It was disappointing to see two of this town’s more progressive voices, the American and the Post-Dispatch, take the editorial position that the state should – despite overwhelming, intense, and random public opposition – “take over” (to keep it real) the St. Louis school district.
They believe that achieving a financially well run and academically sound school district is worth sacrificing voter inclusion. The fallacy, of course, is that you cannot strip parents and the populace of power and still attain what the Advisory Committee Report said was a “requirement” to the “Road of Improvement”: “A community with enough confidence to support SLPS.”
It was surprising that neither publication considered the visceral opposition to state intervention expressed by parents, teachers, principals and employers. Neither seem to understand that forcing on the public a politically appointed three-person regime will only propel us back to the days when virulent public dissent first began – when the management team steamrolled over the voices of the community. That led to the other bizarre extreme – replacing a capable black superintendent with a white one in a district that’s 85 percent black.
Neither paper took heed of what may be the most poignant and sensible point made in the entire lengthy report – when one of those interviewed said: “The way it is being presented in the media, this is an either/or proposition – either DESE intervenes or not. I would like to know if there is some middle ground of mediation, monitoring and accountability.”
Eric E. Vickers
St. Louis