Keep Sto-Rox whole
The fight in Sto-Rox to save the school district and community identity deserves recognition. Sto-Rox has a school board, superintendent, administration and teachers who care very deeply about the success of students.
The joint effort to improve every aspect of educational offerings in Sto-Rox, led by Superintendent Michael Panza and teachers working together, is instilling community pride through the public schools. Parents and taxpayers should be proud of these efforts.
There are attempts to derail these positive efforts. Don't be fooled by outsiders (Propel charter schools) claiming to offer a better choice. When the board rejected Propel's recent attempt to open a charter school, it did so with good reason.
Panza exposed flaws in Propel's application in a public presentation. In addition to education concerns, there were alarming flaws in Propel's application, including duplicate petition signatures, no letters of support from the business community, and nonresidents (including Propel employees) signing the petition. The board rejected Propel's application for valid reasons.
Propel should be prohibited from submitting another application, not only in Sto-Rox but elsewhere. If any public school submitted a document as shoddy as Propel's application in Sto-Rox, the uproar would be loud.
Parents and community members should speak up and say “no” to Propel. Keep your community whole. Sto-Rox, be proud of what is being done to keep your community and schools viable and visible.
The writer is director of field programs and communications specialist in the Western Region office of the Pennsylvania State Education Association (psea. org).
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.