By Antonio D. French
Filed Monday, August 28, 2006 at 5:13 PM
Slightly above 7 out of 10 St. Louis City kids attended the first day of school today. That's according to Interim Superintendent Diana Bourisaw, who told PUB DEF that while she considers the school district's Back-to-School campaign a success, she is not satisfied with more than a quarter of students missing the first day. Labels: Schools
"We're not satisfied until we have 10 out of 10 attending," said Bourisaw. She said that SLPS attendance has typically been around 80% by the end of the first week. "We are well on our way to exceeding that 80% number," she said.
Bourisaw also addressed a concern brought forward by some of our readers about confusion surrounding a later start date for some Early Childhood students. She said that historically those students have started a week after other students (Sept. 5 this year). "We need to change that," said Bourisaw. "They need to start from Day One like everyone else.
29 Comments:
In 2003, with Peter Downs and company actively trying to keep students away on the first day, attendance was 76.4%. In 2004 it increased to 79.5%. With Creg Williams at the helm in 2005 first week attendance was reported at nearly 91%.
The new board fires Williams and manages to get 72% to show up on the first day. That's less than in 2003 when some of the current board members were actively organizing a boycott.
Heckuva job there O'Brien.
8/28/2006 6:05 PM
This is shameful. What is the reason for keeping kids out of school?
8/28/2006 6:10 PM
Some parents posted on this blog that they would keep their kids out on purpose today. I guess they expected something that didn't turn out to be true and ended up using their children to make a statement that didn't even need to be made. Sometimes we need to sit back and look at situations based on facts rather than just assuming the worst. Don't forget what happens when you ASS-U-ME!
8/28/2006 6:14 PM
tim,
Those numbers for Williams first day were manufactured for the media as his "estimate" last year. It was actually closer to 80%.
8/28/2006 6:19 PM
What are you referring to when you say Downs and Co tried to keep kids away on the first day? I don't recall that.
8/28/2006 7:08 PM
Since when is it O'Brien's responsibility to get the children to school on the first day? I hold the parents personally responsible for the low attendance percentage rate and I don't care WHAT the reason. There's been enough hype and publicity about the district and the "wait and see attitude" from the press that I find it hard to believe people didn't know today was the first day of school. Until ALL parents realize education is the true equalizer in our society and stop letting others affect their and their children's future with regard to education, then this district will never see the likes of over 90%.
8/28/2006 7:21 PM
There was a concerted boycott effort in 2003 organized by some people who were upset over the school closings and outsourcing that the previous board had approved. I believe Downs promoted the boycott through his St. Louis Schools Watch.
It is not O'Brien's personal responsibility to get kids to schol on the first day. But it is the school board's responsibility to have an administration in place that helps get kids to school on the first day.
This board fired Creg Williams, who had managed the best first-week attendance figures in about a decade in SPLS. One of the results of their action is the lowest first-day attendance the district has seen since 2002.
Our community needs to hold this board accountable when their actions have a negative impact on educational outcomes, including attendance.
8/28/2006 7:39 PM
Hey, Mr. Tim, it's against the law to keep your kids out of school. It's called truancy. When the 2003 parent boycott occurred, it was Al Sharpton out there marching with a child in a coffin, not Peter Downs. If there was something convincing parents not to send their children this year, it was not coming from 801, it was coming from city hall. And you are misrepresenting Williams when you paint him as a hero. Had he remained, there would have been another mess like the classrooms of his summer school program. It was a complete disaster for weeks. I worked for the man, Tim. He was great at sound bites, but had no clue how to get his grand ideas implemented. Many of us believe he was actually trying to screw up on purpose to facilitate a State takeover for Slay.
8/28/2006 8:22 PM
Tim, why do you refuse to acknowledge that Williams resigned abruptly after an audit of how expenses were being handled? He was not fired. Regardless of how often people say he was fired, the truth is he wasn't fired but resigned of his own free will. And, Tim, did you approve of his using a St. Louis Public Schools armed guard to drive him to and from a gambling casino to dine and gamble(Seen by many witnesses)?
Just because Peter Downs reported what was going on in the school district in his newsletter (including boycotting by some parents) does not lend itself to your accusation. Tim, I have to say, some of your accusations are awfully spurious for a blog where many know what transpired and what is transpiring today. You're almost as bad as the Post in twisting the facts.
For your information, the board members (at least four who are parents) and the administration have done everything in their power to ensure kids get to school on the first day of school.
From what you say in your postings, it almost sounds like you are behind students not showing up for school. Look what the mayor did last year and how he does nothing this year to help students attend school.
Unfounded criticisms and mean-spirited accusations always lead readers to question the motives of the writer.
Fortunately, Veronica O'Brien has more integrity than the most spurious communicator has venom. Hopefully, most will begin to recgnize the politics and vindictiveness behind such vicious attacks.
8/28/2006 8:33 PM
From my vantage point, this is the first honest accounting of the attendance in years. Not since Dr. Hammonds has there been this level of integrity in the top job of the district. Now honesty may not look as good as fudging the numbers or offering "guesstimates" to reporters, but it shows that honesty is more important to the new Superintendent than looking good in the news.
8/28/2006 9:22 PM
Tim, I think several bloggers on this blog would like to hear from you after some rebuttals to your spurious accusations.
Tim, please respond.
8/28/2006 9:45 PM
According to Tony Sanders, a SLPS spokesman (a position he also held in Dr. Williams' administration), the district has not released First Day numbers in many years. Only First Week numbers.
8/28/2006 9:48 PM
As to the source of my numbers, the Commonspace reported what appear to be "first day" numbers for 2003 and 2004 here:
http://blog.thecommonspace.org/archives/000138.php
In 2005 only "first week" numbers seem to have been released:
http://www.slps.org/spotlightnews/index_083005.htm
I don't see any reason why this year's numbers are any more or less credible than past years.
Based on the avaiable data, I was simply pointing out that first day attendance seems to be lower this year than it was any of the previous three years under the old board majority. It is even lower than 2003 when there was an active boycott effort underway.
I think we as a community should hold our school board accountable when objective measures of the district's performance (including attendance figures, test scores etc.) are declining rather than improving.
For pointing out this decline and calling for accountability I have been accused of "twisting facts" "vicious attacks" and being "behind students not showing up for school."
I would hope that everyone in our community would continue to monintor the performance of our schools and demand improvement in all measureable areas, including attendance.
8/28/2006 11:38 PM
Helen,
On Jaco show on Saturday, Downs did not dispute Jaco's assertion that Williams jumped when board pushed him. No sane person thinks that Williams suddenly decided to leave and that the board majority didn't push Williams very hard to resign. Did Downs violate the legal agreement with his statements on Saturday? Downs campaigned on platform of working with Williams. It's sad that he wasn't honest beforehand about his plan to force him out. I voted for Downs, unfortunately.
Unfortunately, board majority members do seem to feel that Williams was intentionally trying to dismantle public education. Downs and Archibald interviews on Jaco show was very intereting.
8/29/2006 8:20 AM
Why are so many of the reform voices people with no kids in the city public schools?
Let's hear more people with kids in the schools get air time.
And let's hear from them why more than 20% of their kids miss the first day of school
8/29/2006 8:35 AM
tim, I believe in accountability--but again, I think we're afraid to hold the PARENT accountable. Why did 30% of the PARENTS choose not to send or make sure their children in school? If you want responsibility, then I still believe the voice the parents listen to the MOST is their parents, not O'Brien or Slay or anyone else. Sure this voices shoulder a responsibility, but the parents should shoulder the MAJORITY of the responsiblity.
8/29/2006 10:13 AM
Just in case most of you thought it was me... here are my .02 I think that it should be the job of the BOE to find out why 30% of the parents are holding back their kids from the first day of school and then format a plan to combat this next year. If this means calling all of the parents, then so be it. This is the kind of forward thinking that we should expect, not just reactionary finger pointing.
I also think that it is disgusting that anyone would withhold schooling a child to prove any point. Be it Sharpton, Downs or average Joe Parent.
TimR
8/29/2006 12:00 PM
tim r. while I agree with the principle behind your statement of having the BOE call those 30%, I still believe calling all those parents to be unrealistic in terms of manpower and responsibility. If we assume these are adults who know when school starts, then isn't the parents' responsibility to get their children to school, otherwise, why have a law against truancy?
Our students receive a letter about 2 weeks prior to school for MANDATORY registration, where they receive their schedules, id's and books. This registration was held the week of the 21st. Less than 60% of the incoming freshmen attended. I think this laissez-faire attitude filters down from parents to their children.
I polled several of my freshmen today as to why they didn't attend yesterday on the first day. I got the usual responses: I overslept, I missed the bus, I didn't feel like coming. WHERE are the parents? Who should be responsible? Should the BOE or me, as an agent of the district, really have to call on the 1st day before school starts to remind parents to send their children?
Again, I ask: when will we start expecting PARENTS to be responsible for their actions and their children?
8/29/2006 2:52 PM
I just asked my daughter if other kids who did not show yesterday say why they didn't come. She said they said that they didn't think anything "important" was going to happen. Teachers never give homework on the first day. The school did not have their schedules ( bus or class) and were unprepared themselves. There is always chaos the first day and no one ever knows what is going on.
I have 3 who went on the 1st day but I have to say that although the 1st day IS important, my children did NOT have any homework. They did NOT have their schedules until they got there. The teachers did NOT send home any syllabi for their class. Many teachers did not have classroom assignments so they didn't even know where there classes were. They still do NOT have all of their textbooks. My daughter at Career Academy has all of hers, while my son who is at Soldan has none. It is day 2 and still no homework or and very few syllabi. And you wonder why the kids don't take it seriously...they get it from the adults.
Adults can speculate all they want to but kids see through a lot of the crap that we try to justify. I went to orientation and an ice cream social both of which were supposed to give out a schedule, id's and such. Neither were ready on either day. They asked for parents to be involved and to come to these things, and they weren't even prepared. Kids see through that and they know Sillygirl...tricks are for kids. ( Sorry, I couldn't resist)
Further, and this is the last thing, apparently the uniforms that were only supposed to be $10 are now $25 thanks to a newly revised recent budget change after Creg Williams left. My daughter and her classmates wanted to know if the $20,000 that was going to Obrien's security can be redirected to cover the original cost of the uniforms they now have to pay more for.
8/29/2006 5:35 PM
I wanted to clarify a point. The number of students that did not attend the first day of school may not be as high as it seems. The numbers are based on projected enrollment. The district has no way of knowing how many students moved to the county or went private or charter. The accurate number will be in a few weeks when the district can tell the true number of children attending. Many students do miss the first day of school but not as many as one thinks. Remember the enrollment in the city has been declining and the district cannot tell the effects of this for a few weeks.
8/29/2006 6:39 PM
Anonymous, what you communicated is apples and oranges, i.e., cost of uniforms and the protection for the school board president who has been harassed and threatened. One has nothing to do with the other. Creg Williams cost the district big time for a school district armed guard even for his personal life and personal entertainment.
The police provided Darnetta Clinkscale 24-hr. protection.
Board funds are separate from District general funds. Ask the principal what happened. Everything is going up these days.
What you say your daughter asked sounds more like you, as you stated on the St. Louis Schools Watch blog.
8/29/2006 7:21 PM
Those of you who make an issue out of attendance on the first day of school ignore the dynamics of the population the St. Louis Public Schools serve.
Poverty, homelessness, lack of telephone service, multiple changes in residences, crime, etc. contribute to problems and issues not faced by private, parochial or most suburban schools. Day-to-day existence is something most of us on this blog cannot even begin to understand or identify with. Many students come from single-parent homes, many from homes other than that of a parent, from negligent, boozed up or doped up or down parents--basically homes that are not in touch with everyday realities such as feeding, dressing, cleaning, ensuring proper rest of children, and getting children to school. If telephone numbers are given, they no longer apply.
I've worked in schools where these problems are faced. It is always easier to criticize than to attempt to understand the enormity of the challenges facing the urban school district trying to educate students from such backgrounds. Families and children in some of the most primitive conditions in various countries in Africa and Asia expend more energy and are more driven to get an education than many of those in our own city. When you see poor students throwing books out the windows of a school, while students in such primitive conditions do all they can to get a book, you can only shake your head.
Until you are willing to spend whole weeks to a month in one of these schools, be very slow to criticize those who willing attempt to do what they can under the most stressful of conditions. Both African American and Caucasian teachers will tell you it is no picnic; and the burnout rate is great.
8/29/2006 7:33 PM
Your postings were called to my attention. The district has not given actual first day attendance in years. Creg did not give them. This is the first time this has happened in years. Have fun expressing your hate!
8/29/2006 10:57 PM
Helen you used to blame the old board for failures in the district, now you blame parents. Why didn't you hold parents accountable before your board got in? Your posts have taken a turn. Are you feeling OK. Isn't this attendance figure some how the old board's fault?
8/30/2006 9:43 AM
Worried citizen, I'm as consistent as you are in your support of what took place by the previous board.
You will never find in anything I wrote blame to the previous board for students not attending school on the first day or any day after. And I have always written about parent's ultimate responsibility for their children's education and success in life. In fact, the Archdioscean's newspaper published one of my article relating to parent's responsibilities. There is no change in my stance here. I have never wavered or blamed scapegoats in this regard.
Please try to be rational and truthful.
8/30/2006 10:01 AM
Wouldn't it be a giant step towards holding the parents accountable to call each and every one of those who held their kids out of the first day and find out why? I can imagine the 'oh my gosh' feeling of a parent getting that phone call. It would make the parent accountable and any information gained would be valuable for next years start of school. The cost? Well, money always becomes available for the important things. The benefits? Well, when you say its "for the kids" it would really be... for the kids.
TimR
8/30/2006 12:15 PM
TimR, good suggestion if feasible. Many of these families either have no telephone or the numbers on record at the schools are no longer in service. Having worked in a school, I can't begin to tell you how difficult it is to get in touch with a responsible party for many of these kids.
That's why only those who spend several weeks to a month in a school every day and all day can begin to comprehend the challenges facing urban public schools.
8/30/2006 12:52 PM
Then, I guess that the first problem that needs to be addressed is to get good contact information. (One idea would be to ask the kids for their phone number on the second or third day, when they do show up.)Sometimes, outside information can help you take the blinders off. But that is only if you are not arrogant and do listen to the input of others. That is the reason that seems to be why everyone gets replaced.
Don't you think that this information would help to direct a, perhaps, misdirected effort or even to strenghten a well directed effort? Without good information, all of the best intentions in the world could just be groping in the dark.
TimR
8/30/2006 1:09 PM
TimR, it's even difficult to get good contact information if they either don't wan't to give it or can't.
You still can't contact the parents of the kids who haven't shown up if you don't have good numbers. Then there is the problem of no one at home or an unwillingness to answer the phone.
The mobility rate is so high. Some of these kids move and transfer to three or four schools in one school year.
Don't take my word for it (and I have no reason to make up any story, as I was probably more shocked than anyone when put in such a position), but ask other school staff.
Seeing is believing. Anyone with doubts, come work or volunteer in a school to see for yourself. Welcome to today's urban education!
Please, if there are any teachers, principals, or other school staff out there, add your comments to this unique dilemma and challenge to let citizens like TimR and others who want to understand comprehend the challenges and issues you face.
8/30/2006 2:07 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home