On another post Anonymous wrote:
Today's PG article on Closing the Racial Achievement Gap quotes Pedro Noguera, a highly regarded consultant from NYU.
Critical requirements include the following:
"While the report calls on central office to provide better support to schools, it is not a top-down approach, noting that "cultures cannot be imposed externally upon a school" but instead must be developed "organically."
(Note that it is NOT the one-size-fits-all approach currently mandated by PPS.)
"That is done through "strong, distributed leadership; a clear vision; buy-in around that vision from staff, students and parents; a willingness to use data to monitor progress and ensure internal accountability; and a deliberative, collective process to support planning, as well as the implementation of timely interventions and reflection."
Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/news/education/pittsburgh-schools-work-to-close-racial-achievement-gap-647376/#ixzz22ULaAEMV
34 comments:
You can link ot the working document from the district's home page. It is ironic that the student featured in the document (Morgan) is a Schenley grad. The school was well-known for its spirit of embracing all students, not just the IB kids.
Yes it truly did. Anyone who showed up regularly, behaved and made an effort seemed to receive help and encouragement. There were some funding disparitites that had an undeniable impact, but the school administration and teachers had no control over these expenditures- such as the 20 student a class limit in CAS (back b/f the clever reinterpretation of the student limit) and the fees required to make the IB program available.
At Schenley, yes, they expected kids to behave and gave out detentions and the like for those not behaving. However, they also seemed aware of what was and was not to be expected of kids this age. That is, they reacted fairly proportionately to the misbehavior.
Nowadays it seems that a small misbehavior can get a huge response, while something truly dangerous or threatening may barely get a mention from the administration.
Anon at 6:29, baloney.
If anything, little is done at all where discipline is concerned.
And as for Schenley, perhaps what you are putting forth is true but such was not the case during the last two years at the Reizenstein building, where the anything goes mentality was pervasive among administration.
Kids walking down the hall on cell phones? Fine.
Hats? No problem.
Pants down the crack of the posterior? Sure.
Swearing loudly in the halls, going exceptionally late to class? Hey, what's the problem?
And more.
This sure made an impression on kids on the Obama side and made them wonder why there were two disciplinary standards within PPS.
I think it's great that you want to sing the praises of Schenley, really I do. But boy, are you sugar-coating things.
Why is everything about Schenley? Does this mean you only read the first page of this plan to bring equity through the district, the whole district? Aren't you curious to see how the district is going to do this?
We're talking Schenley at Schenley. Not the final groups of kids who'd been left to dangle out there as they were shoved into smaller and smaller spaces. They got to watch as teachers who had been told that IB qualifications would give them the same protections that say, Montessori trained teachers have at that school, were not.
Many were forced to choose between teaching ONLY at one school or the other. Neither they nor the next year or two of kids have had a "real" high school experience. Half had to dwindle and half got treated like middle schoolers, for instance having "clubs" that were mandatory and during school hours. Some of those "clubs" were TOTAL wastes of time. Those that weren't, should have had more than 30 minutes a week.
There was plenty of bullying that ended in true injuries (thank heavens one kid told about the truly dangerous planned attack before something horrible happened.
It's not a horrible school. But, if it's an example of a good to great school in our district, we've lost a lot.
At least this guy saw the divide between Administration and the board regarding teachers and the community. You know we are all reading the SUPER watered down version of his assesment. I imagine he was much more critical. Actually there is quite a bit of criticism in the report, it is just worded kindly.
This is a very long article on MSNBC which Pedro Noguera was one of the participants in a round table discussion on education reform. He represents the opposite of PPS policy. It is worth the time to read this. I am on an ipad, I am not sure if there is still video available with the article.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47603712/ns/msnbc/t/wchris-hayes-saturday-may/#.UBy4FWt5mSM
He did seem opposite of PPS on NBC. But, either it is PPS spin and he is allowing it, but now he reads like --I consulted and got money to say --oooo PPS is right-- continue doing it. Sounds like the ultimate snake-oil salesman consultant yet again. People can be paid to say Riiiight! to anything.
After reading the entire document (EQUITY: Getting to AL, most educators will find it comprehensively superficial. It tells us nothing that we do not know about PPS, its programs, the perspectives, the processes, and projected outcomes.
In the alternative, it confirms the lack of understanding (as well as depth and detail) about the steps necessary for equity and achievement to be implemented as a model of EQUITY for ALL in city schools.
Read it carefully for detail and depth. Read carefully the responsibilities of central office administrators. Again, we see that consultants will be relied upon to deliver (and maybe that is a good thing given the in-house lack of skills) but, with whom and how will the change be accomplished. Who are the experts and how, explicitly, will the expertise be shared and implemented. Read carefully and then tell us who, what, where and how change will take place in schools that have, at best, demonstrated incremental, but insignificant improvement over recent years. (PPS have dropped to 476 out of 500 in the state. Others have improved, PPS has not.)
What is new about the plan? Yes, the new Common Core State Standards are mentioned, but with much inaccurate accompanying information.
This document reflects a need for either more and/or different consultants OR a whole new central office team.
Please read it carefully educators! Also, remember that we have yet to hear ANYTHING about this year’s PPS (2012) PSSA results that have been sent to all PA schools and school districts.
It's also true that when you read about and talk to people that they SOUND good. They talk about equity and high expectations and all those good things.
Simultaneously they are implementing curricula that are neither effective nor relevant and are actively re-segregating the district.
And to clarify, I'd take an effective curriculum over a "culturally relevant" one any day. Kids who are taught effectively develop knowledge and skills which leads to esteem and to more learning and the development of higher expectations for themselves. (Hint, the teacher should NOT always be just a "guide on the side" and not everything can be "discovered" by kids in a small group.)
Ask middle schoolers in this district to identify an unlabeled map of Pennsylvania and most won't be able to do it or ask them to point near Pittsburgh on an unlabeled map, or to find most anything on any size or type map -- you'll be sadly dispappointed.
But it turns out that you can't learn things from other people who don't know either!
Please EXPLAIN WHY an "effective curriculum" cannot be "culturally relevant"???
In truth and fact, the MOST HIGHLY EFFECTIVE curricula is a "CULTURALLY RELEVANT" curricula, bar none!
Currently, for most of the underachieving schools in PPS, the most effective curricula across content areas MUST be one that is "culturally relevant" and aligned to the Common Core State Standards in Reading, Writing, Listening, Speaking and Technology!
9:51
Please engage your critical thinking skills and reread.
No one said that a "culturally relevant" curriculum couldn't be effective.
It was said that being "culturally relevant" does NOT make it effective.
It was said that the current curriculum is neither of those things.
It said that IF you had to pick between the two, that commenter would pick effective. Reasoning that learning content well leads to students who feel empowered and motivated to learn more.
Cultural relevance doesn't create effectiveness.
Effectiveness doesn't mean or not cultural relevance.
Sadly, in many cases "culturally relevant" implies curricula which have been dumbed down, contain less actual content and those "high expectations" generally agreed on by our culture.
Again, read that last paragraph carefully. Culturally relevant curricula CAN be effective curricula; current use of the term "culturally relevant" often is used for programs which are NOT effective.
9:17 stated "And to clarify, I'd take an effective curriculum over a "culturally relevant" one any day."
Enough said?!
Most points that are set forth in your post are arguable. The Common Core Standards are emphasizing competence at making a good argument, clearly a much needed skill, one that has been given little attention, educationally.
Many of your points also reflect a lack of reading comprehension but is full of self righteousness. Both are counterproductive for solutions. We need people in PPS who can solve the problems, the ever-expanding problems in this district. It is critical to improving the current state of education in PPS.
12:35:
9:17 stated "And to clarify, I'd take an effective curriculum over a "culturally relevant" one any day."
Enough said?!"
A car can be very reliable. It always starts, it never breaks down, and it gets you where you need to go.
A car can look good and be comfortable to drive and spacious or get great mileage.
A car can be both reliable (effective) and comfortable (culturally relevant).
A car that is both is likely to be very popular!
That's what most people would pick.
However, if I had to pick the reliable car that always gets me where I need to go OR the car that looked and felt good but was NOT reliable and couldn't be counted on to start or not stall out or break down?
I'd pick the reliable one (aka effective).
End of analogy.
Nice analogy! Just one flaw in your example as viewed by teachers of another culture or persuasion.
The strong "culturally relevant" model IS and has been unerringly "reliable" has never broken down or stalled, in fact has never even needed a mechanic/coach and has taken Black students to a new place where the achievement gap was reversed in the hands of a strong, credible teacher!
Is anything other than the model and a strong credible teacher needed? In other words, does the model never break down or stall regardless of building administration, class size, number of special needs students and level of needs, etc.?
Can someone please give me an example of an elementary level math or science problem found in a culturally relevant curriculum? Seriously, a concrete example of a culturally relevant question that is not found in our curriculum. In your example please let me know which particular culture you are addressing.
The answer to your question, Questioner, is NO!
6:34 -- you're catching on to onee of the knottier problems of this magical curriculum.
Always beware the silver bullet. If there were one (or even three) perfect ways to teach kids, all kids, all the time, we'd already be doing it.
And yet even highly successful schools fail some kids.
Not to mention the racism behind the idea that all people of one race (and it seems only that race) share a single culture across our entire country, regardless of where they live (rural, urban, suburban), what they do, etc.
What exactly do cities that have several different "cultures" represented in every classroom have to do?
Or are you suggesting that segregation is the real path to excellent education?
Thank you for pointing out that a race does no equate to a monoculture, something this "plan" simply does no and cannot address, because the plan reflects the thinking of the 1950s. By the way, people in other countries outside the u.s. when faced with the question "What is your race?" answer by saying,"I don't understand the question."
This is is not an equity plan. If you look at other equity plans around the country, you will see more inclusive plans that contain special needs students, anti discrimination and de-seg, among other areas.
What you have from PPS now is a form of the Pledge of Allegiance with pictures, and, yes, Dr. Noguera is misquoted and his work and theory misrepresented in this "plan."
Then why are the pps admin moving all the black student to the hill distric and keeping all the white students in the south hills,for example Langley to brashear,black students from brashear to u prep.What happened to integrating these students..brashear was and still is 75 percent white,where u prep is 99 percent black
8:18, this plan shows you that de seg is no longer a priority. Schools are closed and students are moved relentlessly each year to avoid nclb sanctions for failure. A school closed and reopened us considered to be a new school starting fresh on the nclb timeline. PPS has its nose against the mirror and can only see what it's problems are today, not the impact of its actions long term. So PPS is only thinking about how to stay open and how to avoid becoming a state controlled district. Optio B to that being PPS voluntarily becoming a network of independent schools, each with their own bard and Bellefield being a technical iu type of support that s
The network would purchase services from. PPS central leaders prefer ths second set up and are actively working toward that. Such a set up relies on the assumption that children and families have the universal wherewithall to research and choose and get it together to apply and enroll in a school. This assumption leaps over the many real barriers and difficulties of the poor, the dysfunctional, the addicted, the depressed, the unemployed, the homeless in just making it through the day. This is not an inclusive list of all factors that can get in the way of even the most fortunate amity figuring out ad achieving enrollment of students on their own.
Back to your question, the current plan addresses an emotional and spiritual commitment the current superintendent has to race, which is admirable but not actionable as stared in the current plan, because this commitment is not grounded in the reality of Pittsburgh's communities or the reality of legal requirements and cooperative institutional structures--like dept of human services-- pathways for accessing and delivering services to support students and families and to stabilize society. This refusal on the part of PPS to understand that it is part of a civic fabric that maintains order, peace, ad livelihood, and that it s not some kind of outlier rogue genius agency creating a new world order is a reflection of the arrogance and naïveté of its very inexperienced and largely untried young staff who are making it up as they go along, clearly. The superintendent relies on their advice a great deal, it seems.
Cogently expressed!
"This refusal on the part of PPS to understand that it is part of a civic fabric that maintains order, peace, ad livelihood, and that it s not some kind of outlier rogue genius agency creating a new world order is a reflection of the arrogance and naïveté of its very inexperienced and largely untried young staff who are making it up as they go along, clearly. The superintendent relies on their advice a great deal, it seems.
Emphasize: "arrogance and naïveté of its very inexperienced and largely untried young staff who are making it up as they go along"
Unfortunately, unless immediate action is taken, we will allow the dissolution of a school district that has held this city together in a strong and viable way.
How do we organize for "action"?
August 5, 2012 8:50 AM
Upon reading this report, page 20 stands out. Since we have had site-based stupidity, principals have been free to LESSEN cultural relevance. Page 20 illustrates this. Art, Music, Library Services –all lead PPS students to varied cultures at all levels. Then principals were able to decide That students, particularly African American students needed “more basics” so they didn’t need the arts-or cooking. Or, they didn’t agree with the teacher politically, so they cut the program. Basically everyone on page 20 was an at-will employee. At least now, there is EQUITY. No I’m not positive that the delivery of these programs as they have been laid out will work. But it was wrong to say that some students have NO art, music and library services
I've read this again, and the other strings here. The only suggestion I have is to send your child to a private school or to home school the child. That seems to be the only way to get the child into a secure environment with competent, reliable people who actually know what they are doing. How can you tell? The child is actually the priority, and everything is not hard and so dramatic. You don't and won't see this kind of capable work reported in the paper, mostly because there is nothing to sensationalize about good work and honest achievement. Good isn't glamorous, but evil sure is. And evil is deceptive. Every one of these PPS people feel they are doing something honorable, sacrificing their lives to change the world. Notice the focus they put on their own sacrifice. This is not an action of true love, because love is selfless. There is no true love here for children, only love of self. I would never give my child willingly to such a person or place.
Insightful response to the plan with only one phrase that is questionable:
"PPS people feel they are doing something honorable, sacrificing their lives to change the world"
No, there is much to counter this statement when you observe their behaviors in real life. the inability to be direct and truthful is woefully lacking, and and you have to be very conscious of your own manipulation of the facts which is not "honorable." Also, there is little, if any, "sacrificing" in their lives, and certainly no evidence of changing lives, unless it is to put the majority of young lives in Pittsburgh on a downward spiral.
The key to true change starts at the top. And until we realize that Linda lane is not the answer we are dooming our students to a second class education. She is a nice lady but not a strong effective leader. How long in the interest of being nice are we going to allow our children to suffer. Get her out or get you kid out now while they still have a chance.
Until we get rid of all venture philanthropists involved in the school district nothing will change.
Until you get rid of Lisa Fischetti nothing will change. She runs Linda Lane and every body else and is the cause of most of your problems. And she is probably the monitor of this blog by now.
Ha ha, she has nothing to do with the blog, can't imagine that she would enjoy reading it.
Trust me, they don't care about this blog. They may read it on occassion, some may post spin, that is all. Public opinion means nothing to them.
Spend any time at all with Lippert, French, Otuwa, or Fischetti, and you realize that the ego is out of control. Here is a group of people that regard teachers as "the little people." Let them eat cake.
Let's not forget May-Stein in this equation.
"Honorable???"
Surely, you jest.
The conduct of this group of individuals would likely have them called on the carpet in any district where the idea of honor was important (and they are not alone in this regard, of course. Being an administrator of any stripe in this district seems to carry the tacit note that one can act as he or she feels, at any time, and in a cavalier manner.)
I almost choked when I read the word "honor" being used in this conversation.
Post a Comment