Election Results

Hernandez appears to have hung on to his seat in West Covina.

In Montebello, the incumbents were tossed out by more than 2-1.  I doubt that this was primarily due to their city mailer debacle, but I'm sure that didn't help.  The Whittier Daily News story is here:  http://www.whittierdailynews.com/news/ci_7392188

And congratuations to Henry and Janet. Apparently, all those flyers left around town by Crazy Bob and those signs that Mike Lewis paid for didn't have much of an effect in the Garvey School District race.

Scores in the Rosemead schools are strong, so it's going to be hard to unseat the incumbents. (Man, we need stronger performance in MUSD elementary schools.)

The big Urteaga win was interesting. I didn't expect that big a margin.

It's a big win day for UCLA alumni, Dem party insiders in MTB.

Definitely, the Rosemead district has a demographic edge. They're skimming from the northern (wealthier) part of Rosemead, and it's a small area. MUSD has a much wider range to cover, from Bell Gardens up to East LA, Pico Rivera, the Montebello Hills, and South San Gabriel. MUSD does above average at all their schools, which is good for starters.

But if you factor in economics, the less wealthy Pico Rivera has done better than MUSD. The most affluent areas in MUSD aren't doing that great compared to areas with similar demographics. So with what MUSD's got, they should be able to send more kids of Ivies, win more CIFs, and do better at all their schools. The district seems to be able to produce some impressive candidates for local office, and you often run into MUSD alumni at the top universities. I still think they can do even better, and help make Montebello a community of choice for parents focused on education.

(If I don't shut up, i'm going to have to get involved.)

Pico elementary schools, which are in the El Rancho School District avg API is 695.58 versus MUSD 674.05 (so 21.53 points is not much).

I think what is happening is that parents from LA Unified are somehow finding or "paying" to use an address in MUSD so their children can attend school here AND in the past they had principals who were just too willing to accept inter-district and intra-district transfers.  It is a quandry, because kids don't have any control where they live and shouldn't be penalized for it. 

However, school attendance officers are now actually going to the homes and asking to see the student's room and looking for books from MUSD to verify the student actually lives there, b/c MUSD is getting the short end of the stick w/ overcrowding.  And, isn't it illegal to ask if the student is here legally?

In my area, our kids go to Potrero Heights Elementary (which is a Title I Achievement and Distinguished School), Macy Intermediate, then parents can choose to send their child to Schurr (written up positively in Newsweek), Don Bosco and/or Sacred Heart of Mary/Cantwell.

However, as you know, every decade there are population shifts and demographic changes.  I remember when Mark Keppel was a sub-par school in the 70's to early 80's, now I believe it is a Title I Achievement and Distinguished School as well. 

No doubt, there will be more population and demographic shifts in the comiing decades as well.  To be continued, AS THE WORLD TURNS, lol.

PS: "send more kids of Ivies, win more CIFs" - what did you mean?

PSS:  If you are interested, there are many ways to get involved, schools can't have enough volunteers). 

I meant that the high schools should try to get kids into ivy league universities, and also win more CIF championships. People pay attention to both.

Zebara says, "I would hope our parents have higher expectations for their children than to merely not drop out of high school".

 But as a community our collective responsibility to ensure that our kids are not dropping out are NOT being met, and not being met in a HUGE way!  We have to learn to walk before we can run.  Zebra, as a parent, YOU have every right to have high expectations for your OWN children with your OWN personal income,  but when you depend on my $5000 annual property tax money to support our schools (and when I have NO kids in the district and haven't for decades) I think I have every right to have my own EXPECTATIONS for minimal standards in the broader picture and for ALL students. The schools will always have AP (advanced placement) courses, and then there are our gifted kids, but we have FAILED miserably with almost half our students--and that is the true prejudice--the few over the many.

Yes, Zebra, while this phrase was attributed to some conservative pundits and unfairly on Pres Bush,.it nonetheless was helpful in persuading and enacting the Leave No Child Behind Law, which requires all schools receiving fed money to meet a B avg or risk losing funding. 

Although you lost me when you took the position that you hoped all parents expected more than a HS diploma. 

My response was to "night reader" in having an "unreasonable expectation" of all our area students going onto ivy league colleges.

Whereas, my pragmatic position is that a HS diploma, with a 40% drop out rate, should be our collective goal, with new vocational programs instituted, so the next gen will have some kind of reasonable hope for gainful employment.

Voc prgs were mostly done away w/ starting in the 70's b/c many liberals thought our students were being "pigeon holed" and that every student should be "college bound". 

As stated above, I believe becoming a police officer, firefighter, nurse, etc., are all "honorable professions", as long as they are the students' and family choice AND that the students are not prevented from pursuing higher education IF that is their choice, and they have their own money to support it (which is NOT the sole responsibility of the gov).

I don't see there being any conflict between supporting students seeking higher education and efforts to reduce dropouts. In my opinion, aside from teachers' salaries to teach AP and honors classes, the expense is the same. The academic classes require books, but not much more. It's more about teaching the teachers about what it takes to get into Ivy schools, or the "public Ivies" like U Mich and UC Berkeley. Most teachers didn't go to the most elite schools, and probably think they're unreachable. I went to Berkeley, and know others who have, and met people up there who came up from MUSD, and people who have been to the Ivies. These top universities are within reach for MUSD students. For that matter, they're intellectually within reach for many people in LA who, for lack of money, think they can't go.

If more tried, more would get in.

If more got in, more of the kids coming after them would have expectations of being able to get in.

It's not even up to the parents' expectations. Most parents haven't set foot on one of these campuses. They may think it's impossible to go -- in fact, I bet most parents think this way. (That's just my limited experience.) The main actor is the student; it's up to the school to spread information about these top colleges, so that the kids can get this info, and develop high aspirations. It's also the school's job not to discourage the students by telling them to be "realistic" about their goals. They already have a little voice in their heads telling them that higher education is too expensive or too difficult. They may have parents telling them to stay close to home, or that girls don't need a college degree from UC, or that Cal State is fine for someone with straight A's, or that law school is too hard. There's no need for the policies of the district to contribute to these attitudes.

"Realistic" can be the enemy of "possible."

It was never realistic for Bill Clinton to go to Yale. His mom waited tables, and his brother was on the road to ruin. The "realistic" expectation was that GW Bush would go to Yale.

MUSD could send the next Bill Clinton to Yale. Given our demographics, we're never going to send the next GW Bush. That's something to contemplate. :-)

Again, the issue isn't low parental expectations, but low personal expectations. Parental expectations matter a lot, but, ultimately, the student must learn to balance those expectations with personal expectations.

The reason I think this way is due to an article I read in one of those "youth" papers they give away at the library. A kid from Baldwin Park wrote about how he wished he'd known more about college, earlier in his high school career, because he wanted to attend Yale. He made it to UC Irvine, which is a great school, but, it was a bittersweet accomplishment. His writing was great, his student resume was stellar, and his explanation was clear to me -- all it would have taken to get into the Ivies, was to get Ivies presented as a realistic possibility in middle school. Who's at fault? Well, he had the grace not to point an accusatory finger - so I'll do it: the school district was at fault.

My opinion's also informed by the many people I've met who are smart, self-starters, who seem to be able to crack open moderately complex books, and understand them, and intellectually break them down. They know history backwards and forwards. They're great strategists and tacticians. They're total intellectuals without even a B.A. Maybe they didn't get along with the teachers. Maybe their families were involved with gangs. Maybe they got into drugs and bad relationships. Maybe they had negative parents. Maybe they were social rejects. They all lacked enough money (but that's what loans are for). For whatever reasons, they ended up not pursuing higher education, or restricted their goals to the community colleges, and even rejected the idea of going to UC, when they could have done it.

It's better to try, and fail, than blah blah blah etc.

Even if you fail, at least you'll get to meet some of these "elite" people, and see that they aren't so big.

(I guess you could put me in the camp with people who allegedly caused voc-ed to be defunded in the 70s. I also support public higher education. Better education translates directly into a more flexible labor force, and also gives workers more leverage in negotiating wages. There's nothing wrong with being a cop or fire fighter with a degree. You need one to be an R.N.)

I'm all for reducing drop outs. According to this government page, Texas reports that poor grades was the fourth most common reason for dropping out. Above them were poor attendance, GED, and employment -- these all point to work as a motivator encouraging drop-outs. It could be that real-world "success" - the lure of money - is causing students to give up on academics. Reasons 5 to 7 were marriage and pregnancy issues. Reasons 8 and 10 point to discipline or inability to adjust to school.

It's food for thought.

AFTER 911, THE CITY OF BERKLEY WAS THE ONLY CITY IN AMERICA TO "BAN" THEIR FIRE TRUCKS FROM DISPLAYING THE AMERICAN FLAG AS A TRIBUTE TO THEIR FALLEN NYFD HEROS

Night Reader, there has never been nor is there currently a policy at MUSD, El Monte Union or LAUSD that "discourages" our students from seeking out UC or ivy league--that is a flat out lie and you know it.

My family members have gone to USC, the Pasadena Art Center, Claremont and Loma Linda (full scholarships or partial scholarship w/ sexy dirty cash, little or no loans--BUT NONE will ever go to the Peoples' Republic of Berkley, not if they want to come home for Christmas! lol

Night Reader, Im glad for your "personal" gain and accomplishment; however, my "legacy " wants to ensure the other 40% of our minority students also have a life.

I'm also very selfish, I need the police officer to protect me from harm, the nurse to clean my butt when I'm old, our gifted kids (yes we we do have them) to discover the cure and antedote for cancer and AIDS.  But the ones with the expectations for a B.A. and M.A. in "history or art" who end up teaching our kids to hate America at Berkley--or worse becoming a politicians (I'm sure as hell NOT paying for that)

night reader, your gen had the highest default on student loans 22-30% in the 80's, its now down to 5%