This Sudbury story on a rally for a Catholic elementary school in the city disappoints-- it follows a very predictable pattern for this sort of story. Even more so the embedded video.
Quote parent talking about how good the school is-- refuting common perceptions that enrolment and teacher / program may be at the heart of why the facility is pegged for closure. The key line for me was almost a throwaway line where the parent says that yes, the school (facility) needs some work. Is that the real reason behind the closure recommendation?
Admittedly, I don't know the paper's history on reporting this review or the issues-- this article does a poor job of providing any context a first-time reader might need.
The kids quoted here are cute but don't add to the story in any way. Having "nice teachers" (story) or "liking gym" (video) don't tell me why the school is being considered for closure and give a better explanation of what the accommodation review recommendations were and what the staff recommendations were, other than the obvious closure of this school.
On a related aside, this shows another occasional foible of education reporting-- interviewing children. They're adorable and cute but often prone to simple, one-word answers and often reporters just don't know how to speak to kids during interviews in a way that gets past monosyllabic responses.
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment