Dr. Shillingburg has a unique perspective as a former District 181 administrator, a current District 181 parent, and a current superintendent in a neighboring elementary school district. What do you think of his opinion?

Dr. Shillingburg provides an educated opinion. D181 is touted as a high achieving district but no one wants to address the needs of advanced learners this year. No child should be waiting to learn while the administration figures out the goal. A transition plan is usually a plan that is put in place to reach the ultimate goal not visa versa.

Finally an explanation for all of the confusion going on in the schools! Parents seemed so content with the elimination of gifted services, but they do not realize that now, teachers have an even broader range of children in their classroom! Now, teachers have to deal with the ACE children, AND the below average class kids in the same room. The kids not low enough for special ed, but still at the bottom in their classes will suffer more. Eliminating ACE simply freed up more money for administrators. Now more children are suffering. Those currently struggling in their classes are not being helped, or even identified because the district would rather use that money to buy furniture, fund "experimental" iPad grants, hire more consultants, and raise their salaries. Meanwhile, parents whose kids need help, are being forced to pay for expensive Hinsdale tutors and Kumon. Taxpayers should be outraged. If some BOE members don't even bother to research issues, WHO is going to look out for our children?

An administration in this district should never eliminate successful programs without implementing a proven replacement with completed training and curriculum. Nor should it rely on one consultant's report to negate years of success in a program without looking at whether or not modifications to the program should be tried first. To do otherwise is careless and irresponsible. A philosophy change by the administration should not cause the complete elimination of programs that have proven successful for so many students and, in a high performing district such as ours, we shouldn't have to choose between a strong curriculum for all and advanced learning for those students who have been formally identified for years as needing it. ELA, ACE and pull-outs for math, reading and writing serviced 10-20% of children in this district. If your child ever received these services, you should be asking the BOE and administration why they were eliminated and you should be asking your children what they were replaced with. The teachers in this district have always differentiated and taught to each child as an individual and ability driven groupings are nothing new. Ask your teachers where the new curriculum is and how your child will be assessed going forward. If your child already understands concepts presented in class, there is no new curriculum to "differentiate" with. Differentiation may not be a bad thing but unsupported differentiation is.

How about we put our tax payments in a "state of transition" until the district straightens out the mess it has gotten itself into? Administrators certainly were quick to request 4% raises for themselves in the next years budgets, but can't seem to find time to serve students. When D181 actually begins teaching students new core curricum based on nationally accepted, U.S. Dept. of Ed. standards, THEN we should start paying our taxes. In the rest of the world, when you are not doing your job, you get fired....in D181, you get a raise.

Parents should educate themselves about what is happening at the administration and Board of Education and what is going on in the classroom. The Board will approve this plan in December unless parents voice their opposition. This year our teachers have been required to compact math curriculum, implement a new writing program and begin "differentiating" in the classroom. In the meantime, all services for advanced learners in any subject have been completely eliminated as has almost all formal assessment, leaving teachers to deal with parent concern, confusion and anger and an increased workload. Parents with younger should children should ask how they will know if their child needs additional learning if he or she has never been assessed. A convenient situation for the district because, soon, there will be no services to provide to those children anyway. Parents of younger children will have no idea what used to be available to students in this district.

Why is it okay to bus children for sporting events in D181 but there was a problem with busing kids for the elementary ACE program which is an educational program? Why is it okay to have Encore classes (global challenges) in the middle school and waste the time of the gifted specialist when enrollment is very low for some quarters but there was a problem with using a gifted specialist for the one day a week or now a half day a week elementary ACE program?

I too am stunned at a school board who seems to be asleep at the wheel regarding the "ready, fire, aim" approach of Rene Schuster. It is nothing short of irresponsible. Our teachers are already over-burdened by programs "dujour" from d181. This district is pinning their hopes and our children's futures on the least developed skill of our teachers - that of differentiation. This is not an indictment of our teaches, just a reflection of the reality of the learning environment that requires their attention in so many areas that they are already stretched too thin. As a parent of children who are "cusp" gifted learners, we have heard the "differentiation" story for years from d181. Their learning needs were supposed to be addressed by extra studies in their classroom. Of the 40+ teachers we have had in d181 - 2 were actually skilled at how to address individual learning needs through the art of differentiation! The burden fell to us as parents to stimulate our children and address their needs. How is it that parents totally understand this reality but the district appears to be clueless? This is not something a teacher masters by taking a summer seminar or two. It takes years to develop the skill of differentiation and rich curriculum from which to draw -- in addition, it requires desire from the teacher, extra time, and lower classroom sizes to be successful. Dr. Schuster is setting our children, teachers and parents up for HUGE disruption and ultimately disappointment.

Thank you to the Patch for finally publicizing the words of Dr. Shillingburg who has continually been "ignored" by the current administration and board. As a former leader in our district, a current d181 parent and the Superintendent of the LaGrange school district, Dr. Shillingburg's experience, knowledge and expertise are invaluable.

It is important to note that these changes in process are not solely about the ACE program, but the education of all of our children no matter where they fall on the learning scale. I don't think anyone would argue the belief of the Common Core Standards being implemented in order to elevate our children to national standards is the wrong thing to do. But to spend a year (or more) implementing the CCS, inundating our teachers and school administrators with curriculum they are unfamiliar with and shoving the differentiation efforts down to a few people is beyond comprehension. Numerous people have been voicing these same concerns for sometime now. Thank you, Warren, for finally having your voice heard.

Dr.Shillingburg did launch to ACE program years ago. It had fatal flaws. If it had lived up to the hype, it would still be in place. Warren must not know that he lives in a glass house. He is the Superintendent of LaGrange schools and he has plenty of parents who think their kids "deserve better."

Julie, you certainly bring back memories, and I do appreciate hearing views from all sides. Unfortunately, you have totally avoided the topic we were discussing to simply express your own anger and bias. The issue is the district's RtI process for meeting the needs of advanced learners, not the ACE program, which by the way was never put out there as perfect. I would have been thrilled to see someone take what was started and make improvements. No one is against seeing things get better. The problem is seeing services/programs taken away without anything concrete to replace them.

As for your insult toward parents believing their children deserve better in my district, I would not doubt there are parents who feel that way; as the superintendent in 102, I will work on those problems. I am sure no one else in 181 cares about my problems, so let's try to focus and stick to the problem at hand, which is making sure our children in 181 are getting the best education they can from our tax dollars.

The indictment of District 181's schools as chaotic, rudderless, mediocre centers of learning by an insufferable and unrelentingly vocal minority of indignant parents reminds us anew of the perils of entitlement addiction. They've had their precious, gold-plated (flawed and indefensible) "private schools within public schools" (subsidized by all taxpayers) taken away, leaving them the one and only option of portraying themselves and their children as victims, damaged goods, sentenced to the horrors of learning in classrooms overflowing with "average" and "dumb" kids. But more than anything, it appears they are furious because their hand-picked Superintendent, the gifted-education advocate from Missouri, along with a new board that is not beholden to the status quo, have concluded, correctly, that they are responsible to all students, all parents and all taxpayers, not merely the ones who have pinned their self-worth on grade-school assessment testing, tracking and intellectual segregation.

Entitlement addiction? Are you kidding? Would you call taxpayers "indignant and entitled" if the city provided other sub-par services to its residents? What if the water was contaminated, or the hospital was not prescribing appropriate medicine? Would you whine that only a "few" people died? You seem frustrated by "gold plated schools", and acknowledge that our money is being wasted, but don't support parents complaining. If people don't complain, nothing will ever get better. This public, property tax dependent institution should be able to defend itself with proof. Just because most people do not know the situation our schools are in, does not mean the problem does not exist. When knowledgable people, the "vocal minority" DO complain, all residents should applaud them for looking out for the rest of us. If D181 has nothing to fear, they will welcome the scrutiny. Furthermore, if you knew anything about education or student ability, you would never call another child "dumb", or "damaged goods". This is not simply an issue regarding "giftedness". It is about the district providing the apppropriate curriculum and services to ALL learners, and providing teachers with the support necessary to do so.

My recent college-graduate daughter participated in the GRC program when she was in third grade. One full day each week a group of fellow third grade children from all seven schools were transported to Walker School for a day of intensive enrichment. After coming home crying every day of first grade because she was so disappointed and bored out of her mind, followed by a somewhat better second grade year (thanks to a dedicated teacher who independently implemented her own version of differentiation back in 1998), Wednesday at GRC was the highlight of my daughter's week. The two teachers were AMAZING and took very bright children and truly challenged them - not with just more work, but with conceptually different work that stretched them far beyond the busy work in their regular classrooms. Alas, we could see the writing on the wall for gifted education in District 181, so we jumped at a chance to move our daughter to a dedicated gifted education program the following year. We never even placed our younger two children in 181, as we continued following the debates, revisions, etc. regarding gifted education. I'm very sorry to note that the situation has only grown worse rather than better in the intervening twelve years since we decided to abandon ship. So glad we did.

Let's remember that the gifted program that was the object of a scathing evaluation by two recognized experts in the field of gifted education was largely of Dr. Schillenburg's making. It's predictable that he would feel compelled to defend that program.