This is the blog section of the PURE Reform website. Please leave your thoughts and comments here.
PURE Reform has created this blog as a forum for parents, teachers and community members to share information and voice concerns regrading the reform process in the Pittsburgh Public Schools. Although we would like to foster constructive dialogue, PURE Reform does not edit content. The views expressed by bloggers in this forum are not necessarily views held by PURE Reform.
To comment on an existing topic, go to the line at the bottom of the post for that topic that begins "Posted by..." That line will list "1 comment," "2 comments," etc. Click on "comments," then leave your comment in the box provided. To post as Anonymous, no registration is required, OR you can choose an identity.
To suggest a new topic, go to this month's post labeled "Start a New Post" and add your comment (as described above) about the new suggested topic. PURE Reform will use these comments to start new posts.
Probably, it would need to be requested from the Parent Hotline (with up to a 30 day delay) or the reporter might share it. Or maybe the Tribune will publish the list.
The Achievement Gap at Colfax ALA was 47%, the highest in the District___clearly that is not a criteria for a bonus! Why?
The Achievement Gap at Murray ALA is 20% in Reading where proficiency went from 33 to 39%____with 60% of the students NOT proficient in reading. In Math "proficiency" dropped from 48% to 46% with 54% of the students NOT proficient.
Did Allderdice, Brashear, Langley, Peabody, Oliver, Carrick, Westinghouse receive bonuses?????
Proficiency dropped/decreased in all of these schools this year.
What about the part of the article where Roosevelt stated that the district did not even evaluate principals before he showed up. Talk about going from 0 to 60! Is this the third or fourth year of bonuses? We went from not evaluating principals, to giving them bonuses based off of an evaluation system that was created in one or two years.
Tells it like it is? You must be joking. On one hand, perhaps she needs a lesson in public speaking and diction, on the other--she is the perfect principal for this regime. Nuff said.
13 comments:
The article does not have all the #s and names, sadly.
Last year each principal and the bonus were listed.
Though the website has gotten some slight redesign, I could not locate a press release on the district site.
Probably, it would need to be requested from the Parent Hotline (with up to a 30 day delay) or the reporter might share it. Or maybe the Tribune will publish the list.
Most of the principals named for bonuses in this article were veteran principals.
Did any of the PELA principals receive bonuses?
If not why not?
Only two ALA principals were named for bonuses___why?
Millions were target for ALAs and PELA_____does the lack of bonuses revel a lack of progress and/or competence? Explain.
The article apparently focuses on some of the top bonus recipients. The complete list of awards was not reported by the PG.
The Achievement Gap at Colfax ALA was 47%, the highest in the District___clearly that is not a criteria for a bonus! Why?
The Achievement Gap at Murray ALA is 20% in Reading where proficiency went from 33 to 39%____with 60% of the students NOT proficient in reading. In Math "proficiency" dropped from 48% to 46% with 54% of the students NOT proficient.
Did Allderdice, Brashear, Langley, Peabody, Oliver, Carrick, Westinghouse receive bonuses?????
Proficiency dropped/decreased in all of these schools this year.
It seems like the criteria for bonuses might change from year to year. It is not even clear that criteria are decided in advance. From the article:
"For bonuses this round, the district considered which schools are high need and therefore are more difficult to turn around."
- So, the Murray principal might have received a higher bonus because the school has a higher percentage of low income students.
It's great to see a large bonus go to someone like Principal Rucki, who tells it like it is.
I find it interesting how the system is set up. Administrators are to be motivated by bonuses.
But teachers are to be motivated by fear, the fear of being targeted.
It reminds me of the old Kirk Douglas WWI movie Paths of Glory.
When the battle went well, the generals got medals and promotions.
When the battle didn't go so well, a few foot soldiers were chosen essentially at random and taken out and shot.
What about the part of the article where Roosevelt stated that the district did not even evaluate principals before he showed up. Talk about going from 0 to 60! Is this the third or fourth year of bonuses? We went from not evaluating principals, to giving them bonuses based off of an evaluation system that was created in one or two years.
Is it really an evaluation system, and how effective can it be, if the criteria are so ambiguous?
Tells it like it is? You must be joking. On one hand, perhaps she needs a lesson in public speaking and diction, on the other--she is the perfect principal for this regime. Nuff said.
Post a Comment