There are too many GUSD ‘programs without purpose’

Dear Editor,
Staff writer Katie Niekerk’s front-page article (

GUSD: Making the grade?

published March 2) highlights

GUSD lessons
– According to accountability specialist Doug Reeves, schools
should: Build upon their strengths – not focus on weaknesses.

Dear Editor,

Staff writer Katie Niekerk’s front-page article (“GUSD: Making the grade?” published March 2) highlights “GUSD lessons – According to accountability specialist Doug Reeves, schools should: Build upon their strengths – not focus on weaknesses.”

As a homeowner, would this recommendation mean: Maintain the structure’s appearance (good paint job, clean windows, empty gutters, unbroken roof, et al), mow the lawn, trim plant growth but ignore the many termite tracks and tunnels on or near the foundation?

More analogies can be made, but the flaw in Mr. Reeve’s premise is obvious. It’s been said: “A chain is only as strong as its weakest link.”

In GUSD’s implementation of an Accountability Plan, it must recognize the maintenance, workability and final success of any proposed program(s) will depend on all associated areas able to carry their share of the goal(s). To ignore weak areas within the district and favor only perceived “strong” areas is to ultimately see everything fail.

GUSD seeks knowledge to “encourage schools to share what has and has not worked to improve student performance” but hires, at what unknown cost, an “accountability expert” who offers words but not wisdom; interpretations without insights; programs without purpose.

James Brescoll, Gilroy

Leave your comments