Posted by Concerned Parent, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, 7 hours ago

For those above concerned about school size (because it has such an impact on connectedness and quality) -- it is not too late to change direction (without losing a lot of money), but it is 11th hour.




It will only happen if parents get in and demand that the school district take a DETAILED AND SPECIFIC look at the 3rd high school question again (probably as a choice school) ASAP. And the discussion needs to be with parties that are not married to the decisions that have been made thus far in the construction. I think it would also take leadership from someone outside the administration, because the leadership on this issue inside has been notably lacking.

Posted by Power of the Parents!, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, 7 hours ago

I have been trying to work with the schools and district to identify areas within their realm that would support student health and well-being. It is easy to marginalize one voice.




The superintendent made it clear when asked when and how he would report to the parents on further progress, he answers to the school board.




The school board is responsible for policy and performance of the superintendent. If all the parents concerned about the health and welfare of their kids work together, maybe the board and the superintendent will finally hear us and do something concrete.




Who will join me at the next school board meeting on Tuesday, February 22, at 6:30pm!!!

Posted by High School Mom, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, 4 hours ago

One thing I agree with is that our high schools are too big. The reopening of Cubberley has been discussed for years to no avail. It seems it is a complicated mess involving the city and PAUSD as well as many non-profit organizations residing there and a staggering cost for reopening that site as a high school.




One alternative, practiced by some large high schools, and at universities (e.g. UC Santa Cruz) would be to divide up the existing high schools into smaller units within them, calling them "houses" or whatever. A student would belong to a house that would have its dedicated teachers for most core classes and its own social events and connectedness activities. A bit like Team if you wish, but for everyone. It is a path worth exploring.

Posted by I will join you, a resident of the Palo Alto Orchards neighborhood, 4 hours ago

Power of Parent,


I will join you. I and other parents have been trying to get Skelly's attention,so he can do something about it. However, he will only listen if there is a bunch of parent standing up for the kids and not just few. There are a lot of things he can do for our kids. I know it is not the school's job, but the schools have a lot to do with the suicides. Our kids spend a lot of time at school. Wen we do nothing about it and other kids died, like the last girl, who like the others found no way out, and was not taken care off properly, even though they said they did, it was not enough or effective, otherwise she would still be alive or in a hospital getting the help she needed. It is everybody's fault, not just the district, not just the parents, not just the teachers, we all contributed to her suicide. The schools by moving her to another school, we the parents who knew suicides were taking place, and all we did is attend few meetings and then we forgot about it. Only few parents continue to work in this issue. Forgetting about it is what the district want us to do, so we do not remind them that someone died and nothing effective was done about it. I hope more people will join the next board meeting. Hope to see you there.

Posted by Parent, a member of the Palo Alto High School community, 3 hours ago

Not sure if I can make the next Board meeting, but I will try.




To make this work, there needs to be a coordinated effort, the Board will not take too much notice of a couple of individuals.




It needs to have a large number of well behaved people present who are willing to fill in cards to speak for 3 minutes at the open forum time. Although present high school parents are the ones who understand the problem, it will be much more relevant for elementary parents to make their voices heard, at the least middle school parents. Any changes will not be made in time for our present teens.




Posters being held by the audience are worth doing. Also, any petitions or letters from other parents could be handed in.




The relevant issues are that the high schools are too big and the possibility should be explored of reopening Cubberley as a magnet, choice, 9th grade only, science or liberal arts campus under the leadership of either/ or combined Gunn and Paly - a type of daughter campus, rather than a fully fledged stand alone high school.




Speakers will only be allowed 3 minutes, so any relevant data about school sizes and optimum learning and connectedness should be handed in separately to the Board Members and Skelly.




Likewise, a plethora of emails to the Board Members PAUSD email addresses starting asap along these lines would show them that parents mean business.




If anyone has any other ideas, they can be added here too.

Posted by Anon, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, 3 hours ago

Parent, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, writes:




"Regarding opening a third high school:"




I think that the community should seriously consider *four* high schools, not just three. Gunn, at least, has twice the population that it did initially. There is really no reason why a high school needs more than about 600 students to support a full curriculum with good math tracks, music programs, etc. And, a smaller school means ordinary kids can "make the team" in sports if they work at it. There are many advantages and few disadvantages to smaller schools.




"This community can't even come to a civil consensus on changing to finals before the holidays for reasons as silly as "my family always takes vacation in August"."




August is often the best time to take a family vacation, so, I don't consider that "silly". Unfortunately, the unwieldy college admission process encourages a too-early start, so, if I were on the school board, I would have to vote for an earlier start :-( But, I can understand very well why families without high school juniors/seniors would not want to go back to school on August 1.




"You want to tell me there wouldn't be a huge outcry over learning your child would no longer go to Gunn or Paly the way you thought. If I were a board member I wouldn't touch that issue with the proverbial 10 foot pole."




Just as many parents and kids would be happy to get the heck out of Paly and Gunn, so, *open enrollment* might work fine. I'm not trying to dis- Paly and Gunn, but, lots of kids do not thrive in such a competitive environment. Some do, but, lots don't. How about if we open a couple of 600 student high schools as a smaller alternative to Paly and Gunn?

Posted by For Those who want to go to the board Meeting, a resident of the Palo Verde neighborhood, 1 hour ago

I think that we should meet first, the weekend would be perfect, we could meet at a coffee place, chat and organize otherwise we will not make an impact on the district. Please tell others that it is about time to stand up for out kids. They need our help now. Parents whose kids are elementary students, this is the perfect time to start getting the schools better so when they get there, they will have less hard time then the ones who died or have attempted suicide.

Posted by too big to fail?, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, 57 minutes ago





For those who want to go to the board meting,




if you're serious about this, e-news it at all the schools

can't be there on the 22nd

Can you just ask the district what they intend to do, or NOT do about school size?

It seems that the subject only comes up with enrollment issues, not as in shrink the schools already

Are there any examples of districts like ours with 2-3 larger schools and a smaller "choice" school - or any smaller school? I can see pros and cons, but I imagine it has been tried, so it would be useful to see how it has worked for others.

All we need is a few parents with deep pockets to reopen Cubberley. That can be found in this city. I think we'll have problems finding students to attend though, due to the Paly/Gunn reputations. Or the BoE would have to be strong about enforcing attendance boundaries (a pipe dream).

Most of the research on school size points to making schools our size smaller, not larger.

Larger schools with better quality measures tend either to be outliers (we would have to work harder to maintain the same quality) or restrict enrollment based on academic measures. It would be foolish for us to take the most optimistic view in comparisons and ignore the systemic challenges presented by larger schools, because the comparison districts don't face the vagaries of Prop13-influenced funding.

Cubb/Paly Alum,
Or how about saving the money by building smarter at Gunn and Paly? If Gunn doesn't have to be enlarged, the money spent there can go all to improvements, and expanded classroom millions can go to putting the classrooms at Cubberly.

The first two-story building going in at Gunn will cost $20 million, at least $3 milliion of that is just the extra per-square-foot cost of going multistory, and millions more in extra classroom space they wouldn't need if the campus was going to be 1500 students instead of 2500. That's just one building of many planned. (The premium on multistory across the district will probably exceed $20 million, though at least one of those buildings is probably necessary regardless of campus sizes.)

Is it too late to partner with Foothill? They had $40million to spend that had to be spent!

Cubb/Paly Alum,

Paly and Gunn reputations would likely spill over to a new high school because the ingredient of Palo Alto students (highly motivated) would still be there

if the reason for smaller schools is student-centered, it will have a chance, and people really interested in student well being will finally be doing something about it

Meeting at the weekend is a good idea.

Does someone want to suggest a time and place?

Picking a rallying color, or wearing Paly or Gunn sweatshirts or T shirts, or baseball caps?

Getting word out to elementary parents and letting them see that it is their kids who will be impacted by schools of over 2,000 is essential.

Some talk of houses (like Harry Potter) within the high schools is also something that could be done much quicker. A buddy system pairing seniors with sophomores, and juniors with freshmen, could also work. A feeling of belonging needs to be nurtured for our present students.

"Posted by kmom, a resident of the Greenmeadow neighborhood, 42 minutes ago

I would love to see smaller High Schools in Palo Alto. The schools are so big that they don't even know who your student is. Communication is lacking because with so many students, no on has the time for it. But, as others have said, opening another High School does not seem to be on the agenda. So, I would recommend to parents that if these schools stay large, march down to the administration and let them know who your child is. Insist on communication, insist on them knowing who your child is, so that they can better educate them and help them mature.Let them know your concerns and their concerns and take an hour of the principal's time to express how you feel about your child's experience (good or bad) at High School. The worst thing you can do is hope that the administration is going to make things better for your struggling student because experience these past 4 years has shown me that unless you go and stand up for your child, the administration won't either. If you think something is wrong at your high school than go down there and tell them. All of us have suffered over these past 4 years, parents of successful students and challenged students alike. After graduation last year, parents looked more like they had survived a "war" than anything else:kids too."

Folks,

If you give them a bunch of other ideas like buddy systems and houses (all which likely work better in smaller schools), they will take those ideas and experiment until the cows come home

the buildings are going up,

monster high schools have to stop, this is not supposed to be UC Santa Cruz, so better to focus on the Third High School

Good point, Hope it Works. Let's leave those suggestions out of the mix for next Tuesday.

First we must get word out to all parents, particularly to elementary parents.

Next we must swamp Board Members with emails.

Also, I feel we must find a leader/point person/spokesperson who will be able to guarantee to be at the weekend meeting and the Board Meeting (I can't promise to be at the Board meeting, unfortunately.)
This person will have to be identifiable so I suggest if anyone is willing that they start using their real name and identity here.

Cubberley is an outstanding central location for a high school. I have never understood how it hasn't been PLANNED FOR for years - yes, enrollments dip, etc., but it worked well in past and can work well again, but good luck in getting anything happening soon. That is the crux of the matter.
On the other point, I think meda-high schools can only work if they have outstanding organization/leadership and that's a big "if."
Overall, looking back at our time in the school system, I fail to understand the ridiculously lengthy construction process that occurs in public school projects (whether from the ground up, remodelling, minor tweaking, portable uses, etc.) - it takes WAY more than it does for commercial businesses, seems way more bureacratic. My point is, if there is a way to get ACTION that is meaningful, go for it, otherwise you are looking out 10 yrs when your kids won't even be in the school district anymore
-from a local parent of young adults

oops, that type was "mega"

anyway, I salute those parents who are active and make their viewpoints known to the board. Otherwise, look for your kids to spend a lot of time in portables with little to show for them (maybe for some future students...)

by the way, consider benchmarking w/other districts: MA has a nice theatre now, Los Altos has one, Santa Clara has two high schools with reasonable, newer theatres, and somewhere to the south -- San Jose -- a bunch of high schools have also opened attractive, functional theatres (I may have seen a pictorial on this in the Merc recently)Somehow, these places got action and facilities completed and in use.

Parent,

you know it's almost impossible to get people to sign up to lead something like this, which is what the district and board seem to COUNT on, and that things will just go away

and they do

Publisher of Palo Alto online, please take the posts on these threads about the issue of Mega High Schools, and you will have an award winning story

the research is there,

our Palo Alto HIgh School problems are there,

parents are just so darn busy trying to SURVIVE this system, or the rest are SO vested in the status quo, that the lone voices will remain crying out with reason, but ignored.

kmom from Greenmeadow posted

"After graduation last year, parents looked more like they had survived a "war" than anything else:kids too."

it's true!

we need some help here, and anyone that can write, publish, and do whatever techie stuff is necessary to blow the mega high school problem WIDE open will be doing service to ALL our youth,

I can just hear the district say we sent emails about construction and this notice out, it's too late, the plans are set ,but they send HIgh School emails practically in CODE to High School parents, instead of a simple note to Elementary parents

Dear Elementary Parents,

the bond you voted for is making our high schools into monster big schools that are not really good for anyone or anything. We are avoiding the issue of school size and will continue to do so because few High School parents can do anything about it, they are worn out. If you think the problem will be solved by the time your kid gets to High School, good luck!

Before anyone approaches the school board with the idea of (re)opening Cubberley, find out what it will cost to remove the asbestos and make it seismically safe. To make the site safe, it may take another multi million dollar bond issue which will take at least 3 years to develop and pass - if it does. This doesn't even address the relocation of all the non-profits, for-profit organizations, and meeting rooms, theatre, and gymnasiums so heavily used.

Just making noise is not enough. Have specific information about cost and other practical location alternatives, or you're wasting your time.

Someone might want to start out by asking Dr. Skelly or others in the administration why they have chosen the path they have, enlarging the two existing campuses. Churchill Street certainly isn't blind to the options being discussed here, and in fact know quite a bit more than most (all?) of us about both the theory and practice of setting up and running schools, as well as the fiscal and physical realities of Palo Alto. Rather than go off half-cocked ("We want...XX!" in matching t-shirts no less), it would be good to learn from the intelligent, thoughtful, and well-meaning people whose full-time jobs is to work on these issues.

Me Too

I've posted before, on the related thread, and I agree that school size is NOT parent responsibility, it is the district's. they need to produce the answers to all questions, from asbestos at Cubberly to all the "realities" you mention,

if these answers are already public, please share the link to this report from the district

these threads are about another reality

the problem of how to maintain the big school, highly competitive system in our high schools for the bulk of students able to navigate it and take advantage of it, AND address the issue of the students challenged by the system, if everything was peachy there would be no threads

for the district to say they will improve things with practically the exact same resources they had before we had the 5-6 suicides (in families just like yours or mine), and not address school size may sound acceptable to you, but I think they can do better

If they have a status quo answer about school size, what about having TEAM for high school, not just the lottery in 9th?

I can already hear it

TEAM is impossible for the whole school, teachers may not like it

it only works for a few in 9th grade

it would be a nightmare to try doing the scheduling

whatever inconvenience and resources it takes to have TEAM in high school, or something powerful to address high school size will be well worth it

Though I don't live in Palo Alto, I think having an alternative, smaller high school would be a great idea. Still, though, it is possible to have large, top-ranked high schools that are relatively happy places. I still think the problem is much more than just size, though size probably exacerbates it.

@Too big - I'm not aware of any posted discussion on those topics. If the posters who are concerned with this matter are interested, I imagine they can just email Dr. Skelly and ask some of their questions (one hopes respectfully), or request a private meeting to discuss their concerns. On the few occasions when I have emailed Dr. Skelly, he generally emails back a thoughtful response and refers me to others if they have the info. I think others have had similar experiences.

I do disagree that the district is responsible for explaining all the district's thinking and decisions to the community. The super's job is to run the district and get things done - he answers to the school board, not the voters. That's not arrogance on his part; it's just a fact. The risk of engaging the public in policy decisions is that the ensuing debate will block progress for many years (as we see with the calendar issue, for instance).

I have nothing against "mega high schools". Just like "mega cities", kids will group together with like-minded others, in clubs, in the same "lanes" at school, etc. Big is not bad.

I just hope there is a LOT more vocational/technical ed options for non-college bound kids to give them a chance to move forward into an apprenticeship or advanced vocational training certificate.

As a parent of a current Paly senior - there is no real vocational/technical education options at all in PAUSD, just a few classes as lip-service. We don't prepare students for any option except attending college. If you are a kid who should be training for something else, you're out of luck...

The call to re-open the Cubberley site as another high school is falling on deaf ears because the Administration is well aware that no parent will be willing to have their child transferred from either Paly and Gunn to attend a new Cubberley. If you want Cubberley to be re-opened be prepared to have your child go there!!

To re-open Cubberley will required a huge new bond measure because the present school would have to be torn down and re-built to modern earthquake standards. The asbestos and lead paint is hazardess and must be removed at huge expense.

Posted by palo alto mom, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood:

"As a parent of a current Paly senior - there is no real vocational/technical education options at all in PAUSD, just a few classes as lip-service. We don't prepare students for any option except attending college. If you are a kid who should be training for something else, you're out of luck..."

So true. Paly and Gunn are only for kids who are college material.


Posted by So PA Resident, a resident of the South of Midtown neighborhood:

"The call to re-open the Cubberley site as another high school is falling on deaf ears because the Administration is well aware that no parent will be willing to have their child transferred from either Paly and Gunn to attend a new Cubberley. If you want Cubberley to be re-opened be prepared to have your child go there!!"

No doubt true for college-bound juniors and seniors. You just have to phase it in as they did with Terman. Believe me, there are plenty of parents who would jump at the chance for a smaller school, though.

Or any smaller or alternative school than Gunn or Paly. And so would several other parents in the SE part of Palo Alto. We are far from both high schools and frankly in fear of the competition and impersonal nature we read about on these forums.

Don't think that everyone buys into the current HS's reputation as the de facto means for living here. I don't want my elementary aged kids feeling like a number and losing their community and love for learning when they get to high school.

Unfortunately, our Board has a reputation of bowing to whoever shows up at meetings. The Calendar battle was the latest example. They have confused mob rule with representative democracy.

Common error now, from our little microcosm to international proclamations.

Pity...

If Cubberly High School were to reopen, it would once again become the neighborhood High School for much of South Palo Alto and enrollment numbers would soar. Once the High School gained a good reputation, other students from around the town would be drawn to Cubberly, too. Terman Middle School reopening was a perfect example of this. That said, the concept of building two bigger High Schools over opening up a third was chosen due to the very reasons stated above: Cubberly would have to be rebuilt from scratch, big high schools can be highly competitive and offer a huge variety of classes for all students and it was the way to proceed with the least amount of interruption to the large ongoing community programs offered in Palo Alto, ie, Cubberly Community Center that services a lot of people in Palo Alto. The program to build 2 Mega High Schools simply won out, because opening Cubberly seemed impossible. I wish more creative solutions had been considered, like the many suggested by people on this forum, like opening Cubberly.

The reason Cubberley closed originally was because many of the students in south Palo Alto had already transferred to Gunn. Cubberley's enrollment was so low that it no longer remained a viable high school. Very few students (or parents for that matter) will be willing to leave either Gunn or Paly to attend an untested and small high school at Cubberley.

The title of this blog refers to Mega High Schools. Gunn and Paly are only being increased in size to accommodate 2,300 students. A mega high school is over 5,000 students of which Los Angeles has several.

I was unable to attend or watch this Board Meeting last night for scheduling reasons.

Could someone who was there report on whether many parents attended and spoke at the public forum. I have read the Weekly's report and nothing was mentioned.

Thank you.

@Been around: Thank you for the clarification of the size of a mega school. Some liberal arts colleges are 2000 so I too assumed 2300 was huge.

Many people move to South Palo Alto for the academic reputation. I also highly doubt PAUSD can find enough students to attend Cubberley.

To Parent,

In answer to your question, several students and parents spoke at the board meeting. Only one of them, parent Marielena Mendoza, specifically addressed the school size issue. Mendoza said "there are too many students so it's impossible to know each other" and that smaller schools would make it easier to address the social and emotional needs of students. Parent Kathleen Blanchard called for a renewed sense of urgency in supporting the emotional health of students. Two students, Ashley Jiminez of Palo Verde and Jasmine Jiminez of Terman, said they have had problems with bullies at school.

I could not attend the meeting,

but I saw it on playback

it's not a fair view that only a few parents can attend these meetings but we all know that every single student suffers the big school issues.

why not do the same thing they are doing with Math

a year long committee of parents and teachers looking to see what great things could be done to support students

that committee could learn how other big schools maybe have better practices because I am beginning to agree with why in Palo Alto??

Yes, it is disappointing that many of our kids, (not just 3 or 4 are having bulling or social emotional issues), but their parents do not have the time to attend the meetings or does not occur to them that there will be a lot less problems if the schools were smaller. There fore the district does not pay attention to just couple of parents speaking about the issue. Please stand up for our youth, they need us. Be thankful if your kids are doing fine, but remember that many are not, and the prove are the suicides and numeral attempting suicides.

Thanks to Marielena, Mrs. Dickens, Mrs. Blanchard, the students who spoke and also to Chris Kenrick for speaking up at the meeting and also for reporting it here.

Speaking up at the meetings is good, but emailing the Board of Education individually and also to Kevin Skelly are good ways to get the message across too.

We have already wrote e-mails (to principals, board members, superintendent), group meetings, community meetings, letters of petition,you name it, we done it, but we are still not being heard. So at this points is better that they have a visual, you know maybe some school officials are visual learners, I know I am one who needs to hear it, see it, feel it and touch it in order to get it. So I have to try everything in the hopes that one time I (we) will succeed. Our children deserve it. Since I do not want to see more empty rooms (of the children who die), I have to try everything, any other ideas are welcome, like I say it takes a village, I am not that smart and I want things to improve but with help of others we may come up with a better plan. I have been standing up for our students since the second child at Gunn died, but I was discouraged and sat down again, the third child was really my call, I stood up the moment I knew he died,and till today I have not sat down, and I will continue to stand up for our students till I die, or things improve. That way students who are struggling will know that I truly care, and I just do not say it, or hope for things to get better on their own. This is a very serious issue. Hope more caring people can join us.

to be honest, right after the first suicides there was a lot of information about the subject, and the community was "informed' but the thread about the recent "Stand up for our Youth" meeting highlighted how Non-specific the changes at the schools actually have been.

plenty said about what is a priority, and we know the district cares, but what are tangibles that can be reported about new initiatives that are not supposed to be parent driven (I still get annoyed at the gazillion "Developmental assets" chart, which could be achieved with smaller schools and less words)

anyway, it's pretty cold that the subject is no longer a priority to discuss even among the parents, but if it's like me, I've got my hands full just taking care of my own, and as High School progresses it seems like everyone is out for themselves,

Im guilty of being one of the silent majority that knows better

I just want to comment on the apparently common assumption that large schools and suicides are somehow related, or even that our "stressful" schools are related to the suicide cluster at Gunn. There is not evidence for this that I'm aware of. Research suicide clusters among young people. They happen all over, all the time, in all kinds of communities. Nantucket High, with 400 students, saw 3 suicides in 11 months. Wellesley High (MA), with 1300 students, suffered 4 suicides in 3 years. Cravignon High in Northern Ireland had three suicides by hanging by 15 year old friends in a three week period in 2007.

Mental illness causes suicide, with suicide "contagion" (copy-catting) significantly contributing among youth. Schools don't cause suicide, though they can help by identifying those who need help and provide the first steps for that help - as can and should every youth organization and, most of all, families. School size, school calendars, school "stress" are all valid issues, but putting them together with suicide prevention just muddies the water on both issues.

You might be right, however you do say "though they [schools] can help by identifying those who need help and provide the first steps for that help." Wouldn't be easier to identify if a student who are having this issues or are feeling suicida, and get them help by having smaller schools? how can they do that when the principals and teachers do not get to know some students because they see many during the day? now you convince me more than ever that we need smaller schools. I think that every student suicidal or not will benefit from smaller schools, look what happened when they open Terman, less student population at Jordan, and JLS. More opportunities for them to be accepted in sports and clubs, same thing will happen at the high schools. It is ridiculous at Gunn there are about 6 counselors and more than 2000 students. It is just impossible for them to know each kid, and even harder to know their needs.

Me too,

is that what it's about, as long as there are no suicides, big schools are ok?

I think in a perfect world, it would be wonderful to have school size of 1000 with class size of 20 etc.. but keep in mind that the staff to student ratio is driven by the budget, NOT the over all school size. Even if you opened a 3rd school, class size would remain at the contracted level. Actually, it might increase since there would be additional costs to the budget for maintenance etc... As for the counselor ratio, that would also remain the same. Instead of "6 counselors for 2000 student", there would be 3 counselors for 1000 students. This is an unfortunate reality of school budgets.

Yes there might be more opportunity for students to play sports or be involved in extra curricular activities, but I actually think our schools have done a great job adding activities as their populations have grown. Both schools have added sports teams in order to offer more opportunities for students to participate (lacrosse and freshman teams in existing sports are examples of this). I believe that both schools offer ways for anyone to get involved in student government, band, choir and theater. Paly has added publications in order to accommodate the growing demand of students who wanted to be involved. My guess is that Gunn has also added extra curricular activities for student to join.

I think the school within a school idea is worth looking into (an expansion of TEAM), but am not sure how that would work logistically.

@another - My main point is that suicide clusters are unrelated to school size, since they happen in big schools and small. Personally I think big schools are fine and can work very well for many students. But I wouldn't let the tragic fact that we had a suicide cluster in our community drive our thinking about the size of our high schools.