously since it's still vague at best? This sounds like nothing more than another of Ack-Ack's orchestrated pat on her backs. What dolt would hold up a sign that said, "Dr. Ackerman's way or now way"? Parents have routinely been invited to come into the classrooms throughout Philadelphia. It's been getting them to show up that has been the problem, including at report card time. Ackerman is using this as more anti-teacher propaganda. She wants to act like she is the only one that cares for parents. A new low.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 01/13/2010 - 21:50.
People should really read this. It is an excellent analysis of why Ackerman and SDP have been (rightly) criticized over the events at South Philly High and the quotes from both Principal LaGreta Brown and Dr. Ackerman are awful. "The newspaper is full of lies?" Really?
http://www.phlmetropolis.com/2010/01/a-district-in-denial.php
Submitted by anonyous (not verified) on Wed, 01/13/2010 - 21:57.
Man am I disappointed in Tony Payton
Submitted by MsChips (not verified) on Thu, 01/14/2010 - 00:57.
Well, the new flacks have been busy. And...wait a minute...Fitzsimons has a H&S????
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 01/18/2010 - 06:36.
If it's worth anything, South Philadelphia was ranked last year as the second most violent high school in the city in terms of assaults against students - ranked second only to FitzSimons. (http://www.philly.com/philly/education/79596267.html)
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 01/14/2010 - 02:17.
What is the SRC doing during this meeting? When an SRC meeting becomes an exercise in posturing by desperate PR folks, then what means of control are the commissioners exercising, or is this what SRC meetings have become now. And with signs like "Ackerman's way or no way" - what kind of independent parent group holds a sign like that? With me or against me - that is a pathetic way to govern. No wonder only six parent showed up.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 01/14/2010 - 10:16.
What is the SRC doing? Is this what SRC meetings are reduced to? Some media reports mention that the student ambassadors feel like their school work is suffering. So why is the School continuing to take them out of school time, providing transportation and chaperones, if they need to be in school?
Is Parent University a District program? Is this how District resources are used to grow parent leaders? What kind of independent parent holds up a sign that says "It's Dr. Ackerman's way or no way!"
I thought this story couldn't get any worse, but with perfectly well-behaved kids being manipulated as victims and district resources used for this kind of p.r. posturing, it's just appalling.
Submitted by hs teacher (not verified) on Thu, 01/14/2010 - 21:20.
well at least we know how those thousands of dollars on PR are being spent...more SPIN, SPIN, SPIN.
This is laughable at best! Any fool can see that this is completely orchestrated. Sorry Ackerman, we know your tactics. This is just lofe San Fran
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 01/15/2010 - 13:13.
Isn't this type of PR typical of authoritarian, corrupt regimes...? Sugar-coating things when events are going on at Southern, Olney...and nothing/little is done...
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 01/15/2010 - 17:49.
I would agree that what occurred at the SRC meeting on Wed. was a inappropriate at best and manipulative at worst. After the parade of Ackerman support ( I think there is a rule about only 6 speakers on the same subject) Ms. Brown and an entourage of students walked in. Of the four students in attendance, two of them successfully spoke. A third student had prepared testimony but was not called up to the podium. Ms. Brown gestured to CEO Ackerman that there was another speaker but the session closed before any further testimony could be delivered. Some of the student's testimony can be seen here http://www.philly.com/philly/opinion/81650982.html, also linked on thenotebook blog. The purpose of the testimony was to downplay the December 3rd attack on Asian-American students and its coverage in the press. The students voiced their concern over the unfair portrayal of the school, their principal, and CEO Ackerman by them (meaning "the media"). Each testimony praised the family atmosphere they felt at the school and what a great job Ms. Brown is doing compared to the last two principals at Southern. The testimony did not seem genuine to me. How anyone would view any reports that have been written about the school as negative to the entire school population I don't know. Clearly there are students at Southern who do not feel like they are in a family atmosphere, and they have told us so. What really bothered me about the proceedings on Wed. was that it seemed these students voices were being used for the purpose of the adult leadership. We have heard from CEO Ackerman a few times on how she views the events. We have not heard very much at all Ms. Brown. I would hope that when an adult in the district wants a certain viewpoint heard, they use themselves as the messenger and not their students.
Submitted by Philly HS Teacher (not verified) on Sat, 01/16/2010 - 03:35.
Does anyone know if the parents of the students from Southern used to prop up Ms. Brown and Dr. Ackerman sanctioned their participation? The more Ackerman, with her surrogate Brown, try to spin the situation at Southern in their favor, the more they bury truth.
Submitted by Helen Gym on Sat, 01/16/2010 - 11:21.
Thanks for posting this account. It was surprising to read that one of the student ambassadors was complaining about her concerns that her attendance at numerous press conferences was taking time away from her schoolwork. I find it very disturbing that more than 6 weeks after the incident, Principal LaGreta Brown continues to provide chaperones and transportation for students who hadn't planned to be at this SRC meeting and felt they were hurting academically because of it. At the same time, Principal Brown still willfully excludes the voices of Asian immigrant students who boycotted the school. Furthermore, as Principal Brown continues to mentor her student ambassadors, I'm saddened that she would encourage this reaction by young people - who were neither victims nor perpetrators - toward the suffering of their fellow classmates. I would hope that a warm heart and an open ear would be the lessons learned from December 3rd rather than terming the on-going anti-Asian violence at the school an "occasion scuffle" that's been "overblown."
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 01/17/2010 - 14:37.
I'm saddened that the student ambassadors who seem to genuinely love their school have been at the very least used, if not exploited by Principal Lagreta Brown. How will this shape who they become? When they are older and look back on this, what will they think and feel about their role in all of this? It is unethical that they have been used as the mouthpiece of Lagreta Brown Did she ever consider how using these students will effect them in the future? Did she ever consider them, or any other student in that school as living, breathing, feeling human beings who are just at the start of their lives? At first I thought she was callous toward the Asian population; now I see she is callous toward all.
Post new comment