Summer Worcester schools questions

Questions that have floated through my head this summer...

• Are we ever going to find out if Hanover really did make a donation to the much-heralded "gifted" middle school program at Burncoat? It hasn't shown up anywhere that I have seen. How much was it and what was it spent on? And was it a one time thing?
• Speaking of donations, there was much ado, of course, around how the proposed strategic plan was not done within the Worcester Public Schools. The moment it was proposed, though, it became a donated service, and that donated service has a value. We ought to be seeing a public donation come through.
• Worcester was among the districts announced this week as receiving part of the state early college high school grant. This is good (particularly, if you read that release, that the students are going to be supported), but this is hardly alone in college things offered to high school students in Worcester. Having seen this at close hand, Worcester really needs a better central (open all summer) clearinghouse for this information, which specifically spells out how it works, who it's for, how many kids can do it, how much it costs, and so forth. There are opportunities lost by those who can't chase around from office to office for information, and guidance offices are very uneven.
• This article today on how we really don't know what AP courses are doing to and for students reminded me again of how Worcester has totally put all of its eggs in the AP basket, and has done so while not funding the AP tests and not know what it does to students long-term. 
• And speaking of things we aren't thinking long term about, this massive article on the fear-based industry of school security reminds me that lack of basis for Worcester's training has never been adequently explained or dealt with. 
• I mentioned last year that after having years of continued insistence by some members of the Worcester School Committee that there had to be public involvement in the process of hiring principals, those members seemed not to care anymore. Add to that now multiple rounds of postings for schools and lack of applicants, something which--if you follow school districts--is not happening elsewhere. This is a basic management function of the superintendency, and it's concerning to see the holes in school-based leadership. 
• I generally don't opine on logos--my tastes run to simple, time-worn, clearly labelled, non-trendy--but the possible issues over the proposed change in Worcester are something I can appreciate, as someone who taught Shakespeare to high school students. Note that it was clear from the presentation given to the School Committee in July that this was a professional consultant job, so let's not put the kids in the middle of it. That would be a good thing to have  a price tag on, too, as I can't figure out where in the budget they put it. 
• I know we're not concerned with school levels anymore, but has anyone gotten an update on if Elm Park Community is ever going to get out of Level 4? All of Worcester's prior experiences with Level 4 have been successfully completed much more quickly than this.
• And since we aren't going to worry about levels anymore, what are the chances we can hear something about what the new acccountability system is going to look like here? Beyond, one imagines, continuing to send parents charts on attendence, is there going to be any shift in emphasis? Any changes?

You didn't hear it from me, but the high school schedules are up (I'm told the posted middle school schedules aren't necessarily final), and if you google your bus route, you just might find it. 

As always, if I get any answers, I'll let you know!