UChicago Consortium Anniversary — Introduction: Twenty-Five Years of Inquiry and Partnership

UChicago Consortium Anniversary — Introduction: Twenty-Five Years of Inquiry and Partnership


PENNY BENDER SEBRING:
Welcome everyone, to the Consortium’s
25th Anniversary. And the first thing
I’d like to do is to ask those people who
were working in Chicago Public Schools, or working on
school reform in 1990, to please stand up. Let’s see who you are. That’s wonderful. For the rest of
you, a lot of this is going to be a
history lesson, I think. So to situate our
celebration today, I’m going to return to 1990
when we started the Consortium. The Chicago School Reform
Act had cut resources in powers of the central
office, and then devolved money and authority
to local schools, which who were themselves,
creating their new local school councils. It was a very confusing
time and there was very little
systematic evidence available on the
Chicago Public Schools. In the midst of that,
Tony Bryk, our founder and who you will see
on video shortly, was approached by CPS to see
whether the universities could get involved in evaluating
this new reform. And it was out of that
request that we started. In July of 1990, Tony asked
me to join him in this effort. We, in addition to
the school system, we also involved universities,
nonprofit groups, the Teachers Union, the Administrators
Association, and many other groups. Thus the name, the Consortium. We began our work in a space
above the U-Chicago Lab School’s band room, where
students were trying mightily to make music. Tony and I were each
working part time. Can you hear me? OK. Tony and I were each working
part-time on the Consortium and we had a part-time secretary
and a part-time graduate student and that was it. Today, we have well over
20 full-time researchers, and we’ve become a consequential
and trusted institution in the city. We’ve created a large
body of research. Many of you are
familiar with it, covering topics from preschool
attendance to high school discipline, and from
double dose algebra to non-cognitive factors
involved in learning. None of this would have been
possible without the Chicago Public Schools, who have
been great collaborators. And they provide
this kind of support, even though often
times we went to them with very discouraging news. And we’ll show a video
shortly on our model. I also want to formally
announce that we are shortening our name to the
U-Chicago Consortium on School Research. I heard a few giggles. So for short, you can call
us the U-Chicago Consortium, or the Consortium. In a few minutes,
Sara Ray Stoelinga, the Sara Liston Spurlark
Director of the U-Chicago Urban Education Institute, will
explain how the Consortium fits into the Institute. And Sara herself has
worked for the Consortium and earlier iterations of the
Institute for nearly 20 years. Our focus today, our
substantive focus is how to ensure
that more students go to and through college. And we want to,
and we want to say that we are very indebted
to Melissa Roderick, who began this very significant line
of work more than a decade ago. Very good. We know we have far too
many talented students who don’t go to college
at all, or go to college and then stop short
of getting a degree. And this is an incredible
loss for these students and for our city
and for our society. So today, we’ll get a primer
on the most salient findings regarding what is effective
in preparing and orienting students for college. Then we’ll have a panel
of high school leaders and a university leader talking
about innovative programs to help students succeed. Then we’ll have a little
review of the reports that the consortium has
provided to high schools, and most all high schools
have received those now and we’ll be getting
other versions of them. We know of no other city where
such detailed information is provided to the high schools,
or to the elementary schools, for that matter. After that we’ll move
into breakout groups where you will have a chance
to hear from a high school team that has been
looking at its data and learned what
they are seeing. And then our discussion
groups will go on to consider the
question of what we all can do to support
high schools as they try to prepare their students
to go to and through college. We have many different
organizations here today, including universities. So we think this is
an opportunity for you to connect to others who are
also interested in college access and college success. And then at the end,
after the breakout groups, we’ll come back here and have
some wrap up and implications. And let’s see, I think probably
we’ll be ending about 6:30, and then we’ll
start our reception. So let’s see the video and
then we’ll hear from Sara. The Consortium is a
research institute at the University
of Chicago that does studies on school reform. We live on this funny
boundary of doubt and belief that we’re always
skeptical about evidence, and we’re skeptical about
whether there’s progress, but we believe that
schools can get better. ELAINE M. ALLENSWORTH: We
know Chicago really well. But we don’t just know
Chicago, we know schools. We understand urban
education in a way that’s really kind
of deep and nuanced and that you don’t see a lot
of times in education research. We try to ask questions
that are going to get at really deep issues,
things that people are really struggling with, not just in
Chicago but across the country. How schools work and
how students learn and what really matters
for student success. JENNY NAGAOKA: It’s
so important for us that we not just be
doing good research, but it’s actually good research
that is usable by people. That it’s actually changing
how people are thinking about the issues in education,
how they’re thinking about their day to day work,
how they’re thinking about what sort of policies we need. ARNE DUNCAN: I’ve always been
a huge fan of the Consortium, and I think having something
like that in Chicago where I worked was a huge advantage. Other superintendents
in other cities that didn’t have a strong,
impartial research base made their jobs harder. And having folks who can feed
you good information, who will tell you not
what you want to hear but what you need to hear,
who will tell you the truth is extraordinarily beneficial. So I always thought it was a
huge asset, a huge advantage, to me, to the city, and
ultimately most importantly to the kids we were
trying to serve. PENNY BENDER SEBRING: One of
our most significant studies was the study of the
five essential supports, and this was a study of
the common characteristics of improving schools. Improving schools had
five areas that they were very strong in,
school leadership, collaborative teachers,
family involvement, a supportive and safe
environment for kids, and then finally, ambitious instruction
going on in the classroom. ISAAC CASTALEZ: There was so
much to dig into in the survey, but it was also
a catalyst for me to begin my improvement
as a school leader and to make the changes that
I needed to make at my school. Attendance has
improved, the number of suspensions and
infractions in the school have gone down drastically, by
more than 200% in some cases. Now my students are increasingly
willing to take on challenges. They feel more
confident in themselves because there are structures
and supports around them that they trust. And that allows them to
take thoughtful risks and to work harder,
because they are working in an environment that is safer,
warmer, and more supportive of their needs. LIZ KIRBY: I just
go back to being a principal my very
first year and not knowing what I was doing. And I was looking for an anchor
and looking for the things that I could focus on. And the Consortium, those
reports were, I mean, they were posted all
on my bulletin boards. You know, I had them
right on my computer, even, just to remind me
of what was important and what really should be
guiding my work with teachers. One of the first areas
of focus was really looking at the performance
of students in their freshman years. ELAINE M. ALLENSWORTH:
We came out with a report in
2007 called, What Matters for Staying on
Track in Graduating, where we really showed
the crucial importance of attendance and
how even one F made a huge difference
in the 9th grade year for a student being
likely to graduate. AARTHI DHUPELIA:
Freshmen on Track work has been a huge deal
for the district. It really helped adults organize
around the work and talk about, student by student,
how can we have the student with the
challenges that we’re facing. And so it sort of
started dialogue and work within schools that wasn’t
necessarily happening systemically. LIZ KIRBY: Not only did
the On Track rates improve, but achievement also improved. On Track really was
a magical thing. Graduation rates went up, the
incidence of negative climate misconducts went down, college
enrollment, most importantly– and this all this
is connected also– I will say this any
day of the week, there is a child
that is not in jail and there’s a child
that is not dead because of the work on On Track. JOHN EASTON: I think that the
Consortium is an institution, especially located at a
university like the University of Chicago, where this has
succeeded over 25 years. I think that is something of
a beacon for other players. I’ve heard people
even talk about it as a social movement that’s
really fundamentally changing the way education
research is done. JENNY NAGAOKA:
The Consortium is, it’s an amazing place
in so many ways. People work there
because they really care about what’s
happening in our city and they care about what happens
to the students in the Chicago Public Schools. And they really want
schools to improve. JOHN EASTON: Well,
there’s been fantastic work the past 25 years. Hopefully in the
next 25 years, you’ll see even more timely research,
even more impactful data, that could help educators
who have dedicated their lives to helping
children be successful. ELAINE M. ALLENSWORTH:
I feel like we’ve had an extraordinary influence
on education in Chicago and in school districts
across the country. But I feel like we
could do so much more. And I’m really excited to
see what that’s going to be. SARA RAY STOELINGA: I’d
like to add my welcome to the special event honoring
the U-Chicago Consortium’s 25th Anniversary. Thank you so much for being
with us here this evening. I wanted to offer a few insights
and perspectives on U-Chicago Consortium’s existence within
the Urban Education Institute, kind of situating the
Consortium within UEI. And as you may know, the UEI
has four units within it. One is our U-Chicago Urban
Teacher Education Program, with its
residency-based approach to training teachers with a
full year of residency training and also three years
of coaching support wherever they land in
Chicago Public Schools. We have our University of
Chicago Charter School, which is pre-k through 12, serving
900 students on the south side of Chicago with a goal of really
creating critical thinkers and leaders and 100% college
graduation of our students. Thirdly we have
U-Chicago Impact, which disseminates
research-based practice-proven tools from the Consortium
and from our other units as well nationally, and touching
about 2.5 million students across the country, currently. And of course, we have U-Chicago
Consortium, whom we are here to celebrate this evening. So thinking about how to situate
the Consortium within URI, one of the things I
thought I might do was to actually briefly
illustrate the influence and impact that
the Consortium has on its sister units within
UEI, and I want to start with U-Chicago Charter. So if you walk
into the conference room in the University of
Chicago Woodland Campus– and we actually have the
Interim Campus Director, Mike Lackenbach is
here present with us– if you walk in
there they actually have two walls that are
white boards that are covered with the Consortium’s work. There are quotes from Elaine
Allensworth on the wall. All of the five essentials
are blown up poster size with all of the items
and measures listed. There are report covers
that illustrate the most important focus areas
that the school has, that’s influenced by the
Consortium’s research. And importantly,
this year the CEO of U-Chicago Charter, Shane
Evans, who’s also here with us this evening, actually
instituted new metrics focused on 98% attendance
goal for all of our campuses. And of course, this
clearly comes directly out of the Consortium’s work. And so it’s an example of the
impact of the Consortium’s work on the school. If you go to U-Chicago Impact,
the Consortium of course created five essentials, and
you saw that in the video. And I know many of you use
this in your day to day work, the power of that
predictive indicator, of the way in which
understanding how we organize schools for improvement
and the impact that has on the long term health
and outcomes of students. And I’m proud to say that
U-Chicago Impact is now disseminating five
essentials nationally, and we’re in 12
states, 4,200 schools serving 150,000 teachers
and 1.2 million students across the United States. And of course, this
would not be possible without the Consortium’s
innovative and forward thinking about these types of indicators
and U-Chicago Impact’s efforts to distribute those nationally. When we go to U-Chicago UTEP,
our Teacher Education Program, the research approaches
that the Consortium has used to understand
the quality of teaching and to understand how to measure
that– so things like comparing teacher evaluation ratings
from program to program, or collecting artifacts
of student work that are assigned by
teachers, and analyzing the extent to which those
are ambitious intellectual assignments that are given to
students– these kind of ways of thinking about
teacher quality have molded and shaped the way
the Urban Teacher Education Program does their work. So why do I provide
these snapshots? I provide them for two reasons. One is to illustrate the
power of UEI’s work, which the Consortium sits within. This use of evidence
to drive improvement in all different
aspects of the field really defines what
the Urban Education Institute is and does. But the second more
important reason that I give you
these illustrations is to demonstrate the
Consortium’s influence on the micro level
within UEI, and the way in which the
Consortium can probably tell thousands or
countless other stories about the influence
that they are having on other organizations
across the country, from school houses
to classrooms, districts, nonprofit
organizations, think tanks, et cetera. The Freshman on Track
indicator is one example. It’s spread across and
taken root nationally. Certainly a dozen
or more places have started research-based,
place-based consortia that are modeled after
our work here in Chicago. And the five essentials,
as I just said, is in thousands of
schools influencing cities all over the country. And these are just
but a few examples of the U-Chicago
Consortium’s influence, which starts right here at home and is
happening all over the country. And so it’s this
legacy and contribution that we honor and
celebrate today, and I want to add my
deepest congratulations to the Consortium as
they celebrate 25 years. And it’s now my pleasure to
introduce Elaine Allensworth. Elaine is the Louis Sebring
Director of the Consortium, and Elaine has been with
the Consortium for 17 years, starting as a junior researcher
and moving across her career into the director role. As many of you
already know, Elaine is considered to be a national
expert in school reform and has provided the
intellectual, methodological, and inspirational leadership
to guide the Consortium’s path. You have her bio in your
folder and I know you all know her well, but
one thing I just want to add about
Elaine that’s always impressed me is the extent to
which she internalizes, guides, and contributes expertise
on every single study that the Consortium does. You will also find
that she was involved in creating or
contributing to all of the most influential
indicators and studies that the consortium has done,
such as Freshmen on Track and the Five Essentials. She’s quite simply incredible. Elaine Allensworth. ELAINE M. ALLENSWORTH:
Thank you, Sara. That was really nice. And thank you, all of you. I’m so excited to be here
celebrating 25 years. And it’s so great to be able to
celebrate with all of you who are our friends, our
collaborators, our colleagues in all of the work that we’ve
been doing over these 25 years. 25 years ago, fewer
than half of students graduated from the
Chicago Public Schools. Think about that. Fewer than half of students
who enrolled in Chicago Public Schools obtained a
high school diploma. Think about in that
context the idea of trying to get all
students to get a college degree like wasn’t
even like something that people talked about. Right? Now the goal of the district
is to get all students ready to succeed in college. And we’re here today actually
taking that goal seriously, right? Thinking about how do we
get all of our students to and through college. Some things has stayed the same. It’s still a district where
the vast majority of students are poor, living in
segregated neighborhoods, attending segregated schools,
struggling with the demands that poverty puts on families
in terms of health, housing and transportation instability,
neighborhood violence, where students begin
school very far behind. At the same time, Chicago
has made a lot of progress, despite its context, despite the
context of the Chicago Public Schools, that’s often
hidden behind the bad news. In this school
district, learning gains are much, much stronger
than average learning gains across the state. Students with similar
economic backgrounds have much higher
achievement in Chicago then in the rest of
the state, compared to other students with
similar economic background. Graduation rates have increased
by 20 percentage points, at least. And we’ve actually had
more than a doubling of students obtaining college
degrees in the last nine years. It’s amazing. There’s a narrative out
there that nothing works, or that we don’t
know what works. And neither of those
things are true. We’ve seen schools make
significant progress. We know that it’s
possible, but we also know it takes a lot of work. People in this city
have worked really hard. People in schools, people in
nonprofits, families, community groups, and they’ve
done all this despite all the politics,
all the turnover, the lack of funding. Now the district has
very ambitious goals. The vast majority of students
in the Chicago Public Schools aim to complete a four
year college degree. To meet the expectations
of our students, our students themselves,
we need a system that’s going to get them there. Currently, the odds are
stacked against them. I mean, that is, that’s just
how it is if you’re growing up in poverty, honestly. So to reach that goal,
fulfill their expectations, we need to attend to
the lessons that we’ve learned over the last 25 years. And we’ve learned
a lot of lessons. So I’m going to quickly
go through some of those. So 25 years ago, researchers,
educators, policymakers, they got together to
develop the first framework, the first iteration of
the framework of the five essential supports, which you
can see represented up here. Since that time,
we’ve learned a lot about what it takes that
makes for strong and improving schools. Time and again, we find that
the way adults work together is more important
than the qualities of individual
teachers or leaders. Traditional models of teachers
isolated in classrooms are only sufficient
if we want to keep on reproducing the
inequalities that already exist in students’ lives. Getting students to show
better than expected outcomes so that students living,
or so that schools serving the poorest neighborhoods show
outcomes equivalent to schools serving the middle class,
requires exceptional school capacity. You’ve probably seen the model
of the five essential supports like this. You’ve seen the
individual school reports. Schools with improving
student outcomes have leaders that bring
adults in the school together, teachers, staff, and families
to work collaboratively on goals around improving the
school environment– that’s whether the school is safe,
supportive, academically focused– and instruction. Often school leaders are trying
to do a million things at once. They’re putting out fires. They’re trying to implement
lots of uncoordinated programs. But successful
leaders figure out what to do, how to put all
that aside and bring people to work together on coherent,
shared goals around student outcomes. Now the guide for
all of this activity needs to be on how students
actually experience the school environment. Using student data,
attendance, grades, suspensions, student
survey reports, as well as performance
on tests, to gauge how things are
working for students and then guide
school strategies. The history of school reform
is one of many big policies that were supposed to
solve big problems. We’ve studied many
of these large scale reforms over and over again. And we almost always
find both benefits and adverse consequences. Full scale, top down, tends
to result in amplifying uneven school performance. Schools that have cooperation
and trust amongst staff and with families, that have
systems in place for school improvement, those
are the schools that can adapt new policies
to their advantage. For schools that have weak
organization and little trust and collaboration,
new policies are just one more demand that makes
the school even more chaotic and makes people
even more frustrated and can make achievement worse. Strategies that
build local capacity are just much more likely
to be effective than those that simply demand change. So we’ve also learned that
college readiness requires careful attention to
transitions, especially the transition to high school. That 9th grade
year, because that’s the critical year, both
for high school graduation and for college readiness. Used to be, back
when I first started working at the Consortium
and was talking to people, people would talk about
preventing high school dropout and promoting college readiness
as two competing goals. Right? I heard time after time
again concerns from schools that, well, if they kept
more students in school, their test scores would go down. Right? They wouldn’t have
the rigor that they needed to get students
ready for college. Now we know that improving
high school graduation is the first step to
improving college readiness. CPS has seen a doubling in
the percentage of students obtaining four year
college degrees, and that’s largely been driven
by the increase in high school graduation rates. Through the response of schools
to Freshmen on Track research, the district has seen
incredible increases in high school pass rates,
course pass rates, grades, and learning. And 20 years ago, people thought
high schools were unreformable. Both high school graduation
and college preparation are about getting students
engaged in their classes, working hard so they pass,
they learn, and they develop learning habits and
learning strategies that they’re going to need
in college and in life. Seems kind of obvious, right? But so many of the
strategies that we’ve seen have been about
improving test scores or just changing the
curriculum without strategies about how to get students
engaged in that curriculum. Right? So we have strategies to give
students more test practice, change graduation requirements,
bring in IDS, the Common Core. All of these are silent
about supporting students. How do we support
students so that they can engage in the coursework? People often think that if you
just get the right curriculum, students will be more engaged. But the opposite
seems to be easier. Getting students coming
to class every day, doing the work, that
leads them to learn more and it makes it
easier to implement challenging curriculum. So, I’m going to give
a special plug now for working on attendance. I think Sara previewed this. People often think
it’s a low level goal, but it contributes more
than any other factor to achievement inequality,
failure, and low grades. College ready students have
average attendance rates of about 98%. Yet, while attendance has
improved considerably in CPS, 30% of ninth graders are
still chronically absent, attending less than
90% of the time. That’s almost a third of
students missing at least 10% of school. So as you’re spending
all your time working on your new curriculum,
working on your test, picking out your
textbook, think about are they actually going to be
in class to appreciate that. OK. So what does that mean? Well, teacher monitoring
and support we find plays a really crucial role. As adults get together
to monitor data on students, attendance,
grades, behavior, they develop strategies for
reaching out, finding out what’s interfering with
students coursework, keeping students
from falling behind. And that’s really key. There are thousands of reasons
students might be absence, might not be getting
the work done or might be performing
poorly on tests. But if nobody finds out why and
helps them overcome whatever that challenge is,
they’re going to just keep drifting further and
further behind, right, until it gets too
late to catch up. But if teachers notice and
they help students develop strategies to succeed, they’re–
that’s what students see as caring. That teacher cares about me. She wants me to
succeed in class. And that’s going to help
them not just in that class, but in all their other classes. And that actually makes
them better students and makes them more likely
to succeed in high school and in college. Our research shows
that the biggest obstacle to students’
college readiness is not their test scores. It’s low GPAs,
low course grades. And that comes from
weak engagement and work effort in classes. Now academic skills
are important. I believe that. But they are not enough. And the narrow
range of skills that are measured on
standardized tests provide an incomplete
picture of what students need to succeed
in school and in life. People used to think that
students failed in high school because they had
low test scores. They thought academically
strong students succeeded in high school and went on
to college if they wanted to, and succeeded there. Right? But we now know that there
are a host of other factors other than academic
skills that matter for student’s
educational attainment and for their life success. You may call them non-cognitive
skills, 21st century skills, soft skills, whatever
you want to call them. Student success as
young adults depends on a host of factors in addition
to their academic skills. Their beliefs about
themselves, their perseverance, their learning strategies, the
list goes on and on and on. And that’s probably why we
find, over and over again, that grades, GPAs,
are so much more predictive of educational
attainment than their test scores. They measure of a lot more. And they’re a reflection
of students’ engagement over the long term, across many
different kinds of challenges. For a long time,
people in Chicago equated college readiness
with performance on the ACT. And probably there are still
a lot of people who do that. But we’ve actually seen
that a narrow focus on preparing for
tests like the ACT can actually be
counterproductive. Limiting students’
overall development and leading to
disengagement, frustration, and even lower test
gains– that’s right, remember that study where we
found that too much preparation for the ACT actually led
to lower scores on the ACT. The question becomes, how
do you support students so that they are more
engaged and developing all the competencies that
they need for success. It’s not about
narrowing the curriculum or doing test practice. It comes back to
developing systems that help adults collaborate,
reach out, and support students to successfully meet diverse
challenges and their larger educational goals. Educational attainment is
also about the larger system that students live in. There are many potholes
on the road to college. Some are associated
with academic skills and preparation. Others with
mindsets, motivation, broader competencies, all
those non-cognitive factors. Others are structural. The process of
applying, enrolling, getting financial aid to cover
all the different college expenses, actually getting
to college, all those things. You know, it’s partly
college knowledge, you’ve heard people talk about
college knowledge, probably. But it’s also the degree
to which students actually have help negotiating a
really complex process. Students with more
advantaged families don’t have to do as
much on their own. A college going
culture in schools helps students through
all those complex steps in preparing, applying,
and selecting a college, and actually getting there. When there’s one counselor
per 100 students, support for college cannot
rely on just one person, right? But if everyone in the school
is preparing for college and going through the
right steps, then students, they don’t have to
figure out how to opt into doing all those steps. Instead, it’s a process of
opting out, figuring out how to get it so it’s opt
out rather than opt in. And developing systems for
supporting students is crucial. When Consortium research showed
that FAFSA completion was a barrier for many,
many students, the district started
tracking students’ FAFSA completion with real time data. And schools developed
systems to make sure students got their forms filled in. Now it’s just not
a problem anymore. It’s not a problem anymore. And the college
environment itself matters. Can you prepare a student
to succeed at an institution where 2/3 of the students
who enroll fail to graduate? Can you do that? We need colleges that
themselves are well organized to support
the students that they admit as students. So to earn a college
degree, most students need to graduate high
school, enroll in college, and then graduate from college. Usually people only look at
one milestone at a time– high school graduation, college
enrollment, college graduation. But that gives you a
misleading perspective. It makes it look like things are
much better than they actually are. So one of the key metrics
that we’re now tracking is the degree attainment
index, which combines the most recent information on
all of those milestones together to show the
movement of students to and through college, all
the way from 9th grade forward. So we’re trying to help
everyone see the big picture, from what happens in 9th
grade, which again is really critical, to high school
experiences, the college choice process, and then the
ways in which students are set up to succeed or fail
once they get to college. The first step to
meeting goals is knowing the scope of
the issue, how students are doing all along
the path to attainment, what really matters from their
success at each of those steps. And we have a lot
of research now, which I’m not going
into, that points to a lot of high leverage
ways to improve achievement from elementary school all
the way through college. And we can measure students’
outcomes along the points. And we are going to be providing
that information publicly, by high school, in
March so that everyone who works with students– the
OneGoals and Umojas and Gear Ups, and Albany Park
Neighborhood Association and all the other community
associations and parents and teachers and school
leaders– everyone will be able to diagnose
where the students that they work with are falling off the
path to college completion. Because it takes all of us,
right, working together. So I’m going to wrap up now
and leave you with three things to remember, three
big takeaways. First of all,
monitoring student data is crucial, whether you call
it working on the ABCs– Attendance Behavior
Course Performance, or BAG, Behavior,
Attendance and Grades, whatever you want to call
it– those data points, they tell you how
engaged students are in their coursework. And they also tell
you, really strongly, the probability for the students
both of graduating high school and completing college. Second, it takes
strategic leadership to coherently bring
adults together around monitoring and
supporting students. Without systems
for collaboration in schools’ focus on
goals for students, individual teachers and
families are left on their own to try to figure out
what to do for students who are struggling. Right? Are we just going to
leave it to everyone to figure out on their own? I’ll say it again. The way that adults
collaborate around goals for improving school
climate and instruction is way more important for
improving student outcomes than the qualities of
individual teachers and leaders. The way that adults collaborate. Finally, getting students
to graduate college takes a school culture that
lives and breathes support for the college process
so that students don’t have to do it on their own. And that’s all I have to say.

You May Also Like

About the Author: Oren Garnes

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *