On another post Anonymous wrote:
"Nice editiorial in the Chicago Tribune taking some of the glitter off of Arne Duncan's Chicago "reforms."
I wonder how long it will take the Post-Gazette to wake up from their slumber to begin to question the Roosevelt/Lane/Fischetti/Weiss administration. Perhaps they are waiting for enrollment to dip all the way down to or past the "unmanaged outcome" McKinsey project pre-Promise (good luck finding the original reports on line - the closer reality gets to the "unmanaged outcome" the more the source documents are disappearing).
Happy reading:
Chicago Tribune: Report Shows Limits Of Education Reform.
A Chicago Tribune (10/10) editorial headlined "No Miracles" describes the "cutting-edge school reform" efforts that Chicago has seen in recent decades, noting that "Paul Vallas ended social promotion and championed high-stakes standardized tests to hold schools accountable. His successor, Arne Duncan, shuttered failing schools and boldly vowed to create 100 new schools in a decade." The piece asks whether such reforms have borne fruit, and cites the recent University of Chicago report on the city's education progress to argue that the reforms have not worked "as smashingly as you might think." The Tribune suggests that the lesson from the report is that there are no cure-all policies for the city's schools, and concludes that instead of "miracles," the city's students need "talented teachers, talented leaders, and a sense of urgency from everyone who is charged with the noble job of educating them." "
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
28 comments:
Eventually it will be clear that it's not the configuration or the theme or the name or the gender that make a difference. Just focus on getting the job done.
"No Miracles" - " . . .instead of "miracles," the city's students need "talented teachers, talented leaders, and a sense of urgency from everyone who is charged with the noble job of educating them."
MIght it be that the "miracle" in PPS will be finding ENOUGH "talented teachers, talented leaders, and a sense of urgency from everyone who is charged with the noble job of educating them."
Certainly, that has not happened in the past six years. The question is: WHY has it not happened in six years when we have many examples of it happening in one or two years?
"Certainly, that has not happened in the past six years. The question is: WHY has it not happened in six years when we have many examples of it happening in one or two years? "
What examples are those?
Please check the "90-90-90 Schools" and the "Dame, Dame Schools{, and many, many, many of the Charter Schools in urban areas in Pittsburgh, in Pennsylvania, and all over this country. The list is long and impressive; BUT, as Ron Edmunds asserts, "It takes only ONE, to prove that it can be done.
This site questions this FACT over and over. How many times must it be repeated? Those who REFUSE to believe the FACTS will continue to do so, regardless of how often it is substantiated!
When people ask this question they seem to be seeking specific school names and locations rather than a research project such as tracking down dame schools.
Yes. There are, in fact exceedingly few schools which are consistently achieving at those levels. There are no districts that I know of which have more than a few. They are often specially funded, or run outside the regular system the district has set up (charters or magnets with admissions criteria).
It's important because you keep saying this like there are these fabulous schools all around -- and it's just not true.
Looking at the research? It's easier to bring up math scores with targeted interventions, far harder to bring up reading scores.
Most schools which have shown tremendous gains quickly? Are later shown to be massaging their data or have high attrition rates due to kicking kids out, etc.
It's not easy and it's not solved by a computer program or a highly paid consultant. It's a long, hard process with dedicated people and there aren't miracles.
The dame,dame schools don't seem to be an active designation anymore as far as I can tell. The 90/90/90 is also, as far as you can tell from the web a less strict designation than it sounds.
90 90 90 schools are often described as high achieving, leading some to think it means 90% of students are high achieving, perhaps even in the 90% percentile.
But doesn't the achievement part of 90 90 90 just mean that 90% of students are proficient (which in some states is a pretty low bar)?
If that is a "low bar" how do you explain the FACT that there are no schools in Pittsburgh Public School where African American children, (except CAPA) met the PA minimum standard for Reading which this year was 72% (next year it will be 81%.)
This means that PPS is NOT CAPABLE of teaching African American children to read. (The average for Black children is in the 35 to 45th percentile range.) When many other Districts are educating these children to the 90th percentile, what is PPS's excuse. "Poverty?"
NO! That has been disproven over and over again!
Unconscionable!
According to a recent report, the PA test is about in the middle of the pack while a number of other states set a lower bar in determining the requirements to be considered proficient.
Speaking of 90 90 90 schools... The day before the school- year began here at MLK K-8 (sans ALA), Dr Lippert charged us with becoming the next 90 90 90 school, evidenced by next year's PSSA results.
Are we now on the righteous path without America's Choice?
Could she have been serious?
Personally, i initially found the comment absurd. As I read this thread during today's prep, I find Lippert's charge cynical and mean
Questioner: Please cite your source(s) on the 90-90-90 schools because you are dead wrong!
AND, according to an "official" national report that I have in my hands, you are also wrong about PA being in the "middle of the pack". PA ranks among the top four states in all but one of the criteria used to evaluate State assessments.
Where on earth does your information come from? Please let us know so that we can check it out.
Here's a typical description from a school district about 90 90 90 schools, indicating that 90 percent of the kids with the relevant characteristics "meet state standards": http://www.lapdavt.org/blogs/bd/2009/04/01/90.SLH.90.SLH.90.DSH.-Schools/
And the article about PA tests being in the middle of the pack is from the PG within the last few months and was noted on earlier posts.
The PG article reports on a study by the Center for Education showing the PA assessment in the middle of the pack: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11223/1166639-298-0.stm
- If PA's test was among the most rigorous that might explain the low PPS passing rate, but that does not seem to be the case. Links to other studies about the relative rigor of PA's test are welcomed.
"If that is a "low bar" how do you explain the FACT that there are no schools in Pittsburgh Public School where African American children, (except CAPA) met the PA minimum standard for Reading which this year was 72% (next year it will be 81%.)"
Dilworth did.
"AND, according to an "official" national report that I have in my hands,"
It's really hard to see from here! Do you have a link?
N0! Dilworth DID NOT. Almost, but not quite! However, Dilworth deserves to be recognized for coming close! BRAVO Dilworth, you are on the right track.
Not a "90-90-90 School" though, which is another consideration that must be taken into account when evaluating relative progress in PPS.
My apologies! I just checked the PDE site. Dilworth is listed as 73.2 % proficiency in reading for African American Students. PPS charts listed it at 71 in the presentation made in September regarding the Achievement of African American students.
Sorry Dilworth! Good job?
At what point will you turn your sights to other causes for the disparity between white and black students when it comes to reading and math scores? I laughed out loud when you made the comment about teachers not being able to teach.
Pure, 100% baloney.
When education is not valued in the home to the point where ancillary reading and practice of math is NOT done at an early age, it follows that kids are not going to do as well. If students have adults in their lives who spend much more time on their own personal interests rather than on the needs of their children, scores are going to be lower.
I don't care what color you are talking about.
I'm a little tired of teachers being scapegoated.
I'm a little tired of the race card being played as the obvious reason.
Isn't it time to examine real causes, even if it requires taking good, hard looks in the mirror?
Did anyone ever look at parents' ages ie over 21/under 21 as an explanation for disparities? Younger parents might in general be less inclined and less able to put children's education first.
Blame the parents, again? I wonder why and what teachers are there to do? I guess we really don't need them, if they can't function unless parents are there, here and everywhere? Right?
Let's say teachers add exactly the same value to each child's achievement. If as a result of family involvement (parent, grandparent, sibling, etc) child A starts out 10 percentage points ahead of the game and finishes 10 percentage points ahead of the game compared to child B, is it fair to blame the teachers? Or can we recognize causes and effects without characterizing observations as blaming?
The site here is about education reform (or maybe not).
Parental reform is a shift; but go for it. Let's prepare parents to educate their kids. Certainly, they are the key. If schools can't do it, let us begin the work with parents so that, in addition to maintaining jobs and keeping homes, we give them the skills needed to educate their children. It is a good solution to failing schools; however, there are only so many hours in a day.
If schools are not the blame for uneducated children, and we need parents to add the value we will need to provide the time, the training, and a shift of compensation from teachers to parents as they take on the additional responsibility.
You are right questioner, the value added would very likely be significant.
Training for parents on how to help their children make the most of educational opportunities would be great. The expectations and workload for teachers would not change, though, so it would not make sense to reduct their compensation.
This "shift of responsibility" is not an issue in the suburbs- parents honestly believe that their children's education IS their responsibility-- school is one faction, everyday life at home is a faction, and other learning outside of the home is a factor. Teachers are well-paid to do their part. When parents want more than what the school provides- they find a way to get their students to these things- tutoring,etc. is a parent responsibility-- many things are free, or low cost, but the parents do have to hustle to get their students to these opportunities. School cannot be the only place where learning occurs.
My daughter, a middle school student, asked a friend of hers why she never does homework and why she is ok with the failing grades she is getting. Her response was something like, "I have no plans to ever work, so why should I care about school?" Upon whose shoulders does a response like this fall? Her teachers? Her parents? Society? Who can impact this child to begin to care about school? Her teachers? Her parents? Society? It is so easy to blame teachers. It is so easy to blame parents. What our district needs is leadership and solutions.
Thank you! YES, "leadership and solutions" are missing in action at PPS.
So, where are the COMMUNITY'S "leadership and solutions"?
LEADERSHIP and SOLUTIONS MUST COME from the COMMUNITY!
WAA is stepping up! Where are the other communities?
What is the WAA? And can you explain what you mean by " stepping up "?
A school district with integrity:
Oregon City School District walks away from $2.54 million grant for performance pay
http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-city/index.ssf/2011/10/oregon_city_school_district_wa.html
Post a Comment