Santa Rosa High School

Personal Reflection

Prior to conducting any research or even stepping onto campus, I had honestly pegged Santa Rosa High School to be a carbon-copy of Montgomery High School, the adjacent Santa Rosa school and bitter district rival of SRHS. When I was a student at Montgomery I did not consider it to be a good school. To me, MHS offered the perfect example of a school performing the bear minimum for its students, a school that preached quality values but practiced very few. In hind sight, it was wrong of me to begin judging SRHS prior to stepping onto campus but MHS was a bad experience for me and I don’t think I could help viewing my placement there as a bad omen. For the sake of transparency, I observed at MHS as a student-teacher and spent roughly fifty hours of in-class observation time there during the 2016-2017 school year. I also conducted a very similar and extensive research project on MHS during that time. Fortunately, I was pleasantly surprised to find that SRHS is quite different from MHS in many ways, but unfortunately, they do have a couple of unsettling similarities. I had always felt a connection to SRHS through my own family. Both my grandparents and my mother graduated from SRHS and never had a bad thing to say about the school; I suppose that should have been my first clue that the school would offer me a great learning and teaching experience.

My first assumption was that the school would feel intimidating. When I was a student at MHS I never felt completely safe. There were countless fights each month and enough kids presented themselves as gang affiliated to make any student wary of where they may be roaming. After only my first week, I felt this was a very different school atmosphere at SRHS. Students respect each other, I have yet to witness any type of altercation, although I know a handful have indeed occurred, and honestly, I take that as an extremely positive note because violence was an overlooked issue at MHS that I was ready to revisit at SRHS. I must admit I was wrong. The students at Santa Rosa High get along better than any student body I have ever seen. I think this is directly related to the fact that over 50% of the SRHS student body does not live within it’s district zone, meaning the majority of SRHS students truly choose to attend SRHS.

I mention the welcoming feeling of Santa Rosa High, but how can I prove that? Santa Rosa High School has the highest transitioning student body in the district. This number is a direct representation of how the school welcomes all types of students in all aspects. The first time this became clear to me was in my sixth period class in the second week of the year; a student walked in with a note from the office addressed to my mentor teacher. Mrs. Samuels smiled at the student and said, “Thank you very much.” Mrs. Samuels then turned to a student seated nearby and said, “Hey Oliver, I just got a note from the office that your paper work is all done.” The student smiled back at Annie, nodded, then continued with his work. To the untrained eye this might appear to be a simple interaction but Annie informed me of the full context after class. Oliver was a transitioning student that had elected to change his name. Annie explained to me that SRHS makes it a priority to expedite the process of informing teachers of name and gender shifts made by students to create a sense of safety and cohesion. Oliver let the office know of his name change and by the end of the day his name and gender were changed in the school computer system and all of his teachers were notified.
I found it very refreshing to see a school that is so welcoming to LGBTQ students because those students have historically struggled with identity affirmation and bullying in the high school setting. The Steven J Spencer article, “Stereotype Threat and Women’s Math Performance” makes it clear that the concept of stereotype threat is a very real concept that is critical to understand for any teacher hoping to create a quality multicultural education. Stereotype threat when an individual feels an implication that their skill or behavior is going to be harshly judged against an impending stereotype regardless of their chosen action or performance. The act of transitioning is not something that I can even begin to fully appreciate but I know that the thought of facing criticism from peers and fellow students is likely enough to cause students to reconsider taking this action. Transitioning students are going to feel harshly judged regardless of the school environment; these students face an impending threat of self-internalized identity-threat and schools. This internal dilemma will inevitably effect school performance, thus there is a necessity for schools to make these students feel as safe as possible. SRHS has mastered this establishment of safety for transitioning students from the staff down to the students.

Stereotype threat for women in mathematics is a concept that is directly reinforced by the data of the SRHS report card. Female students tested at 72% meeting English proficiency standards but only reach 39% for mathematics. Compared to boys at 59% meeting English standards and only 38% for mathematics, the steep drop-off in female math scores becomes quite apparent. This is an issue that goes beyond just SRHS, but it was certainly discouraging to read the article outlining stereotype threat, then go back to the school report card, and realize that SRHS appears to be a contributor to this issue.

Despite SRHS being behind on some aspects of education, they seem ahead of the game in terms of establishing a safe space for LGBTQ students. The article, “Safe Rules or Gay Schools?” by Harris and Dyson, brings up the dilemma of establishing safe school environments for LGBTQ students within public school settings. The article brings up the idea of establishing more schools that are specifically designed for providing LGBTQ students with a safe learning environment. Initially I was apprehensive about the idea of making schools so focused on one specific demographic because it is exclusionary in nature. In my mind, taking a marginalized group of individuals and placing them inside of a vacuum for their education does them no good when the time comes to transition into the real world. I would say the same for the students outside of a specific marginalized group; those students are not exposed to the specific group you are removing, this only serves to perpetuate injustices, stereo-types, and prejudices that cause marginalized groups to be further marginalized. I don’t know how to remedy a situation like LGBTQ education but SRHS seems like a great starting point for other districts to take note of.

The largest issue I have with SRHS and MHS as an educator is the same issue. This issue stems from two simple data points I found in my research of both schools. MHS is already at a majority Hispanic student body and that percent is growing. SRHS also has a very high Hispanic student count (37%) that will also continue to grow. Both of these schools have extremely disappointing scores shown on their report cards when viewing the scores of Hispanic students. MHS had less than 50% of their Hispanic students meeting English standards and SRHS was no better. This is an issue of equality. White students are meeting standards at nearly twice the rate of Hispanic students in both of these schools, leading me to believe that this discrepancy between White and Hispanic scores might even be district wide. Considering the article, “The Central Frames of Color-Blind Racism,” I attribute this difference in scores to cultural racism. It’s clear that there is an issue with Hispanic students and their interaction with the math and English education in these two schools. This is an issue that isn’t going anywhere and will continue to grow exponentially as the percentage of Hispanic students increases in both MHS and SRHS.  The fact that this issue had not been brought to my attention before was jarring. Why aren’t people talking about this? I don’t know what to attribute this to outside of the SRCSD simply believing that its Hispanic students don’t place enough priority on education. I can’t say that this is the feeling of SRCSD but if no action to remedy this issue is taken, what other conclusion is there?

Overall, I think Santa Rosa is essentially a struggling school that is trying to catch up. The staff is outstanding and the students are truly welcoming. SRHS is valuable for the LGBTQ youth in this community. The Art Quest program is the last of a dying breed that I pray does not completely fall by the wayside as the district pushes for a more standard curriculum at SRHS. The world still needs artists. I feel no sense of exaggeration when I state that each member of the SRHS staff that I came to meet reflected genuine care and interest in serving their students to the best of their ability. Finally, if anyone from the SRCSD should read this, please, I need you to do better. The teachers are underpaid and the benefits are poor.  If the SRCSD has any chance of improving, it must become a more financially intriguing location for the next generation of teachers. The decisions of the SRCSD in the coming years are likely to determine the path of this community entirely. If the highest quality teachers are choosing to work elsewhere, SRCSD will be picking from the bottom of the pile, and the chances of student education improving will be slim to none. Santa Rosa is my home and I have grown to love Santa Rosa High School. Santa Rosa secondary education will be in crisis if the district continues refusing to improve the financial status of teachers.
 

This page has paths:

  1. School, Community & Context James Pennington