District’s Lack of Decision-making is Insensitive to Students and Teachers

My teacher said it’s probably going to be Mission Valley.

No, I heard it’s Indian Hills, since Mission Valley just got that new library.

Well, my friend’s mom said it’s definitely Mission Valley.

In the weeks leading up to the release of superintendent Gene Johnson’s boundary change and school closure  proposals, conversations like this were heard through the halls and in the classrooms of East.  No one knew for sure which middle school would be closed, but everyone had their ideas and guesses.

On Sept. 13, the proposal, “Charting a Course for Continued Excellence,” was presented to the Shawnee Mission Board of Education and it seemed that the doubt was gone: it was Mission Valley that would be closed at the conclusion of this school year. But the decision was far from over and the process of presenting it to the community was handled poorly.

Until the Board meeting on Nov. 8, the district held community meetings. These discussions period was filled with protests from parents, including the formation of the “Save Mission Valley” group, whose black and white “Don’t Compromise: Save Mission Valley” signs soon dotted yards in the area.

Then on Nov. 8, Johnson’s final recommendations were announced and voted on by the Board.

Mission Valley’s closing was tabled. At first, Johnson announced that he would appoint a committee to evaluate the middle school situation and report to the Board of Education on Feb. 2. Now, the Board is set to vote on Dec. 13.

As stated in Johnson’s proposal, Mission Valley’s projected enrollment is low, just 36 percent of its capacity in the 2011-2012 school year. Closing Mission Valley is  projected to save $832,865 annually. The proposal is logical and the Superintendent and Board are doing their jobs in trying to find ways to save money and maximize resources.

While the reasoning for the changes make sense, the Board has put off making the final decision for far too long.  If the benefits of the closings were rational enough for the proposal, then it doesn’t add up for the Superintendent to change his mind after parents complain. It seems that the Board is avoiding the decision to escape conflict and that isn’t fair to anyone involved. This stalling is both  illogical and insensitive to students, their families, counselors and teachers.

One of the main arguments of parents protesting the closing of Mission Valley is that they don’t want their kids’ lives to be disrupted. At board meetings, parents have spoken about their elementary school students looking forward to attending Mission Valley like their older siblings.

This is an understandable concern, since middle school students aren’t known for being flexible. But if Mission Valley is closed, they’ll simply have to be flexible, and the more time they’re given to adjust to the change, the better.  If a Mission Valley student has already decided they want to take Performance with their friends and Choir, because their older sibling loved the teacher, it won’t be easy for them to scrap those plans and attend Indian Hills. So, the Board should have made the decision earlier to give students more time to adjust.

Mission Valley closing will likely affect many families’ routines. If a parent living at 90th and Mission now has to drive their kid to 64th and Mission every morning that will clearly take much longer. That may not be a problem for many, but in families where both parents work it would be a challenge, one they would need as much time as possible to figure out a solution too.

Enrollment is already hectic time for middle school counselors and with more students, it will become an even more overwhelming task. Middle school enrollment begins in January, so if it is announced Dec. 13 that Mission Valley is going to be closed, that will leave little time for counselors to reassess scheduling practices to accommodate the new students at Indian Hills.

The Board has stated that Mission Valley teachers and other staff members would either be reassigned to positions at Indian Hills or at another building within the district. They should also be given the maximum amount of time possible to rearrange their lives if their jobs move.

At the Board meeting on Nov. 8, parents were elated that Mission Valley wasn’t closing for sure. Cheering broke out. The front page of the Kansas City Star the next day showed a gleeful Mission Valley mom. Parents and students were relieved, hoping this meant Mission Valley was spared, but that’s not the case. It was insensitive for this decision to be put off, in what seems to be an attempt to dodge conflict. At the upcoming meeting the Board should make a decision and stand behind it.

Illustration by Emma Schulte.