Mountain View school board scraps middle school schedule proposal, but denounces community ‘vitriol’

Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

The Mountain View Whisman school board scrapped a plan to change the middle school bell schedule in the face of vocal opposition from some parents and students, but board members expressed concerns about the tenor that the public debate on the topic had taken.

At a Thursday, May 2, meeting, the board members unanimously voted to stick with the current eight period bell schedule.

District staff originally proposed moving to seven periods at Graham and Crittenden middle schools, which would have carved out more time for core academic classes, as well as created a weekly advisory class where students could receive lessons on social and emotional skills. 

The change would have meant one fewer elective period for students, which prompted intense opposition from some parents and students. Concerns were also raised about adding longer, roughly 85-minute block periods two days a week, as well as about what the weekly advisory period would entail. The opposition included an online petition that got nearly 750 signatures.

Mountain View Whisman officials defended the middle school schedule change as important to improving student performance, especially for those who have struggled to catch up in the wake of the pandemic. Student academic performance has declined since COVID-19 prompted school closures, with disparities among student groups widening.

At the board meeting, Superintendent Ayindé Rudolph told the board that while he still believes in the reasoning behind switching to seven periods, he was no longer recommending the change. He described changing the schedule at this point as “nothing more than a pyrrhic victory” and said the focus on the bell schedule had taken time away from other important issues. Rudolph said that he had witnessed and experienced vitriolic rhetoric and a lack of civility in the last few weeks.

“I would never have thought that my own child and I would have had to listen to parents shouting something at me when I’m simply trying to take him home to go to sleep during a break in a board meeting,” Rudolph said. “Even worse, no one – including myself – should have to read coded language that is rooted in postbellum racist terminology that attempts to synonymously describe African American men as aggressive or criminals.”

Rudolph said that the district had made mistakes along the way, but that everyone deserved more grace than they were given.

“I truly regret bringing this issue to the board, and for that, I do apologize,” Rudolph said. “Not because of what it stands for, which is better outcomes for students, but what it has brought out of our community over the past two months.”

Board members opt to stick with the current middle school schedule

The five board members ultimately voted unanimously to accept the recommendation to keep the current eight period schedule, as well as two other district recommendations. 

The first was to allow the district to drop its reserve level below 17%. District staff have said that changing the schedule would have saved roughly $1.2 million in decreased staff costs and that without it, reserves could drop below the board’s expected level.

The second was to create a Spanish dual immersion social studies class at Graham, and to allow students in the Dual Immersion program at Mistral Elementary School to transfer to Graham to participate. That proposal had come out of discussions about the effect losing an elective would have had on dual immersion students.

While the board members agreed to stick with the current schedule, some also expressed similar concerns to Rudolph about the way the debate had played out. 

Trustee Laura Blakely, who was joining the meeting remotely, said that while she thinks seven periods is the best option, she had heard clearly from parents and students about the value kids get from electives, and that she appreciated the perspectives that we shared. At the same time, she urged the public not to assume bad intentions of the district.

“We do work better when we work together, and we’re kind to each other and we assume good intent,” Blakely said. “We all need to take the high road and try to be empathetic to others and where they are coming from.”

Hearing public feedback on the schedule

At Thursday’s meeting, 14 people spoke about the bell schedule during the time set aside for public comment, with participants joining in person and online. Most of the commenters were against changing the schedule or raised concerns with the level of parent and student involvement in crafting the proposal.

A middle school student spoke about how having three electives had helped them to explore their passions and decide what classes to pursue in high school.

“One of the best parts of this district that I have come to appreciate is our three elective schedule,” the student said. “The extra elective lets students experiment with their interests. “

Mohan Gurunathan, a parent in the district, criticized the district for its handling of the schedule change proposal. He said that district officials were dishonest about their motivations and had used bad data to support their arguments.

“It is this disdain for parent intelligence and this disregard for our input that we are upset about,” Gurunathan said.

Gurunathan and some other parents have accused the district of wanting to change the bell schedule not to improve student performance, but rather to save money and give teachers a raise.  Gurunathan said he supported increasing teacher pay, but opposed what he described as the district’s dishonesty.

Superintendent Ayindé Rudolph said at a prior meeting that the district had already been looking for ways to save money when the scheduling committee brought forward its recommendation. While the seven period schedule would save money, Rudolph has said that the motivation for it was to help students improve academically and have time for social-emotional learning.

The public commenters weren’t uniformly against the change. Rebecca Dorocak Escober, a teacher at Graham who was on the committee that came up with the scheduling proposal, said that students need more time in academic classes to adequately prepare for high school.

“I am the mother of a current high schooler. I know firsthand what is going to be expected of these students in the next several years,” she said. “I worry that we are not adequately preparing all of our students – the students that don’t have me at home to help them with their homework.”

She also expressed sadness about the controversy and what she said was her honesty and integrity being called into question.

While the board decided to stick with the current schedule for now, trustee Bill Lambert said that he didn’t want the district to lose the momentum that has built on the topic.

Lambert advocated for using the debate over the past month as “a springboard for really starting this process again, but making it very clear that we’re going to focus on educational objectives and goals.”

Editor’s note: This article was updated to include Gurunathan’s position on giving raises to teachers.