A few years ago, while taking a hiatus from my law practice, I spent some time working as a substitute teacher in our district.
The first school I ever taught at was Central. Based on my experience I can say without hesitation that most of the students at Central were no different than any of our students at Live Oak or Sobrato. Sure, most of them had some trouble in our “traditional” schools” but that didn’t mean that they were the source or cause of that trouble.
Many of these students have not had strong support at home. Some have faced serious bullying or have been pressured to engage in questionable activities that made them want to give up on school altogether to get away from the problem.
Fortunately for them, and ultimately for us, our district had an alternative for them. A place where they could get a little bit more attention. A place where they could feel comfortable and where they would not be lost in the shuffle or get left behind. A place where they can achieve, excel, and graduate.
I grew up attending Morgan Hill schools. I graduated from Live Oak High School in 1989. I don’t remember many things about how our schools were back then but, like most adults, I have a general, biased and largely unsupported feeling that “back in my day” things were better than they are now, and other than that, I couldn’t tell you much about how our schools were almost a quarter of a century ago. But, one belief I remember having, a belief that recent news leads me to believe some in our community share is this – the bad kids went to Central High School. I remember that back in the day Central was where all the criminals went to school. If you were a thug or at least a trouble maker, eventually you either ended up at juvenile hall or Central or both, probably en route to the California Penal system. That kid who was constantly disrupting class, who suddenly disappeared from school, you would find him at Central. Flunk out of Live Oak, you’d be exiled to Central. I don’t remember much, but I know that’s what I and most of my classmates thought. The problem is we were wrong.
I can’t help but think that this “controversy” over the relocation of Central to the site of Burnett elementary is more about people suffering from the same misconception that I had than it is about reopening an elementary school. This must be the case because in almost four years since Burnett closed I can’t recall ever hearing such an uproar for it reopen until it was decided that Central might be coming to their neighborhood. At best your timing is suspect. At worst, well, let’s call this what it is – some people just don’t want the “bad kids” in their backyards. The problem is that they are wrong too.
The idea that the students at Central would bring some element to any neighborhood that should be feared or shunned is a fallacy. These students are not “bad kids”. They are students who just needed the chance that Central affords them.
Although currently disputed by our school board, the front page of our paper last week said that our district has the lowest graduation rate in the county. If true, of course this is a problem. But, having the ability to expand facilities for Central enabling more students to get the kind of attention offered at Central would certainly help remedy that problem. As it is, Central High is one of the smallest facilities for a continuation school in the county. Having more room to take on additional students, who may be at risk in our traditional schools, should be applauded – not campaigned against.
For a couple of decades I held an all too common misconception about Central High School and its students. It only took a couple of visits to see how wrong I was and to give these kids a chance. I believe that our school board got this one right and have given these students an even greater chance of success with this move. If you hold the same beliefs as I did, go visit the school or call the principal and learn about the place and its students. And, at the very least, give these kids a chance.
