Changes to GCISD school policies include limiting access to upper-level reading, restricting materials for college-level AP courses, limiting discussion around current events. Combine that with the increase in teacher resignations, and our students are facing new challenges in being college ready, and worse…possibly being labeled with a new not-so-flattering district reputation.
6 Panelists, 1.5 Hours All About GCISD Reputation + College Experience
You’ll find the entire 1.5 hour panel here, or skip down to scan some of the highlights.
We even got a few tips from the graduates for students to look to fill in the gaps for themselves.
We also heard from two GCISD graduates who offered the poignant comments for listeners.
Vivek Tanna, Stanford graduate, pointed out how insulted he would be as a student to have adults decide our students can’t handle more than the four basic subjects. Seattle Hickey, currently studying Womens’ Studies at Harvard, gave us another perspective to consider. Adults are being selfish to take the opportunities away from students to develop critical thinking skills and be able to learn how to manage through difficult discussions in a safe space.
Back to Basics is NOT What the World Wants Anymore
Study shows employers are prioritizing these three skills in the hiring process:
Analytics and critical thinking skills
And ability to work in a diverse team
Standing Out in College Applications, Despite a Tainted GCISD District Reputation
Keeping Up With the Conversation in College
Tips for Students to Prepare Themselves
Build Your Resilience, give yourself time to be a kid, and find ways to pace yourself.
Recognizing not all discussions are up for debate, not always a perspective, both in a person’s lived reality, as well as when we look at parts of history.
Recently in candidate forums, the idea of “open enrollment” has been brought up by both Sergio Harris and Kimberly Phoenix as a way to increase revenue instead of cutting teachers, classes, and programs as our current board majority supports. The concept of “open enrollment” is not new in GCISD. We built amazing programs of choice and could continue to grow them by adding the right kids at the right time, rather than cutting programs and chasing away excellent teachers. Open enrollment is what currently allows Grapevine residents not zoned to GCISD to still attend GCISD schools. It also allowed Carrol ISD to recently open up to the families of first responders, just like GCISD teachers can bring their kids.
What is Open Enrollment?
In Texas, the state allows each district to decide its own open enrollment policies. Open enrollment refers to whether parents can send their children to any public school, regardless of where it is located. It runs similarly to a voucher program in that the school can create its own parameters and is not required to take any child that applies. However, if accepted, the state’s funding for that child follows the child to the new campus. Unlike a voucher program, the accepting school is a Texas independent school district and is accountable for the funds in the same way the student’s home campus would be. It is a much more accountable version of school choice than vouchers and charter schools.
How is this good for GCISD?
Open enrollment allows a district to create greater efficiency of operations by determining in advance which programs, classes, or campuses have space in order to maximize their enrollment capacity in buildings that are already being heated, cooled, and cleaned. Adjusting in this way can save teaching positions, keep GCISD from having to apply for waivers when exceeding classroom capacity, and can generate additional revenue for the district depending on where the legislature sets target revenue and the number of students who apply.
Could we set admissions standards?
Yes! In the early days of ASPIRE, students who met the admission criteria were allowed to apply. A few years later, the program hit max capacity and that option closed. With our unique schools of choice, we could set different parameters for each program and even limit what grades we would accept. We could allow it for one year at a time and even make residency a requirement after a certain timeframe, which would allow families to move here after guaranteeing that their child would qualify for a particular program. In ASPIRE, for example, children are required to attain certain testing scores, which we currently do not charge for (but could!) In a tight housing market, it is hard for families to make the choice to move until they know if their student will qualify. This expands our potential applicant pool AND draws more families to our area.
How does this help with GCISD funding?
Districts that allow open enrollment are able to set admissions criteria based on seat availability at designated schools and can require that all students accepted provide his or her own transportation to and from school. In Texas the money follows the child so we would get funding for that student. Additionally, GCISD already loses residents to other specialized programs in other districts. Districts with magnet, academy, or vanguard programs often accept outside applications on a space available basis. We lose highly talented families of kids that qualify to Booker T. Washington High School for the Performing Arts and Grand Prairie Fine Arts Academy because we don’t have an arts focused high school academy. Perhaps instead of cutting our programs of choice, we should expand them!
There are many additional situations that would have to be discussed at a board level if this were to be explored, such as the impact on UIL rules, etc. But it is an excellent and creative way to keep our amazing programs strong for our community!
Pro-GCISD families need to be United for GCISD and support the best candidate that filed in each of the 3 school board races this year. Please show up for our teachers and students and tell others why you will VOTE for Sergio Harris for Place 5, Dianna Sager for Place 6, and Kimberly Phoenix for Place 7!
Harris, Sager, and Phoenix are also listed as the best candidates by Protect GCISD, The Book-Loving Texan’s Guide to the May 2023 School Board Elections, and yes, a PAC. But don’t worry, not all PACs are harmful in local elections. In order to raise money for political campaigns, various IRS structures are needed. Texas Nonpartisan PAC is truly local, GCISD focused, and only formed as a PAC to comply with election rules regarding coordinated election campaign efforts.
Why is the GCISD School Board election so important? The new school board majority eliminated run-offs, so the person with the most votes wins. This is different from prior years. There will only be one chance to vote. A split “non-Patriot Mobile” vote hurts our chances to restore Independence, Respect, and Excellence.
We have One Vote for a Better GCISD, Because Our Kids Deserve the Best!
E Pluribus Unum: Out of Many, One. Our founding fathers chose this original motto in 1776. It signifies the strength that comes from uniting diverse perspectives into a single voice.
We chose to use this purposefully in our logo because, when you are trying to support a district as unique as ours, it takes a strong variety of voices representing differing but equally passionate views to make the most educated decisions for our schools. That is how school board races used to be! Candidates ran because they cared about public education and once on the board, the seven elected trustees sworn to work on behalf of our students and teachers used their varying perspectives to decide what was BEST for GCISD. We strongly believe that City Council and School Board races should remain nonpartisan for that reason, so each elected trustee focuses solely on the district without taking political marching orders that follow a party platform or the desires of an important donor.
Unfortunately, some extremist organizations — defined as far from center and drastically narrower than the views of the majority of GCISD families — have decided to make school board races political across the country, and as a community we didn’t react quickly enough to fend them off. Last year, GCISD made national news as a Patriot Mobile “takeover district” when the candidates they identified, funded, and coached gained majority. Instead of a grassroots election of independent candidates, we instead have 4 trustees that vote as a block virtually every time. The district as we know it has suffered. We have seen a dramatic rise in teacher turnover, families are leaving, our community’s reputation is suffering, and we are losing academic opportunities that once drew families to our district – all due to irresponsible and short-sighted decisions made by an inexperienced board majority.
There are so many proof points of the negative effect in the past 12 months, here’s just a few highlights:
We lost our designation as a Top 100 Place to Work (determined based on workplace satisfaction surveys) after earning it annually since 2018.
Even more disappointing is that our new board majority is very proud of this destruction and they regularly share their “success” by speaking on the topic of taking over school boards.
Why We Formed a Local GCISD Voice
Many of these same anti-public school voices have been involved over the past decade or more, in various organizations with changing names and lead players based on partisan elections. In the past two years, several LOCAL grassroots organizations began forming to try and combat the damage and get the truth out about GCISD. Non-partisan, pro-public education organizations like Protect GCISD, Texas Bipartisan Alliance, United for GCISD and Texas Nonpartisan PAC all formed at different times, with different people, and under different tax structures, but all with a similar idea in mind: counter the misinformation being shared about GCISD, defend our teachers from unfair attacks, help our students feel safe and cared for, and educate the public about what was happening to the district we love.
Several Facebook groups also formed to discuss issues in GCISD, but they did not file as political organizations so they could not impact elections on the same scale, since that was not their stated intent. All of these groups grew out of a love for GCISD and each has an important role, but to truly beat such a well-funded attack requires all of us being on the same page. Sadly, that didn’t happen. A truly grassroots set of organizations organized bottom up by busy families on a volunteer basis is a far cry from a top down process with virtually unlimited funding and professional consultation down to their color coordinated signs. We tried for months to get as connected and organized as time, money, and volunteer commitment would allow but it unfortunately wasn’t enough to keep good candidates from filing against each other (or, later, reconsidering what was in the best interest of GCISD.)
With so many school districts under attack and requests coming in for help in other areas, volunteers decided to switch Texas Bipartisan Alliance to supporting any potential takeover district that needed help. Organizers of United for GCISD launched to focus exclusively on GCISD, beginning with the highly successful Scholastic Book Fair raising $10,000 in books for children served through GRACE Christmas Cottage. After that success, volunteers that felt passionately about speaking out against book bans and censorship wanted to keep the momentum going so that as candidates for school board filed, a support group would already exist.
United for GCISD was formed as an alliance of community members and organizations dedicated to restoring excellence, independence, and respect in the Grapevine-Colleyville Independent School District by electing board trustees who align with these core community values. We hoped to be a bridge and we reached out for support with that in mind. We knew it would be vitally important to get behind ONE candidate per place. We announced our plans and invited everyone to join us that aligned with our mission to Take Back GCISD in 2023.
Based on years of collective experience, we knew it would be catastrophic to pledge support to a candidate before the end of filing because you can’t control who files in a democracy! Unlike the anti-GCISD candidates, there was no vetting or interview process to decide who was allowed to file and where, despite lots of people having lots of opinions, in the end no one could make that decision but each candidate filing.
Looking for Candidates Who Speak for ALL Students
Despite that, we knew we had to UNITE behind ONE candidate for each race and find the ones with the strongest chance to beat the inevitable Patriot Mobile slate. At that time, it was unclear if any of the incumbents were even running. Since school board filings don’t even start until January, we focused on educating the public on issues relevant to the upcoming campaign through a series of Deep Dives. Many people talked to the candidates as they considered filing. Some candidates said they did not want help or that they did not want to campaign alongside any other candidate. Others agreed that a unified plan was our best chance. All of that was taken into consideration and in the end once filing closed we decided to invite all candidates publicly on our page to reach out to us if they felt their mission aligned with ours.
That brings us to today and our campaign going forward. We believe without question that in our 3-way races, Sergio Harris for Place 5 and Kimberly Phoenix for Place 7 stand with us in our desire to Take Back GCISD and Restore the Independence, Respect and Excellence, which at one point in time, we all took for granted.
How do we know Harris and Phoenix are pro-public education?
These two candidates understand the importance of aligning in a way that gives us the best chance of winning back our district.
They have the most recent and relevant experience to get us up to speed quickly and are vocally committed to undoing the damage of our current board majority.
They are parents of GCISD students, long time public education devotees, and have large community volunteer followings.
You will also see Dianna Sager on our materials for Place 6, which is a two person race. She did not reach out to us to show how her campaign goals align with ours, but she is the only non-Patriot Mobile candidate in that race.
Three Candidates Stand Out for Pro-Public Education Voices
We aren’t the only ones that noticed these admirable traits! Harris, Sager and Phoenix are also being listed as the best 3 candidates by Protect GCISD, The Book-Loving Texan’s Guide to the May 2023 School Board Elections, and yes, a PAC. But don’t worry, not all PACs are harmful in local elections. In order to raise money for political campaigns, various IRS structures are needed and a few local GCISD volunteers were willing to structure as a PAC so that we could all have that option for donors. TXNPac is truly local, GCISD focused, and only is formed as a PAC to comply with election rules regarding coordinated election campaign efforts. PACs have different rules than incorporated 501c4s, which are different than unincorporated 501c4s, and all allow more support for causes and candidates due to fundraising and endorsement rules than informational Facebook groups and substantially more than 501c3s.
To be clear, every well intended organization plays an important role, but the financial and legal structures are vital if we really are serious about trying to counter the takeover. We can no longer vote for our friends, a former classmate, the person who filed first, the parent of your child’s classmate, or the one who wants a do-over. Voting for someone because they’re “from here” has not served our community well in the last two elections. This election will require a much more disciplined and thoughtful vote. All eyes across the country are on GCISD, ever since Patriot Mobile made us their ground zero.
Why is the 2023 GCISD school board election so important?
We need more involvement and commitment from all pro-public school advocates in GCISD to make our vision a reality. Until then, outside forces will continue to overpower us. Sadly, as we said to anyone that would listen: school board elections from the days when you could run independently on your own merits and without a built-in support network are over. And anyone who naively thought otherwise before, is clearly seeing the light now, as we are seeing sets of three signs all over town and candidates endorsing other candidates on their campaign pages.
Regardless of how many well-intended candidates we have, in the end we can only support ONE candidate per place or risk EVERYTHING by splitting the vote, since runoffs were very purposefully eliminated.
We’re sorry in advance for how long this is, but here are eight new points to consider.
It’s time for the board majority to be transparent about their goals.
If they believe the public wants to rewind to the 80s and 90s and get a basic education just so they can limit costs, they should say that.
If they think parents should be responsible for paying for extracurriculars and not taxpayers, they should say that.
If they want to support privatization through vouchers and charter schools, they should say that.
If they want to run students away from GCISD so they can consolidate campuses to give a property tax cut to people who already got what they needed out of GCISD, they should say that.
Why are they not saying that? Because our community supports GCISD and we know how important it is to our cities and property values to restore the reputation of GCISD and voters would never knowingly elect trustees who admitted to these truths.
8 truths about GCISD you need to know before you vote May 6
1. Academic Decline: The decline in GCISD’s recent student STAAR scores is largely due to the changing nature of education throughout the world during an unprecedented pandemic and was not an exclusively GCISD issue. The State did not give school districts autonomy in managing their own districts and disallowed any extension of online or hybrid learning. We know from colleges that hybrid in-person/remote learning would have allowed students in quarantine to keep up from home and still be counted present. GCISD had the technology available for interested students, but instead, those students had to miss weeks of instruction.
In addition, demographic information from TEA shows huge shifts in GCISD’s enrolled students in dyslexia, special education, gifted & talented over the past 10 years. Our Title I enrollment decreased, while our Economically Disadvantaged students remained about the same percentage. GCISD now receives less federal money to serve our students with some of the greatest needs. The added pressures of the pandemic only compounded that impact.
2. Programs: It’s false of our New School Board Majority to say “it doesn’t cost more to challenge our students”. Differentiated learning does require specialized and tiered rigor (on-level, advanced, accelerated, STEM, ASPIRE), which in turn require more class sections and likely more teachers. GCISD’s ability to meet all levels of learners combined with our variety of interest areas is attractive to home buyers, because parents know students are most challenged when they are in an environment for which they are uniquely suited. But the New School Board Majority is now standardizing GCISD’s education offerings and focusing just on core content and test scores.
Follow up question:
Is the NSBM planning to max out class size? That leads to reducing and constraining flexibility in the schedule, which leads to less specialized programs, less variables to support and ultimately less opportunities for students to excel in their differentiated strengths.
An example of this reduced flexibility by our New School Board Majority: Despite claims that nothing is at risk of being cut, this week the high school principals announced that they were eliminating Block Scheduling, which gives kids an academic advantage in college admissions. Parents got an email without the Board of Trustees offering discussion or explanation. What will be cut next? ASPIRE? STEM at Colleyville Heritage? Will CHHS get back GT sections of AP classes? Answer: We don’t know what’s next on the chopping block — but we do know it’s not acceptable to assume all kids in the same grade can learn on the same level in all subjects. We should not expect our teachers to appropriately challenge a packed room of students on varying levels, just so the New School Board Majority can report they are streamlining costs. Our New School Board Majority gloats that they’re getting back to basics, and that it’s just common budgeting sense to have all kids on the same instructional level and learn at the same pace. Except we all know kids aren’t cookie cutter, and GCISD knows it, too! Or has, in the past.
2021-22 Staff Information (TAPR) GRAPEVINE-COLLEYVILLE ISD (220906) – TARRANT COUNTY
For reference, this chart from TEA shows how our district supports several programs, meeting the needs of all different kinds of learners.
3. Block Schedule: A “Straight Eight” school day of eight 45-minute periods that meet daily offers the same number of instructional minutes as a Block Schedule of 90-minute periods that meet every other day. GCISD has tried Straight Eight before and switched back to Block Schedule within two years. The drawbacks to the Straight Eight schedule are many.
First, teachers’ daily planning periods will not perfectly align with other teachers in their academic subject or department. It’s possible two Algebra teachers in the same building won’t ever meet unless it’s during their personal time.
Second, the only way to “offer more” through a Straight Eight schedule is to extend the double-blocked courses (Athletics, Fine Arts or Career & Technical Education) into before or after school time. Would GCISD compensate teachers for that time that is usually built into the school day?
Third, changing to Straight Eight requires a review of all students who have extended time on assignments or tests with 504 plans or IEPs (8% of district or 1,152 students). How do they fit in their extracurriculars and their class work, and have the right support (including paraprofessionals) to be successful? There simply will not be enough classroom time to allow those students to finish, which will cause more before and after school time for those students, as well. Typically, those students have been supported by paraprofessionals, a staffing category GCISD underpays and is at most risk for remaining unfilled. If a student whose IEP allows them extra time, will they have enough time before and after school to finish work in multiple classes each day? We are concerned the Straight Eight plan could keep our students with 504 plans out of extracurriculars entirely.
4. Curriculum: We’ll say it slowly: GCISD. Has. Always. Had. A. Curriculum. The district has maintained a written curriculum for its core content areas for a long time. It’s false to mix up “curriculum,” “lesson plans,” and “teaching resources.” GCISD has always had a curriculum. It was just different for different student programs and levels.
The district has adopted comprehensive instructional materials for every content area on the schedule set forth by the state. Our old curriculum from 10 years ago used a print textbook and followed it in order, regardless of how well it addressed the standards or demonstrated a logical progression of learning. For about 2 years, GCISD has used the TEKS Resource System from the State of Texas, which weaves the state’s teaching guide into GCISD’s curriculum documents. GCISD has renewed its contract for the TEKS instructional materials in math, science, social studies, and English. The “new reading curriculum” that the New School Board Majority recently purchased is not curriculum; it is materials (books) used by some populations of students.
5. Finances: Let’s start with the New School Board Majority’s decision –“26 high school teachers that leave will not be replaced.” What if those teachers have a special skill set? Will we force a teacher without appropriate background to teach that class?
If you have attended past school board meetings you have witnessed Human Resources reports where staffing studies are discussed. So, the fact is this was NOT the first study. The facts we should be hearing about are if the latest audit took into account the unique nature of GCISD and our special programs. There is no evidence to support this.
Follow up questions:
Did it account for the highly skilled staff that support these programs? It’s unclear if the audit results were even helpful. To “absorb” 26 teaching positions and say elsewhere that class sizes will be lowered without losing academic offerings is insulting, and definitely not factual.
How many teachers can we find to teach Multivariable Calculus to high schoolers? (Currently, zero; those students are teaching themselves.) What about AP Research and AP Seminar?
How many teachers are licensed to work with our special needs students?
Before the attack on public schools brought on by partisan politics during the pandemic, our teacher retention rate was exceptional, and every opening attracted tons of applicants. What we are experiencing now is not normal. In a quest to appease their anti-public school supporters, the New School Board Majority announced a (fake) balanced budget, implemented a tax cut, continued to tie the hands of teachers, administration, and support staff and make their lives more difficult when they could have been focusing purely on learning gaps.
The nature of public school finances and budgeting doesn’t support a “fluid” budget. When you have set costs, you can’t pretend like they don’t exist and then modify them monthly.
If you know Gas costs $400 a month for your family, you can’t budget $50 and call it balanced when you know you have to add to it every month! Why do you think our longtime Chief Financial Officer left? Did she know the task being asked of her was impossible? Was she being asked to present a budget that violated her duty to the district?
6. Teacher Attrition & Teacher Pay: Since our school district was taken over by the New School Board Majority in May 2022, we have seen a dramatic increase in turnover. So much so that it is now being considered “normal!” The turnover in positions in ‘20-’21 and ‘21-’22 is not the same as we saw pre-takeover. WFAA reported that resignations/retirements were 40% higher this year. It is indicative of a shift in culture in GCISD.
Regarding pay, past School Boards ALSO voted to approve multiple teacher pay raises and attempted to close gaps in pay relative to other districts.
More follow-up questions:
Is the New School Board Majority committed to adding $5 million to the budget annually? Or are they calling for a balanced budget that requires cutting teaching positions in addition to the administrative positions and support personnel that have already been cut?
Have we asked our teachers if a 4% raise is worth the toxic environment that the new board majority has created? Is it worth losing block scheduling? Losing Programs of Choice? Losing our bench of administrative staff and paraprofessionals? Being forced to teach multiple students on varying levels in the same class? Being forced to accept teaching classes outside of their expertise or resign?
7. Strategic Plan: Of course GCISD has a strategic plan. A plan that developed award-winning programs, and created an award-winning work environment. A plan that prioritizes public education for all learners.
LEAD 2021 and LEAD 2.0 involved dozens of community volunteers, parents, teachers and students and led to Dr. Ryan getting 2018 Superintendent of the Year, our Board getting Board of the Year, the development of STEM, AVID, ASPIRE, iUniversity Prep, Collegiate Academy, TECC Center, tuition based pre-K programs, and 1:1 device rollout. Those programs improved standings in Advanced Placement, Dual Credit, and Lone Star Cup, increased identification of students with dyslexia, etc. and allowed students to excel in areas that are most important to them. That was not by accident!
The “Top 100 Places to Work in DFW” award was a very important indicator of how happy employees were in GCISD and is now being falsely called a “fake award that the district paid for!” The only thing the Dallas Morning News charges for is a detailed copy of the survey results, upon request, after the winners were announced. Read the details from the Dallas Morning News. GCISD used the free survey but did not pay to see the survey results. It is completely misleading for a GCISD Trustee to say in a public meeting that it was an award we paid for, when in fact, GCISD is no longer a recipient of the award due to tanked ratings submitted by the 1800 employees who took the workplace culture survey.
Speaking of strategy, it doesn’t seem strategic of the State of Texas or of the GCISD New School Board Majority to underfund our schools and court private schools to take over. State-level decisions contribute to local funding. We need pro-public education trustees to influence our State Legislators. It doesn’t seem innovative for the New School Board Majority to spend a year writing and implementing a new Board policy requiring Board approval (really) to reorder a lost library book. It doesn’t seem strategic or thoughtful that the New School Board Majority didn’t mention it was cutting Programs of Choice and eliminating block scheduling at their board meeting less than 48 hours prior.
8. Innovation: It is not innovative for a trustee to further divide the community by referring to “my side” and make the speaker rounds bragging about the destruction of GCISD and how the board majority has purposely not advocated for the entire GCISD population as a whole. It is not innovative to give everyone the same standard education by eliminating programs students find meaningful. That is the factory school model we fought to replace over a decade ago when faced with declining enrollment. Our Special Programs saved us from having to close campuses. Our Special Programs brought new families into GCISD. If we allow trustees to get elected who are pushing us backwards, our students will never be prepared for the jobs of tomorrow. It is not innovative to force our students into daily “speed dating” running through eight 45-minute classes a day.
Follow up questions:
If it’s true that bussing will still be offered, how will those kids get to one campus and back without missing half of class? Interestingly, it might have been more innovative to actually consider a 4-day a week schedule, or a hybrid schedule like colleges offer. Seeking input from stakeholders on the dozens of options in between block scheduling and 8-period days would have at least demonstrated innovation through community involvement.
It’s also not innovative to falsely claim not to cut important Special Programs but then make changes that so severely harm them they eventually lose support.
Follow up questions:
When students decide they can’t realistically change campus under the 45-minute class schedule, will they then eliminate bussing for lack of interest?
When kids have to pick between extracurriculars and extra electives, will they start removing classes with low participation? And add another fact, currently, our district is maxed out in our ability to seat kids in CTE classes.
When the board majority claims they are looking to “benefit everyone” does that include people that learn, look, or think differently from them? Their track record to date proves that isn’t the case.
Elect candidates who put excellence over extremism
If you’ve read this far, you are probably tired. We are so, so, so tired of spending our time rebutting the stretttttchhhhhedddd facts shared by the New School Board Majority and those that have run for previous elections backed by the same extremists. But we are doing this to get out the truth. We can take back GCISD in the May 6th school board election if we help our neighbors see the truth and choose candidates who will stand up against the extremist New School Board Majority. We must band together and elect candidates who are committed to Excellence, Independence, and Respect in GCISD.
We need trustees who will stand up for our students and staff, seek input from our community, facilitate respectful discussion, & make financial decisions with integrity. Who better than involved GCISD parents: a current teacher, a retired teacher, and a management consultant with extensive GCISD volunteerism!
Here’s a few options for citizens of Grapevine and Colleyville to get plugged into the conversations and to hear how the candidates will be addressing key concerns from our community.
We also wanted to outline a few priority areas to be looking for when you talk with your friends, or if you get a chance to directly speak with a candidate.
Three things to consider when preparing a vote for School Board positions:
We need TRANSPARENCY in how the school board runs GCISD
Will we be able to follow Trustee actions and contribute to decision making through an open, transparent process?
Many concerned citizens of Grapevine and Colleyville question the legitimacy of the “balanced” budget. The New School Board Majority knowing not all expenses were reflected, has repeatedly claimed the budget was balanced, even though it is now being adjusted monthly.
We need to KEEP OUR TEACHERS because they are the key to an excellent education
Will leadership make choices and support programs to keep our teachers, so we maintain our track record of excellence in education?
Keeping teachers through appropriate raises, professional development supports and a healthy work environment is an option, to avoid the costs of hiring and recruiting and training a new generation of teachers.
Since the New Board Majority assumed control, we have lost 175 EDUCATORS AND COUNTING. These spots have been replaced with 140 new hires on one-year probationary contracts.
We need public education to be first priority, including giving students choice within programs
What can we do to maintain the differentiated learning programs that bring value for being known as a Destination District?
Hasty actions will negatively impact the specialized learning options students and their families current have.
Ensure we continue to uphold LEAD 2.0 plans, originally called LEAD 2021. And make sure School Board Trustees keep student success as a primary goal. You can find the full plan here.
Students are prepared and informed to participate in programs and activities that align to their interests. Students are supported in growing their potential and making choices about their future. Students feel confident in selecting from our variety of programs and activities.
Our hearts are full. Our community has UNITED over the love of books and over $10,000 in books will be donated to support local readers! Sadly, our excitement was dampened by the reality of GCISD’s excessively complicated new policies governing all book donations, including to teachers for use at school and in classroom libraries. Book fair organizers worked tirelessly to find a way to get the donated books to students through GCISD, uncovering a policy so incredibly cumbersome that it is completely impractical, and not as parent-choice focused as some claim.
When we realized how large the donation would be, our distribution goal was to maximize impact and minimize the burden on teachers or librarians. Book fair volunteers worked all week leading up to the board meeting to find a simple process. We landed on donating Scholastic book credits so librarians and teachers could order books from a GCISD approved list, seemingly the least complicated way to get your donations to students. Obviously, it was not that simple. It turned out that the district would not accept Scholastic book credits, seemingly because Scholastic is no longer an approved vendor. The only option was for us to do the shopping and donate physical books, but book donations are subject to the same burdensome acquisition policy governing libraries and classrooms. So we dug into the policy. And don’t forget that even after all of this:
Any parent can challenge a book and, “Any material removed shall not be eligible for consideration to be added again for at least ten years.”
The District Librarian (a position currently vacant) or District Designee (who has a primary job other than this!) would have to read $10,000 worth of books in order to recommend or decline each book to the school board. They would have to then post the list on the district website for a 30 day parental review period, and make the books available for direct review upon request. Board members can request individual copies up to 15 days prior to the board review. The librarian has to acquire them, but can’t buy them, because they haven’t been approved! After the waiting period, the board would vote on any books pulled for individual consideration. Finally, the district would post a list online of approved and declined books, and the approved books could finally be acquired.
After all of that, librarians still have to decide where in GCISD to shelve the books based on reading level and content. They have to determine the books that are appropriate for the subject area and for the age, ability level, learning styles, interests, and social and emotional development of the students for whom they are selected; ensure they enrich the curriculum; meet high standards of quality; help students gain awareness of our pluralistic society; motivate students to examine their own attitudes and behaviors viewed as a whole and not excluded because of isolated passages; promote literacy; balance cost with need; incorporate accurate and authentic factual content; align with TEKS to the extent possible to develop civil knowledge; present founding documents in an objective, neutral, comprehensive and unbiased manner appropriately for grade level; and earn favorable reviews in standard reviewing sources.
It didn’t take long to confirm our original suspicion that if United for GCISD donated $10,000 in physical books it would have put an unfair burden on librarians due to the lack of clarity in the policy at all levels. In the end, we simply could not use our community’s generous donations to test a system that could take months to process, if at all. For full details, view the GCISD board policies online.
How can parents have choice over what their students read, if the book they need isn’t on the shelf?
We spoke at the November board meeting to ask again that the board reconsider this burdensome anti-literacy policy and stop removing books from the shelves. We suggested instead an opt-out policy like McKinney ISD passed, accomplishing the same goal with far fewer adverse consequences.
Join us as we continue to fight censorship and support literacy by putting excellence, respect, and independence back in GCISD.
Follow @UnitedforGCISD for more updates on the distribution of our community’s generous donations after our online United for GCISD Community Book Fair ends Nov. 18! Choose our original host location “Grapevine Convention Center” in the drop-down menu. Sales will still benefit local kids who rely on community support to have books at home and all book purchases over $25 ship free!
District Librarian or other Designee can recommend to the board, certifying that they have read it.
No recommendations made directly to the Board by District campuses, departments, employees, students, or members of the public shall be considered for acquisition.
To ensure parental engagement, the District shall post online on the District’s website, on a readily available page, the selection process of library materials for parental review along with a list of all current library materials, and the content of all materials shall be available for direct review during reasonable hours as specified by the District.
If any Board member questions or desires further information on any proposed new acquisition, whether title or author, he or she shall contact the Superintendent at least 15 days before consideration by the Board. The Superintendent or designee shall then contact the District-level library supervisor to obtain copies of professional reviews of any library material in question. Until approved by the Board, the District may not acquire any proposed New Acquisitions, even for the purpose of Board review.
The order for library materials in its entirety, including any materials in question by individual Board members, shall be presented to the Board following a 30-day review period.
Upon request by a Board member, specific books shall be pulled from the recommended list for individual consideration. The Board shall consider and vote on the recommended list along with any books pulled for individual consideration.
A list of all library materials recommended for acquisition shall be posted on the District’s website. Following the Board vote, all library materials approved for acquisition shall be added to the District’s website list of library materials. Materials individually considered by the Board or rejected for acquisition shall be clearly indicated on the list.
A librarian, or designee, must then consider how the books:
Enrich and support the curriculum consistent with the general educational goals of the state and District, the aims and objectives of individual schools and specific courses, and the District and campus improvement plans.
Are appropriate for the subject area and for the age, ability level, learning styles, interests, and social and emotional development of the students for whom they are selected.
Meet high standards for artistic quality, literary style, authenticity, educational significance, factual content, physical format, presentation, readability, and technical quality.
Are designed to help students gain an awareness of our pluralistic society.
Are designed to provide information that will motivate students and staff to examine their own attitudes and behavior; to understand their duties, responsibilities, rights, and privileges as citizens participating in our society; and to make informed choices in their daily lives.
Are viewed as a whole and are not excluded because of isolated passages or illustrations, language, and the like, being taken out of context.
Balance cost with need.
For nonfiction resources, a librarian, or designee, must incorporate accurate and authentic factual content from authoritative sources.
Earn favorable reviews in standard reviewing sources and/or favorable recommendations based on preview and examination of materials by professional personnel.
To the extent possible, while ensuring instruction in the TEKS are designed to develop each student’s civil knowledge, including:
An understanding of (i) the fundamental moral, political, and intellectual foundations of the American experiment in self-government: (ii) the history, qualities, traditions, and features of civic engagement in the United States; (iii) the structure, function, and processes of government institutions at the federal, state, and local levels; and (iv) the founding documents of the United States.
The ability to (i) analyze and determine the reliability of information sources; (ii) formulate and articulate reasoned positions; (iii) understand the manner in which lo- cal, state, and federal government works and operates through the use of simulations and models of govern- mental and democratic processes; (iv) actively listen and engage in civil discourse, including discourse with those with different viewpoints, and (v) participate as a citizen in a constitutional democracy by voting; and
An appreciation of (i) the importance and responsibility of participating in civic life; (ii) a commitment to the United States and its form of government; and (iii) a commitment to free speech and civil discourse.
19. When providing instruction regarding the founding documents of the United States, these shall be presented appropriately for the grade level, and in an objective, neutral, comprehensive and unbiased manner that respects the entirety of the document. The founding documents of the United States include the Declaration of Independence; the United States Constitution; the Federalist Papers, including the Essays 10 and 51; excerpts from Alexis de Tocqueville’s Democracy in America; the transcript of the first Lincoln-Douglas debate: the writings of the founding fathers of the United States; Frederick Douglass’s speeches “The Meaning of July Fourth for the Negro” and “What the Black Man Wants”; and Martin Luther King Jr.’s speech “I have a Dream”.
In addition to the above criteria, fiction, narrative nonfiction (memoirs and biographies), and graphic novels must each meet the following selection criteria, with the District determining that such materials:
Are integral or supplemental to the instructional program.
Support the District’s literacy initiatives.
Reflect the interests and needs of the students and faculty.
Are appropriate for the reading levels and understanding of students.
Are included because of their literary or artistic value and merit.
If narrative nonfiction, present information with the greatest degree of accuracy and clarity.
20. Librarians must then check each student’s opt-in form, which some families still don’t have or know that they have, to see if the student is allowed to check out the book.
And finally, after 20 steps to acquire a book (accept a book donation and put it into a school library), a student can select a book from the books that remain on the shelves and take it home to discuss with family.