“Vision” for “Learning Portland”

Here are the proposed Vision statements for “Learning Portland”:

• Portland is a world-class educational community, and is a leader in higher education.

• We are a city that is passionate about different forms of learning, and we understand how education is vital to the health of the city.

• We learn from each other and from our surroundings, basing decisions on truth and knowledge.

• Children and young people are valued today and understood to be the future of our society.

• We hold an unwavering commitment that all young people are afforded high quality education providing diverse ways to learn and achieve.

• Lifelong learning guides our education through an integrated system of kindergarten through high school, college, professional and community education, and beyond.

• Education and learning is the foundation for making beneficial change for our city.

OK. So…. the first thing I notice, is that public schools aren’t mentioned anywhere. One of the most important factors bringing Steve and me to look at Portland in 1985 was the extraordinarily high percentage of parents sending their children to the city’s public schools. Even after 17 years of cuts in the wake of Measure 5, we still boast one of the highest levels of commitment by parents of all income levels to educating Portland’s children in Portland’s excellent public schools. Portland State University has the highest and most diverse enrollment of any of the seven state universities. Why is there no mention of public K-12 and higher education schools in the Vision?

And does the fact that public schools aren’t highlighted as one of Learning Portland’s most important features indicate the input and output of the Vision may not be valid, when over 80% of Portland’s parents send their children to public schools, and taxpayers repeatedly vote to invest in public education?

Since the writers of these statements missed something as core to the culture of learning in Portland as valuing public education, I’m not inclined to give much benefit of doubt to the rest. If I were, I suppose I’d be relieved that the elephant in Portland’s living room (or rather on its waterfront), OHSU, didn’t feature in the Vision. But really, it should. It’s the only university medical center in the state, and our region’s health care education system and facilities are outstanding. Professionals and sick people do come here from all over the country. It seems to me that continued excellence in health care education deserves at least a minor mention.

How would these Vision statements be used to, say, decide whether the City should help Multnomah County pay for after-school programs? If the City is again in a position to give money to the five School Districts providing education to Portlanders, which of this set of statements directs consideration that Parkrose and David Douglas receive some as well as Portland Public Schools District 1J? And the penultimate statement starts learning at kindergarten – what about Headstart, playgroups, preschool, and other early childhood programs? Do we not care about learning before kindergarten?

I’d like to see some of the flowery language cut out. Instead of, “We hold an unwavering commitment that all young people are afforded high quality education providing diverse ways to learn and achieve.”, just “All young people have easy access to high quality education enabling them to learn and achieve.” This is the Vision – we don’t want just the commitment to high quality education, we want it provided.

Both here, in “all young people are afforded high quality education providing diverse ways to learn”, and in “We are a city that is passionate about different forms of learning”, the Vision statements emphasize alternative methods of instruction. I might be OK with that if not for the glaring omission of celebrating Portland’s public schools. As it is, it seems to me the proposed Vision is designed to push support towards private schools offering “different forms of learning”. Ruth Adkins just won election to the School Board by a wide margin, with a main theme in her campaign that focus programs should supplement rather than replace good neighborhood schools in every part of the city. I simply don’t believe that the Vision volunteers and staff heard that Portlanders want many more private alternative schools in 2030. And even if they did hear that from the 12,999 people other than me who completed the preliminary surveys, I don’t believe it is a view widely shared by the other 550,000 or so citizens.

The proposed Vision states, “We learn from each other and from our surroundings, basing decisions on truth and knowledge.” Not love, compassion, equity, affirmative action, fairness, and bitter or blessed experience? Not on the harsh choices mandated by too-small budgets? How about basing decisions on federal and state mandates, do we not think those will still be important in 2030? Are we setting a Vision for Portland, Oregon or for Disneyland? Don’t people generally make decisions based on the truth as they see it, and isn’t the problem often that people see different things as the truth? I’d prefer to see this statement end at “We learn from each other and from our surroundings”. Or maybe, “We learn from each other and from our surroundings, experiences, and history.”

I wonder if the Vision team ran (or intends to run) these proposed statements by the School Boards, PSU/OHSU/Community College Boards, and the governing bodies of private schools and colleges. It seems to me the elected officials and diligent volunteers on these committees would have some helpful comments and revisions to suggest. I’d like to hear what those suggestions might be.

Overall, I find “Learning Portland” disappointing. It doesn’t emphasize the value of public education. It doesn’t spell out the connection between education and economic vitality, or between successful schools and peaceful, prosperous neighborhoods. It doesn’t mention learning from senior citizens, or the importance of libraries and other continuing education programs/facilities. And it emphasizes providing different forms of education instead of stressing integration and collaboration between the many public and private institutions and agencies providing educational opportunities. Disappointing.

There are two more sections of the proposed Vision to review. I’ll post analysis of them on Tuesday, since I’m guessing nobody wants to read about them over the holiday weekend. You can read them on Tuesday, as a bitter reminder of returning to your regular routine 🙂 I’ll post other, funner stuff over the weekend. Like, Next Up at City Council! Oh, maybe I can do better than that, even.