Hi Tom- I went to Dewey, Miller, Nichols and ETHS. I taught at Oakton for over 20 years. My father taught at Nichols for over 30 years. In all this time, I have never seen the kinds of things currently going on with D65 administration. I feel exactly the same as you about Evanston and D65, and I'm very grateful for your hard work. Please don't let the critics get to you.
Hi Tom - There is no one who does anything truly worthwhile who does not attract their fair share of critics. The fact that you have critics is a sign that you are doing important and worthwhile work. Thank you for taking on this project.
One thing I have learned in this project is what is covered and is not covered by FOIA. Essentially, anything financial is fair game for FOIA, especially here in IL, given our .. checked past. But there are many limitations, especially when it comes to stuff that is pre-decisional, opinion, scholarly research, or otherwise. I always laugh when I see that college exams are not FOIA’able but only after some kids actually FOIA’ed their exams.
Your politics shouldn’t matter and don’t relate to your efforts. Did you disclose your beliefs because people who don’t like your Substack attacked you as a right wing zealot? That what detractors do when they can’t argue the facts - they resort to name calling in order to silence voices that they don’t agree with. Sadly, you are right about the state of local journalism - thanks for stepping in to fill the void.
I think it was ingenious on the part of the Superintendent to go to a Rupert Murdoch outlet for a big national news story on the District early in his term. He had to know that it would result in ridiculous "culture war" bloviation from the right.
This allows him and the board to now define ANY critique as being from right-wing crazies, letting them off the hook for poor governance and lack of transparency.
Dr. Horton having a WSJ piece is, to me, is more of a "hate the game not the player" kind of thing. I don't think there is anything wrong with that piece. It is a notable story and it was written by a local Chicago Education writer, not some national culture war guy.
I think District 65 wants to have their cake and eat it too with the national attention. If they want to go down that path, that is fine but the public needs to be aware of the costs: security for staff, lack of focus on education, etc. At the end of the day, the costs from that attention were probably close to $1mm dollars! That's money coming from the pockets of all the District's kids, including BIPOC kids. Should we continue that fight? Or is there a better way?
I’ll write one. It’s more of an art than a science, though. You have to consider things like .. the private security. How much was required and how much was tied to the WSJ article vs just general right wing hate stuff. I’m not sure how I would tease it out but waging national culture war issues can be expensive depending on how you react.
Look, you're allowed to have whatever opinion you like and I'm not going to delete your comments here. But if you want to see an Evanston that is different than the one you live in now, you need to quit shitposting, use your real name, and make arguments with data and evidence. Maybe you'll even learn stuff (I certainly have!)
Also "half the country disagrees with what is happening here" is a bullshit argument. Half the country also likes twinkees and the dallas cowboys. That doesn't make either of them good or right. I don't care what half the country thinks, I care about what 100% of Evanston thinks.
You're not going to change anyone's mind with this kind argument. Find data, evidence, and argue with that.
Hi Tom- I went to Dewey, Miller, Nichols and ETHS. I taught at Oakton for over 20 years. My father taught at Nichols for over 30 years. In all this time, I have never seen the kinds of things currently going on with D65 administration. I feel exactly the same as you about Evanston and D65, and I'm very grateful for your hard work. Please don't let the critics get to you.
I try to learn from the critics!
Hi Tom - There is no one who does anything truly worthwhile who does not attract their fair share of critics. The fact that you have critics is a sign that you are doing important and worthwhile work. Thank you for taking on this project.
I'm a sensitive guy, what can I say? :)
Undoubtedly, there are examples of FOIA being used abusively. One example comes to mind: https://blog.ucsusa.org/michael-halpern/breaking-climate-change-scientist-michael-mann-and-scientific-inquiry-win-in-virginia-foia-case/ You have put your cards on the table - who you are, how much you are FOIAing, and why. I invite your critics to ask themselves if they would feel the same if you were FOIAing an institution that they were not essentially in support of.
One thing I have learned in this project is what is covered and is not covered by FOIA. Essentially, anything financial is fair game for FOIA, especially here in IL, given our .. checked past. But there are many limitations, especially when it comes to stuff that is pre-decisional, opinion, scholarly research, or otherwise. I always laugh when I see that college exams are not FOIA’able but only after some kids actually FOIA’ed their exams.
Your politics shouldn’t matter and don’t relate to your efforts. Did you disclose your beliefs because people who don’t like your Substack attacked you as a right wing zealot? That what detractors do when they can’t argue the facts - they resort to name calling in order to silence voices that they don’t agree with. Sadly, you are right about the state of local journalism - thanks for stepping in to fill the void.
That is exactly why
I think it was ingenious on the part of the Superintendent to go to a Rupert Murdoch outlet for a big national news story on the District early in his term. He had to know that it would result in ridiculous "culture war" bloviation from the right.
This allows him and the board to now define ANY critique as being from right-wing crazies, letting them off the hook for poor governance and lack of transparency.
Dr. Horton having a WSJ piece is, to me, is more of a "hate the game not the player" kind of thing. I don't think there is anything wrong with that piece. It is a notable story and it was written by a local Chicago Education writer, not some national culture war guy.
I think District 65 wants to have their cake and eat it too with the national attention. If they want to go down that path, that is fine but the public needs to be aware of the costs: security for staff, lack of focus on education, etc. At the end of the day, the costs from that attention were probably close to $1mm dollars! That's money coming from the pockets of all the District's kids, including BIPOC kids. Should we continue that fight? Or is there a better way?
Do you have a link/post about that article's downstream costs?
I’ll write one. It’s more of an art than a science, though. You have to consider things like .. the private security. How much was required and how much was tied to the WSJ article vs just general right wing hate stuff. I’m not sure how I would tease it out but waging national culture war issues can be expensive depending on how you react.
i'm not sure i follow your argument here - nobody said you are the enemy
Look, you're allowed to have whatever opinion you like and I'm not going to delete your comments here. But if you want to see an Evanston that is different than the one you live in now, you need to quit shitposting, use your real name, and make arguments with data and evidence. Maybe you'll even learn stuff (I certainly have!)
Also "half the country disagrees with what is happening here" is a bullshit argument. Half the country also likes twinkees and the dallas cowboys. That doesn't make either of them good or right. I don't care what half the country thinks, I care about what 100% of Evanston thinks.
You're not going to change anyone's mind with this kind argument. Find data, evidence, and argue with that.