To the Editor,
As the parent of a Lab School student involved in the effort to fend off the Superintendent’s relentless assault on the program, I have found the last three and a half months to be very eye opening. Not only did this fight publicly expose a very ugly side to this administration, but the shameless denial of Lab School eligibility to students who had too many absences due to documented health reasons lay bare an alarming level of cruelty that, I’ve come to learn, is simply par for the course in this district’s treatment of students with special needs and their families.
But equally eye opening has been my realization of the futility of appealing to the school board in matters of oversight, accountability, and fairness. This is not fundamentally a problem with individual board members, many of whom are genuinely well meaning and take their job seriously. Rather, it is a structural problem.
It is the fact that they are encouraged, from day one, to maintain a cordial relationship with the Superintendent and treat her as a colleague rather than the employee she actually is, a situation which tends to favor deference over accountability.
It is the fact that the intimate working relationship between school board and Superintendent is built upon a privileged communication channel by which virtually all information board members have access to is information that comes from the administration, and thus reflects the administration’s perspective and agenda.
It is the fact that Bethlehem’s district policy manual lacks language that gives the Board any real authority, so that curricular or programmatic actions can be taken without scrutiny or input beyond a small cadre of administrators. Compare this to the language in the Voorheesville district manual, which states that “complete and final authority on all district educational matters, except as restricted by law, will be vested in the Board,” and one can start to see the very abnormal power dynamics at play. It seems clear that the administration has sought to maintain tight control over its fiefdom.
Where does that leave the Board? As a necessary safety valve through which to channel and ultimately defuse public anger. Letters to the board are encouraged. Space is provided at meetings for public comment. Board members will politely listen and may even speak separately with concerned constituents. But this process is all illusion, as is the hope for any real accountability. For at the end of the day, the house always wins.
This was precisely our experience. Time and again we challenged the administration’s narrative with hard facts and data. We repeatedly demonstrated its pattern of dishonesty and bad faith in the way it has tried to kill the program and the way it handled the 8th grade recruitment effort. Current students and alumni provided impassioned testimony that spoke to the benefits and transformational nature of Lab School on their lives. We appealed to the Board to take what we were saying seriously.
But none of this mattered. And the sad thing is that none of it ever mattered because the board is simply not in a position to operate as an effective governing body given the structural and ideological constraints under which it finds itself. It has neither the will nor the means to seriously challenge the administration and its so-called expertise. It can only trust the administration when it claims it is doing what is in the best interest of our children, even when that mantra is used as cover for actions that most obviously are not.
It doesn’t have to be this way. The students and families of Bethlehem deserve better. But for this to happen there has to be change. Change in the relationship between Board and Superintendent. Change to district policy that codifies the meaningful participation of parents in the education and well-being of their children. And, ultimately, change to the composition of the Board, for these other changes cannot happen until there are enough members who possess the will to force them through.
Arthur Siegel,
Delmar
