A public school performance review means program cuts
On its surface, a performance review to locate public-school inefficiencies seems benign.
However, the purpose of a performance review is to justify programming cuts by identifying anything beyond the minimum state requirements.
In the CH-UH school district, this would mean cutting or eliminating arts, athletics, AP courses, preschool, and the Career and Technical Education program.
Is CH-UH to be known as a destination for mediocrity in education? Because, with such cuts, public-school families will only need to take a quick look at Shaker Heights or Lakewood to realize that, if they live in those communities, they will get excellent, comprehensive educations.
The CH-UH school district currently provides excellent educational choices. CH-UH public schools continue to graduate brilliant successes. Heights High counts among [its] graduates a 2021 Presidential Scholar, a Pulitzer-prize winning playwright, and NFL players. Without excellent programming, CH-UH would not attract such students. Our whole community benefits from this excellence.
Three Republican school board candidates (Lynn, Rennert, and Drake) want a performance review. If elected, they will use the opportunity to gut our schools. (They do not have children in the CH-UH schools). [Candidate] Mario Clopton-Zymler is also calling for this performance review, but, as [he is] an advocate for the arts, I suspect he will be less zealous about making such cuts.
CH-UH will also have to pay for the review—taxpayer money spent in the pursuit of mediocrity.
Eve McPherson is a CH-UH public schools alumna and parent.