Thursday, March 19, 2015

Jill Quinones' Guest Column in Today's Clarendon Courier: A Commentary on the "Positives" of the "Blog"


We have been alerted that the Clarendon Courier ran two "columns" today dealing with our Blog. First, thank you again to the Courier for the free publicity.  The first column was written by Mike McCurry, one of the Courier's regular columnists, a "prominent advertiser" in the Courier (see Courier Editor Ellis' comment to 3/13/15 Post), a Clarendon Hill's realtor and husband of D181 Candidate Amy McCurry.  We are not going to publish his column because we are turned off by Mr. McCurry using his column in any way to reference his wife's candidacy, after Mr. Ellis specifically stated during the Courier debate last week that his paper would not be issuing any endorsements.  If other candidates' supporters have to pay the Courier to run advertisements (case in point, the Hinsdale Caucus ad), then why does Mr. McCurry get to do an end run around this?  Just the latest example, in our opinion, of the conflicts of interest that have cast a shadow on the D181 election season.

We are, however, posting a copy of Clarendon Hill's resident Jill Quinones' column, that Mr. Ellis apparently invited her to write.  As Ms. Quinones points out, she is not the "blogger" although she has posted on her name to the blog.

Thanks to Ms. Quinones for her insightful and appropriate column.









Here are some Comments Ms. Quinones has submitted to the Blog as further elaboration on the content of her column:



Jill Quinones said...
Part 1 - When Mr. Ellis asked me to write the column he didn't tell me the focus of Mr. McCurry's column would be on the anonymity issue or I would have addressed it more. while I am not a fan of anonymous comments that bully, I think Mr. McCurry is a bit detached from what actually occurs in D181 when he says that the only reason to justify posting anonymously would be to avoid terrorism, tyrannical regimes and/or severe punishment, but that those things don't exists in our community.

One only needs to look at the D86 Facebook Ax Through Window fares that had teachers temporarily threatened with legal action for merely liking a Facebook post until saner heads prevailed. One can tell from some of the anonymous comments that these are D181 teachers posting. If you think they are not concerned about retaliation, you are wrong.
Jill Quinones said...
Part 2 -

Parents, too, fear retaliation from District Administrators and Board Members - against their children and themselves. And, yes, there have been instances where unfortunately this has happened when parents have spoken up in their school or at BOE meetings. I am not one of those parents because woe be the teacher or administrator who unfairly messes with me or my student, but if you know me you know I am a little more outspoken than most - another reason for anonymity.
Jill quinones said...
Part 3 - Final reason for anonymity - feet of critical judgement by your fellow community members. Again, I could care less if others disagree with my opinion - every one is entitled to their own. And I try not to use my opinion to harm or bully anyone. But honestly, this is a very judgmental community. I have lived in many different communities, and as lovely as my friends, neighbors, and acquaintances are here in the D181 school district, strong opinions and judgements are not only belonging to anonymous bloggers.

Some people are honestly afraid of being ostracized (themselves and/or their kids) for voicing a different opinion). Should their fear require them to stay silent? 


31 comments:

Anonymous said...

Thank you for sharing this. I wish that the Clarendon Courier had kindly distributed this issue of its paper to the Hinsdale community. So that Hinsdale residents would have been able to read a differing viewpoint on this blog. Unlike the Hinsdalean, the Courier has presented both viewpoints, so as to be fair to both sides.

Anonymous said...

Bravo to Ms. Quinones! Thank you so much for agreeing to write the column opposite to McCurry's column. You have presented sound, reasonable, rationale reasons why the Blog exists.

To the Bloggers: Keep telling it like it is!

Anonymous said...

Blogger: I completely agree with everything Jill Quinones said in her column. You are not bullies. You have provided the community with a forum to speak out (without fear of repercussion) that was sorely lacking. No doubt if the BOE or administration would simply have one or two town hall meetings each year, the blog might not need to exist. Perhaps it Burns, Czerwiec, Giltner and Gray are elected things will change. But you can bet your bottom dollar that nothing will change if McCurry and Turek are elected.

Anonymous said...

Thank you for taking the time to do this, Ms. Quinones! While some posters and rude and nasty, I think most of try to be as factual and informative as possible. A few bad apples does not a bad blog make!

Anonymous said...

Bloggers: There is a comment on Facebook today from a person named Catherine Johnson claiming that you have not published comments she has posted on her name. She states: "I've submitted comments with my name signed (every time!) They seem to only publish comments that they agree with ..Be accountable to what you do and say, anonymous bloggers - if you want the voices of the parents, print all comments, even if they don't advocate your political choices! That's integrity and respectful behavior."

Care to comment if this is true?

The Parents said...

5:26: Thank you for bringing the Facebook comment to our attention. We can say with 100% certainty that we have never received a signed comment from Ms. Johnson. As for her statement that we only publish comments that we agree with, our readers know that is not true. The only comments that we have refused to publish (and those don't include any we have received from Ms. Johnson) are comments that contained so much profanity (against administrators or certain past or present board members) that they clearly violated our guidelines for publication. We have no reason to lie. WE are telling the truth.

Jill Quinones said...

Part 1 - When Mr. Ellis asked me to write the column he didn't tell me the focus of Mr. McCurry's column would be on the anonymity issue or I would have addressed it more. while I am not a fan of anonymous comments that bully, I think Mr. McCurry is a bit detached from what actually occurs in D181 when he says that the only reason to justify posting anonymously would be to avoid terrorism, tyrannical regimes and/or severe punishment, but that those things don't exists in our community.

One only needs to look at the D86 Facebook Ax Through Window fares that had teachers temporarily threatened with legal action for merely liking a Facebook post until saner heads prevailed. One can tell from some of the anonymous comments that these are D181 teachers posting. If you think they are not concerned about retaliation, you are wrong.

Jill Quinones said...

Part 2 -

Parents, too, fear retaliation from District Administrators and Board Members - against their children and themselves. And, yes, there have been instances where unfortunately this has happened when parents have spoken up in their school or at BOE meetings. I am not one of those parents because woe be the teacher or administrator who unfairly messes with me or my student, but if you know me you know I am a little more outspoken than most - another reason for anonymity.

Anonymous said...

Parents: This is 5:26. Thank you for responding immediately to the allegations made on Facebook. Too bad some people want to make stuff up. I have read your blog and know it is true that you print the good and bad stuff people say about you or other anonymous commentors. I just wanted to confirm that you hadn't deleted any of this woman's comments or if you did what your reason for doing so was. Keep on blogging! Most parents I have spoken to fully support the blog!

Jill quinones said...

Part 3 - Final reason for anonymity - feet of critical judgement by your fellow community members. Again, I could care less if others disagree with my opinion - every one is entitled to their own. And I try not to use my opinion to harm or bully anyone. But honestly, this is a very judgmental community. I have lived in many different communities, and as lovely as my friends, neighbors, and acquaintances are here in the D181 school district, strong opinions and judgements are not only belonging to anonymous bloggers.

Some people are honestly afraid of being ostracized (themselves and/or their kids) for voicing a different opinion). Should their fear require them to stay silent?

Jill quinones said...

Part 4 - I have tried to re-read some of the comments that were posted about Mrs.McCurry on the Blog. I certainly don't have the time or desire to review all of them. I suppose the fact that the Bloggers chose to articulate that they didn't think Mrs. McCurry was an appropriate candidate and give reasons, reasons onto which others added their thoughts, could be perceived as bullying, but I wish Mr. McCurry could have articulated some specific comments that he thought were bullying.

When there are more candidates running for an office is it bullying to point out the weaknesses of an opponent as well as pointing out the strengths of the candidates you support? In my opinion it would depend on (i) whether you were attacking the person's character (bullying) or just his actions and stands on issues (not bullying), (ii) dragging personal issues into the comments (bullying) or stating non-emotional facts (not bullying).

It is sad how politics very often gets down to candidates ripping each other to shreds, but I guess I missed the attacks on Mrs. McCurry's character and intelligence that Mr. McCurry notes. Questioning a candidate's level of experience, which he also believes is bullying, I think is fair.

Anonymous said...

Thank you for publishing Ms. Quinones's commentary. And thank you Ms. Quinones for writing such an eloquent piece. I agree with the above comments and don't think I could say anything more other than thank you for giving me a place to share my deep concerns for my children and for my community. The reason the blog exists is bc of the poor leadership in the administration and the BOE. They don't listen to anybody....don't listen to parents or teachers or principals, so what else is there to do?

Anonymous said...

Those who criticize anonymity use their complaint as a crutch because they have no meaningful response to the substance of the anonymous comment.

The Federalist Papers were published anonymously! One of our schools is named after a President who authored several of the Federalist Papers anonymously.

If it was good enough for Madison, it's certainly good for me.

The Learning for All Plan at its genesis was not a plan. It was a power point presentation. Our school board approved a power point presentation as the charter document to guide instruction of our children. Shame on them!

At the time, I challenged our administration that if you roll out a plan with NO detail, it becomes whatever a given administrator at any given moment says it is. Who can disagree with an unwritten plan?

When the "plan" proved to be a disaster, it morphed. The administration decided to draft a "seminal document." The administration clearly doesn't know what "seminal" means. You see, a seminal document is first. It's the initial document that influences later documents, or if you like, its "progeny."

Anyway, the "seminal document" is incomprehensible. It is rife with pull quotes attributed to no one. There are end notes, but they are not cited ANYWHERE in the text. And if you dig a little deeper, you find the research is cherry picked and misapplied to meet the author's political ends. If this was a high school composition paper, it gets an F. And Marty LOVES it! That's really all you need to know to conclude it's not worth the paper it's written on.

The only shot we have to reverse course is with the election of a new board. We need people who demand data, proof, and at least a coherent argument. What we currently have are a bunch of rubber stampers who lack critical thinking skills or are afraid to speak up (Garg and Hennegan notwithstanding).

If we do not elect Gray, Czerwiec, Giltner, and Burns to the board, we get the same old crap and we will deserve it. And then it will be shame on us.

Anonymous said...

Yes, thank you for taking the time to write this piece, Jill. It is very well done.

Differing viewpoints and open, respectful dialogue should not only be celebrated but encouraged. It's a powerful combination. Honestly, that's what I would like to see return to our district.

Joanna Brinckerhoff
Monroe and CHMS Parent

Anonymous said...

I believe Catherine Johnson is just trying to get a rise out of everyone.

She is one of Amy McCurry's supporters and there is nothing wrong with her expressing support for her, but trying to discredit the writers of the blog is really poor form.

I've seen plenty of comments on the blog that ran contrary to the Parents' opinions but they have still posted them.

Anonymous said...

Yes, if you are a regular reader of the blog you know that the bloggers have posted numerous comments critical of themselves. If Ms. johnson is truly a supporter of Ms. McCurry, then Ms. McCurry should be careful with whom she associates.

Anonymous said...

Bloggers: Apparently now Ms. Johnson has taken to Facebook stating that she has screenshots of what she has submitted that the bloggers haven't published. She posted the screenshots, one which looks like the facebook comment she made earlier tonight and another dealing with freedom of speech and selection bias. She also suggests that perhaps she submitted the comments incorrectly.

Care to comment?

Anonymous said...

When I try to post from my phone it doesn't work if that's what Ms. Johnson tried. Alternatively, why would she take screen shots of her posts if it wasn't to try to set-up the blog??

The Parents said...

8:16 p.m. Again, we repeat, we haven't gotten ANY comments from Ms. Johnson, tonight or in the past. If we do, unless they contain vulgar profanity or outright lies with no substantiation, we will publish them. Perhaps Ms. Johnson hasn't submitted them correctly -- as she herself suggests. So here is a primer on submitting comments:
Step 1: If you are looking at a blog post on a computer, go to Comments and scroll to the end of the comment stream and then click on "post a comment." That will open a box in which you can type your comment. Step 2: Type your comment. Step 3: Click on the box below the text box that says "I'm not a robot." It will either automatically verify you are not a robot, or it will ask you to type some letters that appear on the screen, or select a photo that it identifies. Step 4: Once your are verified to not be a robot, choose your identity. If you click "Name" you will then be able to type in a name. Step 5: Click "Publish Your Comment." Step 6: The blogger moderator then receives it.

If you are submitting on a smart phone, you can scroll to the bottom of the post and comments and a text box appears that allows you to type a comment. You must still select an identity (anonymous or name, and then type in your identity) and then you must hit "Publish" at the end of the text box. and depending on what smart phone you are using, sometimes (not always) you will have another box appear asking you to verify that you are not a robot.

If you miss any of these steps, the moderator will not receive your comment.

Hope this helps Ms. Johnson and others.

Finally, this will be the last comment we publish that references Ms. Johnson unless she submits a comment for publication. Let's get back to the actual substantive issues, shall we?

Anonymous said...

If I knew who the moderators of the blog were, I could ask "them" directly why my comments were not published. Operator error? Server error? Who knows? Anonymity inherently confounds the credibility of this blog. How might readers know how many comments you receive and what percentage you publish? Shall
we await an "anonymous" answer? This is an important election and please vote for four candidates on April 7th as ALL of the candidates are volunteering to serve our community.
I would like to offer my previously submitted comment for publication:
I am concerned that some of the accusations and statements made on this blog are worrisome for cyber-defamation. I have commented to this blog (always with my signature) and have never seen my comments published to the website. Does this site promote freedom of speech or rampant selection bias for a specific agenda to diminish the efforts of volunteer BOE members and vetted administrators? I encourage all writers and commentaters of this blog to have the courage, civility and integrity to sign their name to their opinions. I believe your collective transparency will indeed more effectively influence the leadership of D181.
Thank you for your consideration,
Catherine Johnson, MD FACEP

Anonymous said...

Ms. Johnson,

I am not sure why your posts have not been published, but I know that I have sometimes submitted views that are in direct conflict with the majority of the posters here, every time that I have done so, it has been published.

I think that, the blog is more effective when opposing views can be debated on their merits. I think that most of the posters here prefer to discuss facts and evidence, and have open disagreement.

Usually, it is hard to find someone to make a cogent argument for certain actions that the administration has taken. I am hopeful that you are up to the task.

Additionally, if the argument is substantive, the name really should not matter. Make a substantive and well reasoned argument backed by evidence and site your sources and people will listen.



Anonymous said...

Thanks for posting Ms Johnson. While I agree that in some ways, posting with your name is more impactful and can promote meaningful discussion, I can tell you for a fact that there have been repercussions against parents and even students as a result of parents' criticisms of the administration , the Learning For All plan, etc... Additionally, I have been told that, in the past, teachers were also told by administrators, in so many words and directly, to "get with the program" or go elsewhere. I even know of one parent who decided to leave the district after a teacher made a comment to her child about the parent's involvement. I myself have received numerous "dirty looks" and some snide comments from district employees who support the Learning For All plan and who know I have spoken out against it. All of this is indeed unfortunate but it is the truth and it is why many parents choose to share their concerns anonymously. I can assure you that many are also writing the BOE and administration as well, with their names, they just may not choose to go public here.

In all fairness, I have never heard any stories of any type of disrespect from Dr. White. Because of this, and the increased transparency (we still have a ways to go) we have seen under his administration, I am hopeful that a day will come when a blog such as this is no longer needed, the D181 community is once again united in our support of the district and everyone feels good about what is happening with their children in the classroom. What is happening to our community today is not only a shame but is truly unprecedented in a district that has been known for its top-notch education. As one of the BOE candidates said, the blog exists for a reason and that reason is that parents have not felt that they have had another medium to be not only heard, but listened to.

Anonymous said...

So the Opinion Editorial in the Hinsdalean is quite interesting. In the 2nd column it states in reference to the D86 board and advisory referendum questions, "Our biggest problem with these questions is they ask voters to make decisions board members should be making for themselves. That's why there is a school board election every two years - so residents can choose members to sit on the seven-member board whose job it is to set the direction of the district." It ends with "But when it comes to day-to-day operations, residents need and deserve leadership from their school board."

Does this advice not apply to D181? Shouldn't they endorse candidates who know the issues, who understand the financial inter workings of a school district so that residents can rely on them to make the right decisions for them and their children. We deserve people who show they are trust worthy and won't use the usual cop out of "The administrators are the experts" so that they don't have to make any decision.

jay_wick said...

The evolving world of cyber communication is not easy to navigate. The social mores that go along with with "constant connectivity" are not firmly established. I know that some otherwise normal-looking people quite literally interact non-stop with their smart phones even while attending formal meetings; are they sending some message that they just don't want to listen / interact with you? Clueless? Rude? How is one to break through this sort of thing?

In any event, the potential benefits from tapping into social media and blogs are proportional to the value of the content / skills of the authors. The ease of communicating with an established "blogger id" or other non-anonymous means seems to be a good thing to me. It is well known that my frustrations with the secrecy of this blog caused me to launch an effort to "unmask" the hosts and I lost that "battle".

Similarly, it was my sincere hope that someone that would have been a more polished candidate would emerge during efforts to expose the shortcomings of our BOE's current titular head. In that too I failed.

These skirmishes lost, I still have before me the daunting task of winning a seat on the BOE where I hope my efforts at greater transparency / responsiveness will render this particular forum obsolete. Should I fail in that battle, I will continue to press the new BOE to be so honest and open that there will be no need for any secrecy here and only then will my "war" be won...

Anonymous said...

@Jay Wick "In any event, the potential benefits from tapping into social media and blogs are proportional to the value of the content / skills of the authors."

Exactly. People complain about the board, but there is a lot of substance here. Why does it matter who is posting?

What should be of concern is the fact that so many parents believe that they must remain anonymous.

@Jay Wick "I hope my efforts at greater transparency / responsiveness will render this particular forum obsolete."

I do too. That is why I am voting for you.

I don't like being anonymous. I do it for my kids. An open, honest environment would be better, but that has to be a tone set by the BOE and the administration. So far we are not there.

If the administrators would just establish clear plans with good rationale, measurement, and assessment, with honest dialogue, this blog would not need to exist and everyone would be happy.





Anonymous said...

Catherine Johnson, MD FACEP

Don't you have anything to say about the substantive issues discussed on this blog? You really just wanted to complain about a post not appearing?

This blog is really about getting the best education for our kids. Don't you have any insights to share about that subject?

You also mention cyber-defamation, but I am not sure what that means. I do not believe it is a legal term, but perhaps you can clarify whether this term has legal standing or is just a fancy term for saying something that others may not like on the Internet.


Anonymous said...

to the poster of 3/20/2015. 12:53 am:

The interest of substantive discussion related to the D181 leadership and upcoming election is quite valid. The intention of this blog and the content of this blog reflects an opportunity for critical review. The concerns of posting anonymously in the name of fear are troubling. The perceived need for an outlet of anonymous inquiry related to D181 operations should focus the incoming BOE's strategy to engage parents collaboratively with the administrative team.
Consider this: Courage is not the absence of fear but action in the face of fear. The appeal to post one's name for collective representation is quite effective and inherently mandates heightened self-moderation when expressing freedom of speech.
After all, Transparency is a core feature of accountability.
Should any readers wish to discuss substantive issues related to D181's leadership team, strategic plan, curricular innovation, tax levy implications or the HMS school plan- Feel free to contact me privately at catherinejohnsonmd@yahoo.com.

Respectfully,
Catherine Johnson

Jill Quinones said...

Hi Catherine,

I totally agree with most of what you just posted and if you search my name on this blog you will see numerous comments I have made as I always use my name. I believe they are all done matter-of-factly and in a respectful manner. I do this because I have no fear for myself or, more importantly, my children. I believe the D181 Administration knows me well enough to know I may be demanding and a little crazed at times, but I am fair and that I trust they will in no way retaliate against my last child remaining in D181.

I can honestly say this is not the case for some parents. It is one thing for an adult to face his/her fears, even if the result is ridicule by D181 BOE members or administrators (although why should they have to be subject to that?). It is another thing for a CHILD to have to be subject to such retaliation as the result of a parent standing up for that child. Believe it or not, that has happened in the last 3 years and knowledge of those incidents has caused others to become more cautious and anonymous.

When our elected officials and hired District leaders show that they can lead with an open mind, respectful of differing opinions, as well as the Social and Emotional well being of every parent and child in this District, then I believe you will see less and less anonymity.

Of course, you may very well always see it from the teachers in the District because their fear comes with a significant work environment/economic repercussion if their fear comes true.

We do not live in an ideal world, or community. We can only strive to do better. Sad, but true.

Jill

Anonymous said...

I find it very ironic that some people like to post on this blog with their name, but they refuse to discuss their thoughts over real 181 issues with their name attached. They expect others to contact them personally, thus in private, and have people re-explain how and why they have reached a certain understanding. No one on this blog owes anyone a personal explanation. Why should anyone waste their time emailing such people when all of the info is on the blog and on board docs.

If someone is too lazy to read all of the info on this blog, yet feels they have the right to criticize everything and everyone on it, shame on them. If this person had ever listened to the last 2 to 3 years of board meetings, or had ever bothered to ask any other board members their opinions, they would see that simply hearing one side of the story from one board member and one employee is not enough.

I suggest the blog stop allowing posts like these because they detract from the real issues: our schools, their curriculum, and how they affect our children. This isn't a blog arguing the right to anonymity. The legality and appropriateness of anonymity has already been established. That that is how blogs function. To bring any more attention to this issue is redundant and pointless, and gives the impression that substantive school issues are not discussed here.

Anonymous said...

Catherine Johnson " The perceived need for an outlet of anonymous inquiry related to D181 operations should focus the incoming BOE's strategy to engage parents collaboratively with the administrative team."

Well that would be a good step. The administration's refusal so base decisions on objective facts, evidence, and reason, and establish ex-ante metrics to assess outcomes has successfully alienated the most educated and knowledgeable parents.

Additionally, we continue to watch helplessly as student scores tumble in the rankings and the 5th grade math is an absolute mess beyond words.

The vast majority of questions raised here should have been proactively answered as a component of the initial plan that the administration developed.

However, instead of focussing on developing a plan that is best for all of the students, the administration wanted to prioritize "Social Justice" and thought it would be interesting to take our top-performing district and convert it to an experimental integrated classroom model that has not been successful in top performing districts previously. The administration received BOE approval by promising that their plan would "Raise the floor and raise the ceiling of student scores." Parents objected but were ignored, and no metrics were established. What could go wrong?

Now, the district is falling compared to other schools instead of reaping the promised improvements, and the only thing that the administration has shown they are expert at is in making excuses for their abject failure.

Against this backdrop, it will be beyond difficult for the administration to engage parents collaboratively, while continuing to deliver subpar results with no objective rationale for continuing with this intuitively misguided approach, and no comment on when they will be able to deliver to raise student performance at all ability levels to pre-L4A levels as promised.

What do you think would be a good approach to handle this situation?

Anonymous said...

I find it so curious that Catherine Johnson won't publicly share her thoughts on "substantive issues related to D181's leadership team, strategic plan, curricular innovation, tax levy implications or the HMS school plan" on a public forum, but would rather people reach out to her privately. Yet she is critical of the anonymous commenters who do share their perspectives.

It appears hypocritical to me!