Emery at Bottom of Urban School Growth
Emeryville children get only 3.8 years worth of education for 5 years of schooling
Alarming New Stanford Study: Bottom 6% Nationwide
Emeryville children get only 3.8 years worth of education for 5 years of schooling
Alarming New Stanford Study: Bottom 6% Nationwide
Emery Unified School District is revealed to be dead last among Bay Area school districts in academic growth over a five year period and in the lowest 6% of all school districts in that metric nationwide according to a new study conducted by education researchers at Stanford University. It's another bombshell for beleaguered little Emery Unified, still reeling from a terrible showing on the State 'school climate index' and revelations that the district's falling test scores have dramatically dropped Emery's ranking among rival districts as revealed in October. The new study strongly hints that Emery's poor school climate can account for the plunging academic performance.
The data shows Emery starting out low and then moving lower over five years, counter to what would be expected according to a December 5th New York Times story on the Stanford study. Emery represents a low performing outlier cohort in a story that highlights how urban school districts with high rates of poverty can overcome that seemingly debilitating existential condition and produce high rates of growth over time, commonly higher than affluent suburban districts. Unfortunately, the Stanford data proves Emery goes the opposite direction and serves to reinforce negative stereotypes about under performing districts the Times story seeks to disprove. However the story and data also show how a district such as Emery could turn things around, given better leadership.
Notably, Ravenswood Unified School District in East Palo Alto, the only district with lower test scores than Emery in the Bay Area shows an impressive 4.5 years growth on the five year chart and owing to the fact that testing occurs before the end of the school year, that district is shown to be growing at a good rate, right on par with expectations independent of its high enrollment of disadvantaged students. Emery's low test scores combined with it's negative growth proves it lags far behind Ravenswood when viewed holistically and therefore it can be fairly surmised to be the worst school district in the entire Bay Area.
It has been long debated whether test scores measure school quality or poverty. The better measure now being offered by Stanford is one that lists students’ growth rates. This new database looks not at how students do on a single test but how much growth they achieve over time; five years.
This new measure does not look at where kids start but at where they finish. This measure gives the advantage to schools that serve students that start out below average, as they have the most room for growth. And that makes Emery's sharp move down from a low start even more alarming, but conversely, with a change in school climate, more hopeful.
The Times story focuses on Chicago Unified, a similar albeit larger urban school district to Emery with declining enrollment, three in four students coming from low income homes and a tight budget. And yet Chicago and many other urban districts large and small buck conventional wisdom and their students achieve high growth over time, sometimes leaving rich white suburban districts in the dust, at least as far as growth is concerned. The study clearly shows the possibility of "separating socioeconomics from what's actually happening in the schools" as the Times story relates.
The data from Stanford doesn't purport to prove what dynamics result in the high growth of these urban school districts however the Times story does indicate at Chicago and other high growth districts, school 'climate' is critical. It's the culture of student connectedness to their schools that provides the space for academic growth. As one Chicago principal put it, despite grinding poverty at home for these students and all the dysfunction that goes along with it, at school her students feel "this is where I belong". Contrasting with Emery, where student alienation is near total; the 'school climate' California Department of Education study showing Emery ranking in the bottom 1% on student/school connectivity. That study showed how retaining veteran teachers is critically important for helping student connectivity, and at a 37% teacher loss, Emery ranks at the worst of all school districts in the Bay Area. Emery's worst in the Bay Area teacher retention ranking is a result of Schools Superintendent John Rubio, a three year employee at the district and his shake-the-district-to-its-core, near pogrom on educators.
 |
| Emery: at the Bottom of Bay Area Districts
Emery children shockingly only receive 3.8 years worth of education for five years of schooling. One would expect an average student to make five years of growth after five years. The data identifies 4.8 years as the median growth level, which is consistent with expectations as testing usually occurs three to four months prior to the end of the year.
|
 |
| From the Stanford Study (Emeryville's median income is $74k according to the Census Bureau) |
I want to see the school board try to squirm out of this one. You keep reporting and they keep attacking you. That's how we know the Tattler is doing good work. Your newest story is really bad for them. And bad for the children too. Let's see who is still seated come next election.
ReplyDeleteThey do seem none too fond of the Tattler.
DeleteLet's see indeed!
Absolutely unacceptable. If we can't agree on Whose God has the bigger genitals or who's bougie ass community actually has some substance or not then let's all agree to take care of our children and in order to do that we have to remove this board and the superintendent from their seats. Those of us parents who care about the education that our children get need to pull together in order to effect real change. As long as I'm simply worried about my kid and to hell with all of the others, which is the attitude that many parents have and no wonder if some of these children at the school have such crappy attitudes. Their attitudes reflect their clearance crappy dispositions. And I'm speaking of the more affluent and some of the not so affluent parents because when it comes to stupidity your economic bracket has nothing to do with it. Just like your intelligence isn't measured by the degree pass. Check the studies, stop screwing around your children's lives and if we're going to try to salvage this school and drive up the test scores then let's begin doing so by showing up at these board meetings is. Selling cookies and fundraisers are obviously not helping the school one bit so I beg your parents with your heads in the sand to pull them out and look at the big picture.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that the School Board is ultimately responsible because they're the ones who hire and keep the Superintendent. And the Superintendent is a failure. So Emeryville voters need to use their franchise to correct this problem if the School Board won't. So far the School Board collectively is hanging together with Mr Rubio. The voters need to separate out who is supporting the Superintendent and who isn't. There is a culture at the Emery School Board. That culture is dysfunctional and needs to be broken up. The very minimum a school board needs to do is be able to identify the problem so that a cure can be instituted. The majority of this school board can't even see what the problem is. They need to go.
DeleteThis is a nice report on the state of things, but I'm curious as to how we got here. The very end drops a huge hint - John Rubio's "near pogrom on educators". I'm surprised that the article didn't go into what exactly this means. I'd like to know.
ReplyDeleteSuperintendent Rubio's near pogrom on educators is the historic and unprecedented agenda he has against teachers. Since he has been at Emery, Mr Rubio has been busy firing and chasing out teachers. The link in the story above highlights the 37% rate of teacher attrition, by far the worst record on retention in the Bay Area.
DeleteThe New York Times story notes school climate is central to how poverty stricken urban school districts can achieve high growth. Students need to feel they belong and are cared for at their school. This is precisely what Emery has not been providing for the students. The link in the story on school climate tell the story; the Department of Education says Emery is in the bottom 1% of schools in the State on this score. Emery isn't making kids feel safe and cared for. Our kids don't feel like they 'belong' at Emery.
The other thing of note in that story is teacher retention, the State of California notes teacher retention is part of a school climate and is critical for education of children.
Mr Rubio has been getting rid of teachers at a prodigious rate these last three and a half years since he's been at the helm. He says it's how to 'turn Emery around' and so presumably the school climate index and the test scores should reflect that. Three and a half years later, we're still waiting.
What the real result has been is the opposite: Emery is fading rapidly over the last three and a half years, our children the ones paying the price. The Superintendent is responsible for this epic failure. He's responsible because he is the head administrator and because his policies are strongly implicated in bringing this district down.
Did you look at the dates and methodology on the Stanford Study? I'm guessing based on your conclusions that you didn't.
ReplyDeleteThe study looks at the period from the 2008-2009 school year to the 2014-2015 school year. John Rubio's first school year was 2014-2015 and presumably he spent most of that year observing. He probably didn't begin having a significant impact (positive or negative) until 2015-2016, the year after the study concluded. And for 4 of the 5 years the study covered, he wasn't even in the district.
The data you're citing, to the extent that it's meaningful, is an indictment of the prior administration, not the current one. And, as you point out, the results are terrible. This might suggest wholesale changes were needed including the replacement of teachers. The complaint, instead of being why he is replacing teachers, should be why he didn't do it sooner.
That said, I'd look with some skepticism on this study with respect to a small school district like EUSD. The methodology doesn't make sense in that context.
They looked at one cohort of students over 5 years. They looked at one class (the kids who were in 4th grade in Spring 2009) which, in EUSD, I believe would mean less than 40 students. A large percentage of these kids would have changed schools over that 5 year period, and the trend has been that parents who can afford to leave exit the system over time.
Because this looks at just one class, the data also doesn't tell us anything about the school district generally. One bad teacher in a single grade or the exit of 5-15 good students of the 40 who were replaced by 5 weaker students would give you the same result.
It might make sense to run these studies by someone or get a response from the school district before publishing your conclusions. It would prevent you from accidentally misleading your audience.
To answer your first question, of course yes I did look at the dates and methodology of the Stanford study. The difference between you and I are revealed in the different conclusions reached. There is no misleading in my story; obviously the current superintendent, whom I note has been in power for three years isn’t responsible for the dysfunction revealed in a five year long study. But the current superintendent has taken a bad school district and made it worse, much worse. That’s what the story has shown and will be further explored in an upcoming Tattler story that takes what Mr Rubio says at face value asks the question, is there any way to know whether this or any school superintendent is doing a good job? To cut to the chase, the answer is of course , yes there is a way to know and when those universally recognized and applied metrics are used, Mr Rubio is shown to be a terrible administrator. Further, terrible administrators, especially those at the very top, lead to bad educational outcomes. Further still, when bad administrators ensconced in power such as Rubio use his modus operandi, the results for educational prospects are very bad indeed.
DeleteWhat Mr Rubio has done to drive a bad school district down further is among other things, his obsession to drive teachers out. This he has done to a much greater extant than his predecessor. He started on this track immediately after being hired unlike how you characterize it. And most of the teachers he has driven off have been his own hires. The superintendent likes to think all the churn in teachers he’s promulgating has no effect on the students but academic studies show otherwise.
You’ll note I inform the readers that the Stanford study isn’t explicit in reasons as to why some urban school districts are able to show growth over five years vs others such as Emery that don’t. I do quote the New York Times story that concludes school climate as a contributor, and school climate, like teacher retention, are both metrics that has gotten much worse under Mr Rubio. So again, while Mr Rubio, a three year employee can’t be held 100% responsible for what a five year study shows, we know that he has driven the school district down during his three years; from bad to worse. Your conclusion seems to be there’s no way we can know if a superintendent is doing a good job. So given that, what are to do? Fold up the tent and go home?
The answer to that is NO, we continue to expect good results for all our public school efforts and we continue to hold those in power responsible. The answer is not to hide bad or embarrassing numbers that reflect poorly on the Superintendent as he is insisting be done (part of the future Tatter story alluded to above). In service to that effort of his, Mr Rubio refuses to answer to Tattler stories. He feels he doesn’t owe the citizens an answer to these kinds of questions and other than occasionally lashing out at the Tattler, he is taking refuge in the comfort of his three School Board enablers, continuing on in his job at Emery. The Tattler would be misleading its readers if it reported that all these studies that show how bad Emery has become, cannot be taken as having any real value, as you hint if not outright claim. Actually, it’s quite easy to identify bad leadership in school districts (or other entities). The hard part is the political part, removing the leadership, ensconced as it usually is by a protective cocoon.
The problem is that you don't seem to have any data that things have gotten notably worse in the last 3 years, though you keep writing headlines that suggest this is the case.
DeleteThe data suggests only that the wheels were falling off until about 3 years ago. Then, while things haven't gotten noticeably better, they stopped getting noticeably worse. The plane is no longer crashing into the ground as it was, but is instead flying level. The pilot gets some credit for that.
On Oct 24, you published this headline: "ECCL Ineffective in Raising Student Enrollment: Drop Continues" And then showed charts that indicated the drop in enrollment had gone from 815 in 2008 to 695 in 2015 and then from 2015 to 2018 remained essentially level going from 695 to 692 over 3 years, the BEST 3 year period in the past decade by far.
You did the same with the test scores. Your headline on October 8: "Emery Schools Drop Precipitously: Now Below Oakland Unified: Emery Ranks Last in East Bay"
But the data for the test scores showed flat results compared to the downward trend before Rubio arrived:
English Language Arts/Literacy: 2015 / 2017
Standard not met: 49% / 49%
Standard nearly met: 27% / 28%
Standard met: 18% / 17%
Standard exceeded: 16% / 16%
Mathematics: 2015 / 2017
Standard not met: 50% / 49%
Standard nearly met: 26% / 29%
Standard met: 17% / 15%
Standard exceeded: 7% / 8%
Now you give this headline:
"Emery Schools Worst in Bay Area: Falling Behind"
And then in the comments, you say "Emery is fading rapidly over the last three and a half years, our children the ones paying the price." But again, the data doesn't show this. You say you researched the methodology and dates on the Stanford study but then oddly omitted mentioning the most important point: the study covered the 4 years before Rubio was superintendent.
But, presenting data as though Rubio is responsible for the mess EUSD was in three years ago doesn't help anyone. Given how badly things were going, I don't see any way you can justify keeping the same group of educators. And if the test scores are flat rather than declining, if the exodus has stopped, then he's apparently made an improvement, but until the numbers are going up, he should keep making changes.
Your argument style, much in vogue in Washington, amounts essentially to always staying on offense, never conceding even the smallest point and use time elapsed to your favor by attempting to restart the clock on lost points. While this sort of attack may have flummoxed Democrats in DC, here that won't work. To new readers that haven't read our previous tete a tetes, I'l just mention the headlines you find objectionable:
DeleteECCL Enrollment Drop Continues- accurate (and poignant because we were sold a huge rise in enrollment with the $200 million ECCL)
Emery Schools Drop Precipitously, Now Below Oakland- accurate
Emery Schools Worse in the Bay Area- accurate, this new data proves it.
See the problem is the Emery School District is a public entity...it operates with public money. And that means it's accountable to the public. You maybe want to make points about superlatives and not hold the schools here to account but that's not what we're interested in. We're going to continue to demand and expect excellence. You, apparently feel comfortable making excuses for a broken public agency. To the extent that you appear to hold anyone to account, you try to serve that up to the lowest level employee. That's not only not cogent and ineffective, it represents a warped worldview that we don't share.
Thank you anonymous for injecting a bit of sane logical reasoning and conclusion. Yes Brian the dates matter just as much as opinions from outsiders who don't have any children in our school district matter. By the way I do have children in Emery and your ostentatious claims like "Emery, where student alienation is near total" and " Our kids don't feel like they 'belong' at Emery." are utter BS. NONE of my children or their friends ever felt that way and while I will admit there needs to be improvement in many areas of Emery, community and child engagement have not been the issue. Why don't you stop with the history lesson and present some relevant data; oh yeah you are no longer involved in the school district so you probably have no idea of the reality on the inside. Now Why don't you go generate some headlines against OUSD where your kids are truly affected since that's the school community you choose to support. Lord knows they have a more problems than Emery; Or won't they let you bully them?
DeleteSince you're not using anonymous, I'll be serious in my responce to you. To start:
Deletebul·ly
noun
1.
a person who uses strength or power to harm or intimidate those who are weaker.
Who, precisely is the weaker person you are alluding to Mr Henry? And to present a finer point, since you do let me "bully" you as you imply (but don't prove), the question becomes; what's that make you then?
Onward: Where do you suppose I get my information that student alienation is near total at Emery? Do you think perhaps you might want to read the story before you go off half cocked? It seems like you have a problem with messengers of news you don't like. Maybe you should take it up with the progenitor of the bad news. I understand you're feeling like your team is being attacked...your team being lead by the guy that hired the sexual assaulter Rassum Mesfun and held closed door illegal meetings with a Board quorum and then lied about it. The guy that has the worst teacher retention in the Bay Area. Again, before you start getting all ratcheted up on "dates" being cast as somehow illegitimate by your fellow Rubio excuser Mr Anonymous, perhaps you should read the story...this time with an eye towards reading comprehension.
Nice job making it personal rather than rational. Nonetheless, good luck and thanks for using your name while commenting.
To the Henry Family-
DeleteI'm happy your children feel like they belong at Emery. That's great because as the State of California (and the Stanford study) reports that's critical for learning. But as you've seen since presumably by now you've actually read the Tattler story you reacted against, your children are outliers. We know that only 1% of children at Emery feel like they belong there as you've said your children do. The other 99%, a 'near total' amount, do not feel they belong there. But how do YOU feel? Feel any empathy for the other children at Emery?
As one of your fellow Tattler readers said: don't shoot the messenger. If you don't like the results of all these studies that show Emery in decline take it up with the academicians conducting the studies, don't take your frustrations out on the guy reporting on it.
Let's face it, we live in a city that has a school district that can't take criticism. Every time Brian provides info about how the district is screwing up he gets attacked. Don't kill the messenger. I'm thankful for what Brian does. As he said, you can't fix it if people can't admit it's broken.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the kind remarks. As you can see, your fellow readers don't share your ideas about the Emperor and his wardrobe. Not a problem. The whole thing about the public is it takes all kinds and if you're willing to go against the flow, you have to be willing to take on all comers. We have no problem taking them on here.
DeleteBut still, thank you for the words of encouragement.
Wow, so you write a story about some so called "bombshell" and then another commenter calls you out for what is obviously misleading (and also another good example of how dishonest you are) by not clearly reveling in your (now obviously) hyped up story that this is old data from 2008 to 2014, before the current supt was even here.
ReplyDeleteLets recap:
We blame supt. after supt. and little changes
We all know (by now) that your constant barrage of attacks ore personal (though the writing smells of Patz)
And, besides misleading your readers again by not being transparent and honest, in your ongoing Trump like tweets (oops I mean articles), you continue to have no idea that you (and Patz) are actually part of what contributes to the poor climate - oh wait.
Granted, you are not alone, as it seems lost of places have their local nut jobs bashing the public schools and leaders, but it's wrong that you would publish something so dishonest but not being fully transparent in the first place.
Lets also hope you don't treat your own kid like this- hopefully, you help your own son and don't tell them every week how awful they are.
The best question seems to be - when will the teachers start standing up against your attacks - rumor has it that even the Teacher's union president won't support or talk to you.
And, all I hear my kids teacher say is how happy the staff is this year with the new principals (and most of the new teachers) that the supt, your apparent nemesis, has hired.
Hmmm
Again, another Tattler reader that want's to make excuses for a failed public agency. You can revel in your worst-in-the-Bay-Area school district, guarding your team against what you see as threats, go ahead. We on the other hand are going to continue to tell the truth to the people of Emeryville about their schools and we're going to continue to hold the elites responsible for the failure, to account.
DeleteThat's the difference between the EUSD cheerleaders and the Tattler: You want to hide your head in the sand and shout hooray for our team and the I want to get at the truth and hold those in the public trust to account.
But you're NOT trying to get at the truth. You never question your own ideas or report anything contrary to your own position.
DeleteYou're just pushing your agenda. If you were trying to get at the truth, you'd look more carefully at the data and report it accurately. You'd seek out contrary opinions, consider them carefully, and report them respectfully. You don't do any these things.
This article is a great example. You said you knew that the study covered a period that has NOTHING to do with the current administration, but you didn't mention that fact. You said you knew that the methodology of the study only covered one class of a handful of students, but you ignored that as well and just ran the headline "Emery Schools Worst in Bay Area: Falling Behind". It's dishonest.
The truth is that the data shows the school system was getting worse almost every year for at least 7 or 8 years. Then about three years ago, the bleeding stopped. The scores definitely haven't gotten significantly better during that time, but they stopped getting significantly worse every year.
A valid criticism is that flat performance is not good enough. Having stopped the bleeding, now the patient needs to start getting better. The only question is how long that should take.
If you start with a school system that is failing and has been failing for a long time, how long should it take to evaluate the situation, change the culture, replace the dead wood, change the reputation, and reverse the trend? I'd say a miracle worker could do it in 3 years (one year to evaluate, one year to replace teachers and change policies, and one year for those teachers and policies to deliver a change in test scores). Now, if you also throw "move every school in the district to a new campus" as yet another task on top of "fix a completely broken district", then if the trend starts to point upward after four or five years, the new administration still gets credit for a miracle.
If the trend stays flat or shifts negative after that, it's time for a change. But three years of non-declining enrollment and flat test scores is, sadly, the best EUSD performance in at least a decade.
A great skeptic, my mother used to always tell me to ‘consider the source’; sage advice that has served me well over the years. The idea is, people are motivated by money and/or power and to the extant you can know that in a specific case, an effective rebuttal can be made to reveal possible hidden agendas. So what to do with charlatans selling snake oil that are anonymous? The answer: engage for sport if you’re so moved but assign no great credence to the effort.
DeleteSo here we have Mr Anonymous. It’s the same guy that keep coming back for more, even after his charges are shown to be false (I can tell by his writing style, anonymous commenters’ identity is not available to me, the blog moderator). The use of ‘alternative facts’ so off-putting and discombobulating to Democrats when Republicans use them and the use of the tactic of never conceding a point, even when proven incorrect may be an effective assault elsewhere but not here as I have said. But for the sake of my own entertainment, I may continue to engage Mr Anon as I see fit but only with the knowledge that he is not someone who is interested in truth (actual, not alternative).
But still, my mother’s skepticism continues to inform; who IS this guy? At first I thought him an internet troll…a troll with a hatred of teachers’ unions. Now, I’m not so sure. I think our Mr Anon is an EUSD insider, perhaps one of the three ‘Rubio enablers’ on the School Board or Mr Rubio himself. We know Mr Rubio is an avid reader of the Tattler and we know he has been driven to distraction by it in the past. Who else but an insider with much to lose would care so much as Mr Anon? Who else can argue that study after study that finds this school district is failing under the current regime of administration is actually thriving and the ‘great turn around’ is nigh if we will only continue to support the ensconced (teacher hating) players?
We invite you Mr Anon to reveal your identity: your argument will be enhanced if you do so. Perhaps you’re thinking that if you remain anonymous, Tattler readers may be swayed because by taking away their ability to consider the source, they will have to listen to your points as if they were babes in the woods. I think your calculation if this is it, isn’t working though. You’re really speaking only to your teachers’ union hating base. Progressives, the bulk of Tattler readers, won’t be taken in by this ploy. Reveal yourself and give your arguments a chance to actually persuade.
Or not. You’re free to do it either way at the Tattler. But realize, I grow bored with showing how you are wrong over and over on the same points and I may detach from the argument. Please free free to continue to leave comments either way.
The problem you have is that I'm not selling snake oil, I'm not hating teachers, and you're not demonstrating anyone is "wrong over and over on the same points" or even once.
DeleteYou like to attack whoever disagrees with you which is why you don't want an anonymous poster highlighting major issues with your analysis. Attacking people is your M.O. It's why no one will respond to you when you ask for comments.
If, when you are losing an argument, you attack people and their motives, then you learn nothing. No one gains. Your thinking never gets any better. You have shielded yourself from knowledge and are stuck rationalizing your own ideas over and over.
If you are always right, and if everyone who disagrees is always wrong, and if you attack their motives when they demonstrate problems with your thinking, you are stuck in a bad place. It is the Donald Trump approach. It is Emeryville's version of intellectual isolationism
"Consider the source" is good advice when it comes to data, but the data I'm presenting is from YOUR sources. The headlines are from YOUR blog. The stats are from the studies YOU cited. The data doesn't become more or less true based on who cites it, and the argument is the same regardless of who writes it.
If I've misinterpreted the data, show us. I make mistakes, but the numbers are flat for the last three years and declining before that. What else can I do? The data does not align with the point you are determined to make.
Demonstrate you understood the Stanford report and then explain why you chose not to tell your readers that the study ended in 2014-15.
The data all says the same thing. EUSD was getting worse. Now it's not. EUSD isn't getting better, but it's no longer getting worse. The question is whether that's enough, and how long it should take to heal a patient that was dying. And that's a point for discussion with plenty of room for differences of opinion.
But your premise that the school district had been in rapid decline, and therefore, we shouldn't change any teachers is ludicrous. It has nothing to do with unions.
"You must fix the schools! But don't change anything!" That's not a compelling argument.
(And no, I have no vested interest in this. I'm not on the school board. I don't work in the schools or have any relationship to EUSD. I believe that the truth still matters to people and that we should support the people who are trying to fix problems, not the ones who are standing on the sidelines criticizing everyone else's efforts. If the data says that the school district has been getting worse for the last three years, fine. But it doesn't. It says that things had been getting worse for years and for the last 3 years, it has finally leveled off. Whether that's good enough is up for debate, but using a forum like this to attack people you don't like while undermining the people who are trying to fix the school system is just irresponsible.)
Ah, yes I’m Donald Trump you say. That’s a neat trick BTW. If you have an agenda to help the Superintendent to go after the teachers just pull the ’T’ card! Call those standing in your way Trumpian.
DeleteSo for instance if you need to show that 28% is a smaller number than 25% (in ELA) and that 22% is a smaller number than 21% (in math) all you have to do is say that the Tattler AND Trump both believe 28 is bigger than 25 and that 22 is bigger than 21. That way you can show your favorite superintendent is doing a great job. And reasonable people will know it because the Tattler and Trump still believe in the old way of counting and since Trump is a kook and you have tied the Tattler to him so then must the Tattler be kooky.
Silly, silly Trump/Tattler! They never got the message that bigger numbers are now smaller numbers and smaller numbers are bigger numbers! The Tattler’s hidden agenda is to help Donald Trump.
As always, the comments or more interesting than the story with predictable results (the only reason to in fact read the Tattler)
ReplyDeleteA). Brian writes a click-bait headline with a flimsy one-sided, out of context narrative.
B). An astute reader calls him out on his misinformation.
C). Backed into a corner, Brian lashes out the commenters by calling them "Right-Wing".
D. Wash, rinse, repeat.
Entertaining, but hopelessly FAKE news.
Click bait? Really? Why do you suppose I would want to have people click on my site? Have you noticed Mr Anonymous (Mark perhaps?) the Tattler doesn’t sell ads? Click bait is what drives sites that sell ads like the E’Ville Eye. What do I get when people go to the Tattler? An informed populous that’s less likely to elect right wing politicians to the Council or the School Board the likes of which were ensconced wall to wall in Emeryville BT (Before the Tattler). BT there was just the Chamber of Commerce newsletter that taxpayers were forced to pay for that gave the business side of things in town (and ran editorials telling people not to elect resident friendly candidates). Now people can get their business friendly news free at the E’Ville Eye or their resident friendly news at the Tattler (not exactly free at the E’Ville Eye; people have to suffer through the ad barrage and constant begging for donations).
DeleteFYI, The Tattler was responsible for taking the public funding away from the Chamber of Commerce news letter and ultimately that sank the whole thing. Your welcome.
As I always say, you’ll have to show something incorrect for me to retract it. Others have found misinformation and typos and I’ve corrected the stories. You haven’t shown any inaccuracies and so there’s no retraction coming for you even if you really want it I’m sorry to say.
One sided? Yes, the Tattler is one sided. It says so right in the masthead: the Emeryville commons from the residents perspective. That means not the business community’s perspective. That’s one sided. So a lot of business owners don’t like the Tattler.
I’m sorry for you all these studies coming out about EUSD shows a district in crisis. I understand you’re not happy all these independent academicians are finding things that tend to cancel or detract from your narrative. But the fact you don’t like factual information about the district coming out (just like how Republicans aren’t happy with the factual information about climate change) isn’t going to have an effect on the Tattler reporting on it. The people have a right to know about their school district regardless of what you or Superintendent Rubio believe. And they’re going to continue to get this news they’re interested in at the Tattler.
Oh, and you shouldn’t flatter yourself about ‘backing me into a corner’. You’ve never come close. I’m perfectly capable of fending off the likes of you, thank you very much. In fact I enjoy the attacks so keep ‘em coming. But please try to keep them entertaining because sometimes you do get a little boring and in those cases, I’m less likely to engage. Let’s keep it sparking how about?
"BT"? Wow ... now you're applying biblical terminology to your rag like you're some kind of Emeryville Messiah. For your first 'miracle' can you exorcise your own demons and then sacrifice yourself?
ReplyDeleteYou are one tweaked dude Mr. Donahue.
Messiah
Deletenoun
1. The promised deliverer of the Jewish nation as prophesied in the Hebrew Bible.
2. A leader or savior of a particular group or cause.
We’ll take the second definition. The Tattler is the leader in our own delegated multi-year project to make Emeryville’s elected officials and public policy reflect the will of the people here. BT, Emeryville was infamous for being so radically pro-developer. There were numerous articles in the East Bay Express (and other publications) about the curious condition of an extreme right wing city in the Central Bay Area. It seemed baffling to many people how there could be a tiny Emeryville bubble of right wing ideology surrounded by reasonable people in the Bay Area. People wondered about it but I knew it was an accident, more a result of the lack of a newspaper than any darker demographic mystery. The solution: start a newspaper so Emeryville residents can know what’s going on behind the scenes in this town. The idea was always that if people knew how the politics here don't comport with the electorate's actual views, they’d rise up and elect people that DO reflect their views. The problem up to that time was that politicians would tell voters what they want to hear in their campaign literature.
After several years at it here at the Tattler, we’re pleased with the results; Emeryville City Hall now does reflect Emeryville voter’s values. We’ll take a large helping of credit for the change…the Tattler and RULE.
Now the problems at City Hall are generally small scale peccadilloes, the Nora Davis pro-developer dragon having been slain.
Next, we have to replace the culture of dysfunction at our school district and make it into something we all approve of….a school district that reflects Emeryville’s values is something we can attain. The only thing that separates us from that lofty goal is accountability and the sunlight that comes when the public is informed.
Thank you for your comments and being part of the Tattler juggernaut for democratic change in Emeryville.
It never ceases to amaze me. You can put something RIGHT in front of someone, lay it out with all the references, sources and arrows pointing at the answer and STILL you get individuals who are still to dense to pick it up.
ReplyDeleteDepartment of education findings, test scores etc And STILL.....
And then they post their oppositional crap under the title "anonymous".
You guys are just like those creeps who are defending Roy Moore and his propensity for pedophilia.
I'm fatigued by you folks. Really. I am. I know that this is taking it back. WAAAAY back..........a few weeks ago when the student arrested for sexual assault at ECCL was charged with the crime and it came out that our "superintendent" ignored it when it happened. TWO sexual assaults within a week of one another.
Rubio DID NOT REPORT THEM. How in the hell does ANYONE defend this?. You defend it if you are an agent of the district, Rubio, or if you're connected in some way to this corrupt district
It's true; some people will deny their own lying eyes to embrace their warped ideology. In this case it's an ideology of the idolatry of authoritarianism and our local manifestation of it: Superintendent Rubio. No matter what facts are presented or who presents them, they will deny it as fake news in deference to their ideological support of this Superintendent. Three of the five School Board members are doing this as are a small minority of community members.
DeleteBut not to fret David, a correction in the form of an election is coming. The only thing we need to do is make sure the Emeryville electorate knows the truth about the Rubio enablers on the Board and we need to make sure the voters a choice in the next election. Here at the Tattler, we're taking care of the first part (others can help with too). As to the second part, you should encourage any Emeryville residents you know (that aren't inclined towards authoritarianism and with a view to progressive school solutions) to run for School Board. The election is in less than a year and qualified candidates need to start coming forward in the next three months. We can fix this, help is on the way.
As I left the school I Friday with my son, I encountered the principal. All her friendliness towards me left after the first week of school and the superintendent briefed his staff on who I am.
ReplyDeleteUpon leaving, I wished everyone a safe holiday and said,"let's get this school up to standard". My son asked me once we were our of the building, "Dad. Did you see the principals face?" I stated that I did. Principal Carter turned and her mouth fell open. She looked at me as if I had....... known about a sexual assault at the school and did nothing about it. No. That's your boss, principal Carter. We don't need or want such a superintendent nor do we need pretty pictures drawn but our principal.
We need effective, passionate teachers who give all of our students the their best.
I know a white teacher at ECCL who, after being spoken to, does not respond. I pass this woman everyday and I'm glad that she was NEVER my son's teacher.
ReplyDeleteI know that this teacher should not be teaching. Especially children of color.
Being a parent had taught me a lot. Being a black parent of a black child shows me a lot more. This board, the superintendent AND the board foster and nurse this atmosphere.
All you out their posting as anonymous and attacking those of us who rightfully and justifiably call this District on its corruption, criminality, and ineptness, just like those supporters of Roy Moore.
I can't speak to the incident you reference but you may recall last Spring several white teachers testified that Rubio has put in place racist practices against black people at the District (the Tattler reported on it). It seems white teachers, at least a large number of them, are capable of seeing the racism at Emery. Good on them.
Delete