From Mark Rauterkus's blog:
I.B. High should have a 13th year component. New Prep School options for PPS could do wonders.
Posted by Mark Rauterkus at 11:00 AM
A 2008 Schenley grad is now in North Carolina in prep school. (Deandre Kane, Schenley 08, Patterson School in 08-09). He plays basketball. He wants to get a full-scholarship. He wanted to do better in the classroom and in the sports arena. He is taking 13th grade.Many of the kids who go to West Point and the other military academies also go to a prep school.
The new I.B. High (whatever its name) could provide a 'prep school experience' -- as in 13th grade -- for all the kids who graduate in good standing from any Pittsburgh Public School. This 13th grade option would help with students who want to get the full IB Diploma, but need more than 2 years to do the work, pass the tests, etc. The 13th grade option could be for kids who graduate from Westinghouse, Langley, Carrick, Perry, etc, -- who do not want to go straight into college. Perhaps, they didn't get the college of their choice. Rather, these students can take I.B. classes at IB High, save money, yet still get college credit (often) and mature in their book strength and test scores.
The leader of the Pgh Foundation, (Grant O) spoke at a public meeting last year (to Wireless Neighborhoods Annual Meeting) and he said that only 20% of the kids who graduate from college in PPS are able to graduate from college. The greater majority of the few that we do send to college don't succeed there.I.B. High could strengthen its numbers by offering 13th grade. Kids from suburban schools might choose to go here too. Tuition can be charged to those outside the district, of course.
The PREP experience is NOT like CCAC. Kids who go to CCAC begin the four-year eligibility clock in terms of NCAA sports participation. So, CCAC as a viable option is a problem for a kid who is working to get a sports scholarship. With CCAC classes, those students won't get the sport-scholarship aid nor even be recruited.
The 13th year option would have a wonderful impact with the FOUNDATION COMMUNITY and the Pittsburgh Promise. (It should, in my not so humble opinion.) It is not prudent to send kids to college and have them rack up costly tuition bills only flunk out. That would drain the hope and the limited funds associated with the Pittsburgh Promise. It would be better to pay for the Pittsburgh Public Schools to handle the delivery of 13th grade for some who really want to work at the rigor of the I.B. classes and exams -- and then go to college the following year. Pittsburgh Promise funds could be invested into Pgh Public Schools for this 13th year option as a prep year before college. We should investigate and discuss and perhaps INSIST that the new I.B.School have a 13th year program.
For the sake of clarity, do not confuse U-Prep with a Prep Year. Pittsburgh Public Schools is opening a University Prep School in The Hill District. It will be a 6-12 school. It has nothing to do with this concept of a prep year at the I.B. High.
Labels: schools, sports 3 comments
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
Thanks for the re-posting.
Get the posting about the 2 hour delay for Monday, Feb 2, 2009, too.
The 2 hour delay is a welcome idea, but when it comes to new post topics we are trying to focus on school reform.
Still- Here we go, Steelers!
We got word that there will be a 2-hour delay on Monday, Feb 2. Bank on it.
Now, back to 13th year component discussions.
Q: How is it paid for?
A: With funds, in part, from the Pgh Promise. It is cheaper to pay PPS than college education. Kids from outside the district would pay their own way. Often the cost of an extra student in a class that is already running is marginal.
In reference to the delay,I think it is marvelous that the district is giving assurances to parents before it gives word to its "valued educators". Odd as it is, the scenario is a microcosm of all that is wrong with this administration.
Mr.Rauterkus, in a perfect world, your idea is a splendid one. In a perfect world. I think it is marvelous that you have concerned yourself with the Fricks and Schenleys of the district. Might I suggest that you ought to get around to some district hot spots to see where money should be allotted. What hot spots, you ask? How about Oliver? Westinghouse? Myriad middle schools.
Your idea for money being made available for an extra year of schooling ala an Oak Hill Academy is grand, but not in a district that has misappropriated so much spending that it numbs the mind.Not one dime should be spent beyond the basic, sick infrastructure.
Additionally, it is hard for me to feel any sympathy at all for students who larked their ways through the system and either failed to get their diplomas or somehow feel unprepared for college. (One former Schenley star athlete you make mention of comes to mind here, and I know this firsthand.) It's hard for me to believe that even a nickel should be spent for such students.
After all, CCAC is full of PPS grads who wish to move onto better things after two years.
I am sorry to throw a wet blanket on this idea, Mr.Rauterkus, but with so many pressing needs within the basic K through 12 structure within PPS, couldn't you come up with better?
The sci tech school will have a 5th year option. It will also have an option to finish in 3 years, but with the advanced classes that are being planned- classes that go beyond advanced chemistry, physics, etc.- it is hard to imaging that many students will be able to take advantage of these opportunities in just 3 years. If an extra year is available for the sci tech school, why not at another advanced school like IB?
As to cost- IB classes tend not to be full- there should be room for additional students.
Questioner, aren't you mixing apples and oranges here? If we are talking about a 5th year of schooling like what one sees in foreign schools meant to augment education and better prepare students for careers/college in higher or specialized areas of education that's one thing. But if we are talking a prep school set-up that simply seeks to aid kids who didn't care too much in school, then how can it be justified?
Additionally--and forgive me for beating a dead horse--won't the district's new 50% policy all but deem the need for Rauterkus' idea (especially as it relates to the former Schenley hoop star) negligible, at best?
If the 13th year was IB classes- that would better prepare students for demanding colleges.
And you're right, remedial work so Promise funds are not wasted is a different issue. Those students probably would not be ready for IB work either.
I dunno, I'm not buying this. I don't see how adding a 13th year component in any way improves the overall offerings of the district.
Offering something like this through IB seems particularly off-base. First off, it could jeopardize the accreditation. IB is one of the few things in the district that is overseen by outsiders, and is judged by criteria that are used in its programs all over the world.
To the best of my knowledge most kids do a prep year for one of a few reasons. The aforementioned athlete who finally realizes that they should have done something in school and has put scholarship possibilities (and the chances of getting by even with great support in college) at risk. Yes, they're teenagers and teenagers aren't known for their great judgment but we should be pointing them in the right direction.
The other kids I know who end up doing prep years are generally from more affluent families who finally realize that junior is not only not going to get into their alma mater, but he's likely to not get in anywhere at all. These are also often kids who have had (several or more) minor scrape with the law, problems with drugs or alchohol, etc.
I'm just not sure how offering a 13th year in a program that isn't meant to be taken one class at a time, but as an integrated program, and is aimed at kids that are already motivated, prepared and interested in academics would be a benefit to anyone.
Now...if that old idea of an AP high school were around, I could maybe see that -- since those courses are meant to stand alone. But even so, if we're talking about kids who aren't passing mainstream classes, who aren't getting to school, who are relying heavily on the 50% grading scheme...
Well, we need to be dealing with those problems long before they're 19 and 20 years old.
Norman Dale:
I don't believe that Oliver and Langley are going to be high schools for too much longer. They'd be closed even sooner if it didn't seem to be occurring to the administration that they've bitten off more than they can chew in terms of moving programs, changing programs and starting new programs.
So, Peabody gone in three years, Oliver and Langley likely gone in close that same time frame -- or at least warned about it (and by then after the last 2 years of ignoring problems at Oliver, it'll be a shoo-in for closure). Westinghouse transformed into ...something... and taking in all the East End kids that don't have a high school anymore. Carrick saved through some deals made during the Schenley debacle... UPrep and Sci-tech taking in kids that now have nowhere else to go, even if those schools aren't really something they're interested in.
And who knows who will still be around by then to try and sort through all of this? I kind of wish that people were forced to stay, if only to keep working at it until they have cleaned it all up!
The shortsightedness of closing Oliver, Langley and Peabody is incredible. Doesn't anyone see the bigger picture? Where have all of the kids in these regions gone? Is the allusion that the birth rate has declined???
Morphing all of the east end into one high school is almost an idea that emanates from a comic book, or a Morgan Freeman movie. I'm thinking that having a police substation on the premises makes a great deal of sense.
Yes, you said it. These brilliant ideas should be mandatory viewing for those bent on implementing change for the sake of change alone. In fact, forcing these administrators to have offices in buildings like the new east end high or Uprep should be mandatory, as well.
Thanks for the feedback.
Allow me to defend the 13th year component, a bit more.
If the idea is a 'perfect one' in an ideal world -- then we've got agreement. :)
The money for the 13th year -- well -- the OPPORTUNITY for the 13th year -- is for everyone in the district who chooses to use it. Langley, Oliver, Perry, Dice -- any PPS kid -- who feels slighted, cheated, side-tracked a bit in HS, scrapes, etc., -- could enroll into this 13th year.
So, it isn't just an I.B. kids thing. Rather, the academic elite kids of I.B. and elsewhere won't opt into a 13th year. They'll move on to college in the normal time-frame.
These 13th year classes would be at the I.B. High -- IB Prep -- so they would NOT be remedial. They'd be legit, academic, college prep classes with real rigor. If you flunked out, you're not eligible. Allow for kids beyond IB who are grads in good standing only.
Perhaps not one dime extra from PPS general budget would need to be spent on this IB 13th grade. ?? Tuition and Pgh Promise might make it pull its own weight.
I don't think that the 13th year component would impact upon or jeopardize the accreditation. We're mainly inserting fresh minds into the the IB Pool along w the IB kids. ADDITION is not like SUBTRACTION.
I don't get / understand the 50% policy as a deal-breaker / objection. ??
Sure, prep kids do come from affluent families and can't get into the prestige colleges. Understood that that is the existing educational culture N@. But, urban kids have bad years. And, some urban kids might like a year abroad too. :) This concept is an opportunity not generally bestowed upon the city kids now. And, it might prove to be attractive to suburban kids as well -- if they are not upper crust either. More, why not, exactly. ??
So, yes, the IB 13th grade, would be much like an AP 13th grade. Same concepts, really. Different brands (IB vs AP).
Great point in the connection to this concept to the Sci-Tech model. With the Sci-Tech School, kids will move more at their own pace. They might need 3 to 5 years to finish high school. Some in 3. Some in 5. Hope they all finish. We can hope.
With the Sci-Tech, those kids would be in a program that won't allow for much in terms of transfers INTO or transfers OUT OF the Sci-Tech School.
This is where the I.B. classes and the 13th year will part with the Sci-Tech model. Advance I.B. or Regular I.B. (I guess that there is a difference) could be picked up in a 13th year based more on the student's willingness and abilities and not on the constraints of the schools curriculum.
For example, an advanced Spanish class could be taken by a kid who did Spanish at Perry, Dice, Langley, etc. No need for the I.B. theory of knowldge -- just Spanish. Same w history, english, math, etc -- right. ??
These 13th year options do not need to be comprehensive. It is what it is, as space permits. An option.
This is much like the German model, so I'm told. Not based on scholarship, but more about maturity. Some are ready for college study, others not so much.
It IS based on the German model, as well as other Euro concepts. How about we adopt other concepts frequently used there, as well? Unruly, un-teachable kids are shown the door after a finite number of infractions. They are not kicked around the system, but told "Good Luck" and set out on their own. They can find a nice private school.
How about that idea? You think our board will go for it, or will the idea that, hey, placing all focus upon the 10% who DON'T want to be in school takes precedence over any concerns about that other 90% who understand the need for education.
That said, Mark, your idea would do well in a place like Peters, or Lebo, but not in cash-strapped, agenda-riddled PPS. You really do need to move beyond your IB/CAS view to see the entire trainwreck that Roosevelt and his band of merry men hath wrought.
Post a Comment