Monday, September 26, 2011

PPS officials seek remedies for violence in schools

From the Tribune:

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/pittsburgh/s_758705.html

26 comments:

Questioner said...

It is at the point where officials do need to call the police. For example, police wrote citations at Westinghouse:

8/30/11 ("fighting in the classroom"), 8/31/11 ("student along with another student were fighting in the classroom"), 9/1/11 (fighting in front of the school), 9/2/11 (student "engaged in a fight during dismissal"), 9/15/11 (student "yelling and cussing at administrator and security" and another student "cussed out school officials and security"); 9/22 (3 citations, student "did engage in a fight outside of Westinghouse during dismissal time"), 9/22 ("would not follow directions of security staff and cussed them out. Would not leave until school police arrived")... Sounds like some students seriously in need of help and intervention. It would be interesting to know if the students who told A+ Schools they feel safe attend Westinghouse.

Anonymous said...

Planning for the school opening was POOR at best. There are no excuses for opening any school with the kind of chaos that existed at Westinghouse.

Students need and deserve all things in place and a clearly organized and welcoming environment where purpose and preparation are obvious.

You can expect all kinds of behavior from students when there are no schedules, teachers do not know who is in their classes, students can go to any class to be with a friend, the majority of teachers are teaching classes they have never taught before, walk through teams are placing blame on teachers, students are being sent home again and again for insignificant reasons, some students are not wearing the uniforms, etc., etc.

Anonymous said...

It doesn't sound like the students are " seriously in need of help and intervention" but instead the Central Office that created the chaotic and untenable situation that teachers and students are being forced to deal with on a day after day basis.

Talk about "heads in the sand"----Does anyone at Central Office have the experience necessary to create successful schools? A bad, "managed," mandated, one-size-fits-all, scripted curriculum that must be delivered with "fidelity" even when all evidence indicates an alternative approach is needed, IS NOT the answer; but, it appears to be the only 'thing' coming from central office. (Sorry, sorry leadership.)

A large, diverse system like PPS is beyond the capacity and capabilities of the current Central Office people. However, at the rate we are losing students, it maybe quickly be narrowed down to a much smaller number of students that fall with the current capacity and capability of Administration.

This CO is "seriously in need of help and intervention" before there are no students or teachers left in PPS.

Anonymous said...

Here is a gem of a quote.


"I do not know that Pittsburgh has any more problems and concerns than any other school district, in this region or beyond, in terms of safety, security and bullying," Harris said. "Part of our job as a watchdog is to talk to the students, and they report feeling safe in their schools."


FAIL.

Anonymous said...

The stats in PPS for "safety, security and bullying" are far worse than other districts. (See Trib article.) AND, they are worse in spite of the fact that much of what occurs in PPS is not reported, deliberately.

If students were more successful, in other words, successfully engaged in learning opportunities with high rigor and hight relevance, there would be no need to act out in ways that challenge "safety, security and bullying."

Schools, many schools, CAN and DO create successful environments for students.
True LEADERS know how to do that!

Anonymous said...

The problem with comparing stats is that many districts do their very best to keep them low.

I've heard from a sub that teachers at Woodland Hills HS are only allowed to send a kid out of class if they actually physically touch the teacher.

That is, you can't send them to the office for yelling over and over, or cursing at you repeatedly, or running around the room knocking things over. Unless maybe one of them touches you?!

So, in many cases, it's impossible to tell what the numbers mean. Are there that many truly heinous acts or is this a school that is writing kids up for minor dress code violations and the like. Some schools with low rates probably are "scarier" places than places with seemingly higher rates.

Zeppo said...

Perhaps the PPS should scrape together enough money to buy the Tribune.

Then Dr. Lane could put all the editors on paid administrative leave for daring to speak the truth.

Anonymous said...

Hi Anon 11:27-- sorry to tell you but in PPS, sending students to the office is seen as the "teacher giving up their power" and ask tue students- there is cursing, yelling, constant disruption in the rooms of very very strong, good teachers. However that attitude that "NO ONE will disrupt MY SCHOOL" that the pre-PELA principals had-- does not exist. It is always your fault if a student is disruptive-- and news flash--- NO amount of student engagement can "fix" mentally disturbed individuals. Out of school many of these students actions would have them removed from the general public-- public urination, yelling profanity, destroying public property would not be tolerated at a Steeler game.

Anonymous said...

Yes, as a teacher you do give up your power when you send students out. Your classroom is what you make it. All kids want to learn and be successful. You have the power to make that happen. You give it away when you send students out. A teacher creates an environment for learning, relevance, and success. Teachers do that all of the time with the kids who come to school. In truth, it is why they come to creative, responsive learning environments in schools.

Questioner said...

Would a mentally disturbed individual always be able to focus on learning and being successful?

Anonymous said...

Hmm the average parent/ tax payer expects when there is a critical incident, that "something" will be done. Apparently according to the trib, Dr. Lane expects there to be consequences. Perhaps an exit survey-such as ccac does when students leave would provide information as to exactly how disruptive last year was to student learning. The saddest thing about the lack of order in our schools is that the students hurt the worst can afford it the least. When an incident happens, the good students tend to curl up,read etc. Hthe students on the edge tend to follow the action.
Also, as per the westinghouse police blotter-- who lost the power in the halls, bathrooms, cafeteria-- those places where admin is suppose to be in charge?

Anonymous said...

This post and the trib article are enlightening. I do wish A+ would have provided specifics on the kids they talked to; where, when, how. Oftem the kids getting talked to on a tour or during an audit process are hand picked. A CAS student's perspective is different than a mainstream student's perspective and many other examples exist to prove that point of view is determined by most recent experience. I know A+ talked to principals and now will beging talking to teachers in a formal interview process, but was there a similiar initiative for students' thoughts?

Anonymous said...

Well, as 2:11 points out, there are many students who are not acting out or joining in (in a class of 25, there may be 3-5 frequent disrupters, 5-8 who join in sometimes or egg on the disrupters, a few kids who are frequent targets (more likely in the halls or bathrooms) and 10 or so who manage to stay above the fray or just ignore it. Those kids move away, read a book, keep their heads down and their profiles low.

Those latter kids will often respond that they feel safe in school. They mean that they aren't often targeted by bullies and that they don't usually feel physically threatened by fights involving other students.

That might not be what an adult or a kid at a private school with small classes would mean by feeling safe!

Seen it All said...

anon 1:39

You wrote: "All kids want to learn and be successful."

I'm sorry, but that's simply not true. I wish it were true, but it is not.

Let me give you an example. Pick a type of music that you just cannot stand. Let's suppose it's opera.

Now suppose I put you in an advanced opera class. I require you to sit and listen to opera for six hours a day. And occasionally I require you to stand up and sing opera, the very songs that make you sick to your stomach.

Would you be driven to be successful in this opera class, a class you hate? Or would you become more and more restless and unfocused?

The same goes for many students!

Not every student wants to, or can, do classes like advanced algebra.

But the PPS forces everyone into advanced algebra when many would be better served by something like a consumer math class.

Now add to this the fact that a certain percentage of students have mental issues. I'd guess that's maybe 5%.

Those 5% have no interest in learning. Their goal is disruption. I'm sure deep down they want to be successful, but their mental issues prohibit it.

The best teacher in the world cannot change this.

Sorry, but that's the real world. To fix a problem, we first must be honest about the problem.

Anonymous said...

To 6:03 - There would be no argument regarding the example that you give about not all children wanting to be learn and be successful at someone else's superimposed dictate, such as opera or an advanced algebra course. Yet, a case could be made that all children would want to learn and be successful at a course of their own choosing.

In reference to what is termed "mental issues" it might be, in most cases, attributed to conditions in the environment caused by adults, attitudes, demands,and situations beyond the youth's control or ability to cope, etc. Schools with autonomy to serve students' needs are often in the best position to ameliorate what you term as "mental issues' simply by providing an alternate environment where success is structured as opposed to continued failure and negativity.

You might counter that it is not the 'job' of school to do this; however, schools can be life-saving opportunities for students who need a reprieve from devastating situations beyond their control in the world outside of the school. Perhaps, that is what many seek when crossing the threshold of the school. Again, what students find from caring adults in schools has the potential to save their lives or NOT.

Anonymous said...

To 6:03 - There would be no argument regarding the example that you give about not all children wanting to learn and be successful at someone else's superimposed dictate, such as opera or an advanced algebra course. Yet, a case could be made that all children would want to learn and be successful at a course of their own choosing.

In reference to what is termed "mental issues," it might be, in most cases, attributed to conditions in the environment caused by adults, attitudes, demands,and situations beyond the youth's control or ability to cope, etc. Schools with autonomy to serve students' needs are often in the best position to ameliorate what you term as "mental issues' simply by providing an alternate environment where success is structured as opposed to continued failure and negativity.

You might counter that it is not the 'job' of school to do this; however, schools can be life-saving opportunities for students who need a reprieve from devastating situations beyond their control in the world outside of the school. Perhaps, that is what many seek when crossing the threshold of the school. Again, what students find from caring adults in schools has the potential to save their lives or NOT.

Questioner said...

If teachers continue to try to deal with these extraordinary challenges that other professionals are better trained and equipped to handle, there may not be enough pressure to bring about change. And are teachers really doing what is best for students by not insisting that students receive appropriate help?

Seen it All said...

anon 7:03

I'm the 6:03 poster. You might be surprised, but I agree with everything you said!

You wrote: "a case could be made that all children would want to learn and be successful at a course of their own choosing."

That's absolutely true! A student with no interest in advanced algebra might be very interested in auto repair.

That student would be very motivated to take a practical math class where he/she could learn about real-life calculations.

But PPS will not give that student that option.

You wrote: "In reference to what is termed "mental issues" it might be, in most cases, attributed to conditions in the environment caused by adults, attitudes, demands,and situations beyond the youth's control or ability to cope, etc."

Again, I agree with you. I'm not saying that such students should be abandoned. But I am saying that these students do NOT belong in a mainstream class.

A mainstream class is designed to deliver instruction, not to modify behavior. Students with issues must be removed to a special setting until they can get their problems under control.

Leaving them where they are helps no one.

You wrote: "schools can be life-saving opportunities..."

Here is where I agree with you the most! For many of our students, schools provide a real life-saving opportunity. And we owe these students every chance to succeed.

But that's not what's happening in today's PPS. The one-size-fits-all curriculum is forcing many students into classes they do not need or want.

And PPS's failure to boldly address a behavior problem is a tragedy.

Remember, misbehaving students not only destroy their own education, they destroy the education of everyone around them.

As I said above, Students with issues must be removed to a special setting until they can get their problems under control.

Anonymous said...

In most urban schools these are not "extraordinary challenges" as those who work in urban areas are well aware.

Treating all children, with respect and dignity, regardless of the so-called challenges more often than not has an amazing result. Kids want to know that you are for real, that its not faked, but a genuine purpose to know them, to respect them, to teach them, to work for their success in school and the world beyond.

It is the so-called "intervention" that schools can and do provide that changes lives. (Intervention is not a term that fits here, but it is widely used in schools in this context.)
.
Referring these kids to "appropriate help" is more often than not, counterproductive. What kids, and others, need, is to be treated with respect and dignity and approached as if they had some sense (as opposed to punitively), and they will respond in kind.

Questioner said...

Sorry, but there are plenty of mental and emotional disturbances that treatment with dignity and respoect will not resolve. A good example was provided in the NYT magazine article cited here a couple of months ago, showing dedicated teachers responding with extraordinary enthusiasm, respect and care and being dissed in response. Even PPS acknowledged this problem by turning to CEP- but for some reason let the company get away with excluding students on probation, students with an IEP, students with uncooperative parents who would not sign forms, etc.

Anonymous said...

I have to agree that the percentage of mental illness is likely only a little higher in a public school than in the population of all school kids as a whole. And teachers are not trained mental health professionals, no matter what they may think.

BUT, there are also a large number of kids whose genetic load for mental/emotional issues was pushed to the limit by their circumstances, as well. Those same kids in calmer, quieter, more structured schools with small class sizes? They would have done fine, no one would think of them as having "problems."

That still doesn't mean that a teacher can "cure" those latter kids in 45 minutes of instructional time a day with 25-35 other kids in the room and then maybe some afterschool time.

Many teachers do what they can and many in HS do have a number of students that they are looking out for especially, trying to help them make good choices, giving them a place to cool off if they're getting upset, etc. But, that's not a system, that's not a plan that can be scaled up, and in a lot of cases good intentions don't really do much.

Many PPS kids have experiences on a weekly or monthly basis that if an upper middle class suburban white kid had once, it would net him or her high-quality counseling for as long as needed. Say, seeing a family member shot in front of you, or being caught in crossfire yourself, or being abandoned by a parent who told you that you and your siblings were the reason they were leaving, or having both your grandparents who were raising you die in the same school year.

Questioner said...

(This is not to say that CEP is the best or even an acceptable provider of needed services. And unfortunately the arrangement chosen precluded the goal of making classrooms free of disruption.)

Anonymous said...

Not to distract from the topic's discussion but I believe the PA school code provisions prevent IEP students from being considered for CEP placement.

Questioner said...

All the more reason that a different model for providing these services should have been chosen...

anon657 said...

Questioneer, you re absolutely correct, another model would have been better, particualrly one with proven results.

Anonymous said...

You can not base a Principal's Bonus on how few kids they suspend. There is no Disipline in our school system, thats why it is doomed to fail. Kids run all over our school district hallways. Kids go as they please in my school. To many doors, not enough security guards. Its impossible to learn with constant disruptions. No support from administration or the majority of the parents. What a mess.