Thursday, June 28, 2012

Most violent schools

On another post Anonymous wrote:


“Wilkinsburg is Pa.’s most violent school district” and Pittsburgh Public is 9th in PA

About The Tribune-Review

The Tribune-Review can be reached via e-mail or at 412-321-6460.

From the article:

“If there’s a kid in these schools, it can create a harmful environment.”
"Nine Pittsburgh schools, including Murray PreK-8, King PreK-8 and Westinghouse 6-12, made the list of the most violent schools. The district ranked as the state’s ninth-most violent, with 4.13 incidents per 100 students.”

"District officials could not be reached."

Comment: Since we know for a fact that some, if not all, PPS schools keep this data a dark, deep secret, since reporting it jeopardizes the Principal’s job, we could conclude that PPS true data could make Pittsburgh the “most violent school district.”


Anonymous said...

I wonder who the other six PPS schools are who are on the "most violent schools" list?

The article doesn't identify them. Why? Or does it even matter, since they may be honest about the information submitted.

How do we find out?

Anonymous said...

Wow, Westinghouse I cant beleive it not! Suprised its not number one. We knew all the mess that was going on there and we allowed it to happen. Dr. lane does not have a clue when it comes to urban education and safety. This is not IOWA.

What happen to the fancy misleading presentation that was made this month at the education committee special meeting by WHS principals. It times to get the HWD community and Alumni involved and not all this outside agencies that no nothing about Homewood, westinghouse or their kids.

Anonymous said...

Someone please show this to linda Lane. She still thinks that Westinghouse is a great college prep program. In fact she thinks the name academy made it so.

Questioner said...

Here's a link:

It seems to suggest that Westinghouse had more than 4 times as many incidents as Oliver, which is unlikely. U Prep is not on the list. Probably the rates depend a lot on what the schools choose to report.

Anonymous said...

I have a few questions, I appreciate the people/ person running this site. I am not trying to be too critical, however it has been months the last time I saw a thread. I also notice once something falls off page one the conversation stops.

Anonymous said...

Dice,Langley ,perry,Stevens,and mcnager are some of the other schools that there were serious incendents.

Anonymous said...

Part of the Roosevelt game plan was to run a thoroughly Orwellian public relations department.
All good news...all of the time.
Bad news? Never heard of it.

How would you find the truth out? Talk to people in the schools. The kids know. The teachers know.

Anonymous said...

Reporting for the Safe Schools Report has never been accurate in my parent opinion. I am not an authority on anyting but A+ got their info from the state who got it from the districts and the the reports are unreliable. Completely dependent on whim, what else was going on that day, etc.

Anonymous said...

The trouble is nobody TALKS to the kids. Oh, don't get me wrong you have to be skilled at listening to kids to know what is accurate and what is reactionary embellishment for personal purposes, but it is possible to extract the facts if you have the skill.

Anonymous said...

There is no disipline, and it is getting worse. Pela's have no clue, Kids run the schools, security in our schools is a joke. When jobs and bonuses are tied to how many kids you do not suspend, disipline in our schools is dead.

Example from this past spring at my school. A 15 year old drives his moms car across school property on camera. He left school illegally, propped up a side door to get back in to school, everything on camera and recorded. The student got a day of inschool suspension.

Anonymous said...

Yet, at the school board meeting they seemed to buck the idea of behavioral focus. What gives? Parents seem to be driving some push back (U Prep) for more of a learning enviroment. I stand by Linda Lane! Community forces have an unspoken agenda and I wish that we could understand that more clearly with better transparancy. It would help in the discussion. Now, is it a case of CYA? Anyone with the means to do so will flee the PPS.

Anonymous said...

If you stand by Lane, you are in trouble!

Anonymous said...

You stand behind "alternative ed" for ALL 6-12 students attending a Hill District school?

What does that say about you?

Shame on you!

The only agenda the community has is equity and excellence in EDUCATION for their children!

What other agenda do YOU think they have?

Anonymous said...

If you stand by Lane, your job is safe. Sad but true.

Anonymous said...

What's with all the anger? Because I support Linda Lane? I pay city taxes and pay attention to PPS. I haven't heard this in terms of "alternative ed." in reference to the Hill. What part of a learning environment is unwelcome? All I'm asking is for a fuller explanation to the opposition. I recall that it was the school principle that requested additional support. Why? I bring this up in the "violent school" blog. Attacking my post seems to be a little reactionary without context. Something needs to change, the old ways are not working. I applaud the PPS not accepting failure.

Questioner said...

Re: "Something needs to change, the old ways are not working."- somewhere along the way this sentiment morphed into an assumption that anything is better than what we have. But, some of the "anythings" turned out to be WORSE than what we had (not to mention much more expensive). And on top of that, some of the old ways were working. Instead of retaining and building on what worked, everything was swept off the table. And the logic behind the new choices has often been woefully lacking (for example, an assertion that "girls hear better than boys" as part of the justification to place the girls in a particular neighborhood in single gender classes- even though experts dispute whether there are any hearing differences, and any differences would not be specific to the neighborhood in question).