I expected to read some nice things about the perfomance of all of the Sequoia schools. Instead, the writer's slant in favor of Everest and Summit is noticeable. Instead of saying positive things about the traditional Sequoia high schools' performance, Boyce manages to quote Tavenner repeatedly about why she thinks these two charters are better. You are comparing apples and oranges! How do you expect some of the kids who barely speak English or have learning disabilities to take AP classes, for example? Charter proponents like Boyce and Tavenner have repeatedly criticized the SUHSD for their anti-charter rhetoric. Maybe now it is the time for them to adopt a more positive tone toward traditional high schools?

I think the fact that Summit placed in the top 100 high schools and the other Sequoia district schools placed quite a bit lower, by several hundred, makes it ok to pay attention to it. Had the district not given Diane Taenner and her vision nothing but opposition, they would have bragging rights. Unfortunately, they have no right to take any credit whatsoever. Diane Tavenner is a progressive educator and her school works.

Due to repeated violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are automatically removed. Why?