By Antonio D. French
Filed Saturday, April 14, 2007 at 9:01 AM
Is a system of independent charter public schools the future of urban education? With a waiting list of 10,000 students, the answer appears to be "yes" in Chicago. But what about here in St. Louis? Labels: Schools
Recent moves by the Mayor, the Governor, and several legislators suggest that small, independent charters are becoming the chosen alternative (at least for elected officials) to large urban districts that have for decades underperformed.
But what about the performance of charter schools? So far, state testing shows charter students doing no better — and in some cases, considerably worse — than their district counterparts.
However, parents of charter students often point to non-academic factors as reasons they choose charters — safety, discipline, physical condition of the buildings, more professional and assessible facilty, to name a few.
This video, produced by the Illinois Network of Charter Schools, highlights some of the successes of our neighbor to the east.
According to data from the INCS, there are about 17,000 pupils enrolled in the 34 public charter schools across Illinois, mostly in Chicago. More than 10,000 students are waiting to get into an Illinois charter public school.
According to a published report, in 2004, 100 percent of Illinois charter schools earned average Illinois Standards Achievement Test and Prairie State Achievement Examination scores higher than those district schools the students otherwise would have attended. Eighty-three percent of charter high school graduates enrolled in post-secondary education.
Data like this, it would appear, is why Mayor Francis Slay and others have pinned their hopes for public education in St. Louis on charter schools.
36 Comments:
I've heard mostly negative things about Confluence Academy and Ethel Lyle-Hedgeman Academy.
The drawbacks haven't been addressed:
1. If parents have complaints they may not get a response because accountability stops at the private, unelected Board. That's why we hear nothing publicly about these schools.
2. If a child is unwanted by the school for what ever reason, they can carry out a policy similar to private schools and expell them. As with ANY school, public or private, if you eliminate disruptive, special needs students the quality of education will improve overall. It makes me question the wisdom of the Roberti decision to close schools devoted to special needs students thereby forcing them into regular classrooms.
If Slay gets his way and ALL schools in the City of St. Louis are Charter Schools, there will NO accountability. Who will monitor these schools?
4/14/2007 10:00 AM
Q. Who will monitor these schools?
A. A three-person board appointed by the Governor, the Mayor, and the President of the Board of Aldermen.
4/14/2007 10:15 AM
I don't know if charter schools are the future, but I do believe the 20th century version of public education is due for some upgrading. One size fits all education just doesn't work anymore no matter how passionately you are attached to the idea. This is not just a St. Louis thing. It is a national thing.
Public schools were originally created to educate the blue collar class for the "new technology" that was emerging at the turn of the 20th Century. The 21st century is calling for more advanced training.
Our children must be able to compete on a global scale, not just a St. Louis scale. Kids worldwide achieve much higher in every subject than kids in the US. St. Louis is even lower than the national scale so what future does that leave our children with? The crumbs at the bottom of the food chain.
It would be nice to have a school for all boys and all girls. It would also be nice to have a Medical Insititute High School for students who want to enter the medical field. They could partner with Washington U. St. Louis U, and Barnes Jewish. They could prepare students for biotech, nursing, premed. and allied health feilds.
A Business Academy focusing on Business and commerce local through international would be great. A Rites of Passage Middle School could be helpful.
How about a Technology and Engineering School.
I am speaking of a customized education that is approriate for where ever that child is and where their parents want them to be.
Let's stop holding so tightly to the past and be progressive for a change. The problem with St. Louis is that the people are so closed and ultra conservative it causes us to lag painfully behind other cities our same size. It is time to expand our vision.
4/14/2007 10:15 AM
Academic Effectiveness of Charter Schools
Because charter schools vary as widely as traditional public schools, their academic achievement also varies widely. It is difficult -- not to mention scientifically invalid -- to make blanket comparisons of charter schools to traditional public schools. However, because charter schools promise to improve student achievement as a condition of relief from some of the rules and regulations that apply to traditional public schools, it is appropriate to evaluate their effectiveness.
In 2004, the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) released an analysis of charter school performance on the 2003 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), also known as "The Nation's Report Card." The report found that charter school students, on average, score lower than students in traditional public schools. While there was no measurable difference between charter school students and students in traditional public schools in the same racial/ethnic subgroup, charter school students who were eligible for free or reduced-price lunch scored lower than their peers in traditional public schools, and charter school students in central cities scored lower than their peers in math in 4th grade.
NAGB looked at the impact of school characteristics and found that:
Charter schools that were part of the local school district had significantly higher scores than charter schools that served as their own district.
Students taught by certified teachers had roughly comparable scores whether they attended charter schools or traditional public schools, but the scores of students taught by uncertified teachers in charter schools were significantly lower than those of charter school students with certified teachers.
Students taught by teachers with at least five years' experience outperformed students with less experienced teachers, regardless of the type of school attended, but charter school students with inexperienced teachers did significantly worse than students in traditional public schools with less experienced teachers. (The impact of this finding is compounded by the fact that charter schools are twice as likely as traditional public schools to employ inexperienced teachers.)
In a study that followed North Carolina students for several years, professors Robert Bifulco and Helen Ladd found that students in charter schools actually made considerably smaller achievement gains in charter schools than they would have in traditional public schools.
Accountability Proves To Be Elusive
In its official evaluation of the federally funded Public Charter School Program, the U.S. Department of Education found that many charter school authorizers lack the capacity to adequately oversee charter school operations, often lack authority to implement formal sanctions, and rarely invoke the authority they do have to revoke or not renew a charter. Where charters have been revoked or not renewed, the decision has been linked more to noncompliance with state and federal regulations and financial problems than with academic performance.
Accountability is also lacking in oversight for federal charter school programs. According to a report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released in January 2005, the U.S. Department of Education has little data to ensure that charter schools receive the federal funds that have been allocated to them in a timely manner, or to evaluate the performance of those schools. GAO recommended that the U.S. Department of Education collect basic data from recipients of federal charter school funds, such as the number of charter schools actually opened with program funds. GAO also advised that the Department include a look at the effect of states' oversight approaches in its evaluation of charter schools.
4/14/2007 10:23 AM
If parents have complaints in SLPS right now what do they get. Nothing.
My daughter was not doing well in math at Career Academy. I had to write letters to the principal and teacher 3 times before I got a response. They said that a teacher would stay after school on Wednesdays for 20 minutes. Even with that her grades improved slightly. However that only lasted for 6 weeks then strangly ended. When I next heard from them again, they said they thought she might need to be placed in special education because she needs more attention than she can get in her class of 30 students. What kind of Crap is that? Interestingly, they never mentioned the $2000 per child for supplementary services like tutoring she was supposed to be able to have.
Don't believe the hype. There is no real accountablity already. Everyone passes the buck.
4/14/2007 10:29 AM
AfricasDaughter said...4/14/2007 10:15 AM
"I don't know if charter schools are the future, but I do believe the 20th century version of public education is due for some upgrading. This is not just a St. Louis thing. It is a national thing.
Let's stop holding so tightly to the past and be progressive for a change. The problem with St. Louis is that the people are so closed and ultra conservative it causes us to lag painfully behind other cities our same size. It is time to expand our vision."
If you dig a little more deeply into this I think some of your ideas will be confirmed. This is a national issue. What might surprise you (and I can't believe you don't consider Blunt and Slay conservative) is that it is part of a CONSERVATIVE movement.
A couple of weeks ago I saw the end of a segment on C-Span that showed a panel discussion of powerful conservative figures in our country who spoke about overhauling public education because our work force is not as well educated as that of the EU.
In my mind it becomes a social justice issue when the government decides that some children need to be educated for a vocation and not to be able to think for themselves and create their own destiny.
How was it decided that SLPS should be overhauled and transformed into voc. tech.? Why not transform ALL schools across the region to include some voc. tech. in with their regular curricula?
If you examine the politcal bias of the MO State BoE you'll find a long list of neocons who want to carry this out.
If we make these sweeping changes and it fails or doesn't improve things, what then?
4/14/2007 10:36 AM
AfricasDaughter said...4/14/2007 10:29 AM
If parents have complaints in SLPS right now what do they get. Nothing.
Don't believe the hype. There is no real accountablity already. Everyone passes the buck.
I spent 13 years involved with SLPS as a parent. I have heard similar complaints. And for every complaint, I've heard compliments.
It's a few years in the making, but right now we are in process of making changes at the level of the BoE. I voted for parents. At least we can do that.
If your daughter goes to a Charter School and your complaints aren't heard, you're stuck because the BoE is unelected. You won't have a vote or a voice.
According ot Antonio, a rich white Republican businessman from Frontenac, the Mayor's appointee and the appointee of the Pres. of the Board of Aldermen will oversee the Charter schools. I'll put my efforts into transforming traditional public education and take my chances with that.
4/14/2007 10:52 AM
IMO, the only oversight any school needs it the parents of the school's students. I have never understood why otherwise intelligent, independent, people such as the posters here would turn over their most prized thing in their lives to the government. My children's parents are responsible for their education, not the Aldermen, Mayor, Governor, or the President.
Thank you for bringing up VoTech. The simple-minded thought that all children should go to college is counter-productive. I assume my children will attend college as I did. However, I would be just as happy if the learned a trade they loved.
4/14/2007 11:15 AM
CWEGuy said...4/14/2007 11:15 AM
" I have never understood why otherwise intelligent, independent, people such as the posters here would turn over their most prized thing in their lives to the government. My children's parents are responsible for their education, not the Aldermen, Mayor, Governor, or the President.
Thank you for bringing up VoTech. The simple-minded thought that all children should go to college is counter-productive. I assume my children will attend college as I did. However, I would be just as happy if the learned a trade they loved."
I too oppose a State takeover of SLPS. And, since you responded, Voc Tech has been a choice in SLPS for at least a decade. It would appear that Slay and his G-minions would transform the SLPS entirely into Voc. Tech. or something close to it.
4/14/2007 11:49 AM
Another excellent example about how academically clueless conservatives waste money on education.
US sex-abstinence classes queried
By Vanessa Heaney
BBC News, Washington
US students attending sexual abstinence classes are no more likely to abstain from sex than those who do not, according to a new study.
Participants in special programmes were just as likely to have sex a few years later as those who did not attend.
In the past few years of Republican Party control of Congress, the spending on no-sex-before-marriage education has risen from $10m to $176m a year.
Critics have repeatedly said the programmes are not working.
They say the money would be better off spent on a comprehensive sex education that would include abstinence.
Conclusions
Social conservatives have long believed that teaching adolescents about sexuality and contraception could encourage them to have sex.
They would rather promote abstinence until marriage.
The students in this study, which was ordered by Congress, came from a range of big cities across the United States, such as Milwaukee and Miami and from rural communities in Virginia and Mississippi.
They were 11 and 12 years old when they entered the abstinence programmes, which lasted one to two years.
The researchers also looked at the behaviour of their peers from the same communities who did not attend the classes.
The findings show that those who attended first had sex at about the same age as their peers - at 14 years and nine months.
The Bush administration has warned against drawing sweeping conclusions from the study.
4/14/2007 12:00 PM
If your daughter goes to a Charter School and your complaints aren't heard, you're stuck because the BoE is unelected. You won't have a vote or a voice.
You do have a vote in a charter school. It's called leaving the school and enrolling in SLPS in general or another charter school. You vote with your feet. People have been voting that way on the performance of St. Louis City for years.
4/14/2007 12:18 PM
Papillon said...4/14/2007 12:18 PM
You do have a vote in a charter school. It's called leaving the school and enrolling in SLPS in general or another charter school. You vote with your feet. People have been voting that way on the performance of St. Louis City for years.
When you've hit every Charter School and it comes down to SLPS you vote.
But, if we agree that ALL children should have a quality education, why would we have to shop around. Maybe if a child has a penchant for a trade or a particular vocation you would shop. Even then, why can't we expect that those schools would be held accountable for quality.
Choice should be a moot point as it is in Iowa. Take a look at their numbers sometime. That State's public education is perhaps the best in the country. Why would Missouri/St. Louis deny our children what they have in Iowa?
4/14/2007 12:28 PM
There are some very good thoughts, concepts, and principles in these posts.
What can I add? Just recently a charter school dumped all its underperforming and behavioral-challenged students on the Saint Louis Public Schools. Is this fair? The charter school also told the parent(s) of the students their child could never return nor attend a sister charter school. Ergo, the playing field is not level when it comes to charter (for-profit) schools and traditional public schools.
I urge everyone on this post to get a copy of a most important and enlightening book, The Corporation: The Pathological Pursuit for Profit and Power and read the chapter on the corporate invasion in the public sphere, e.g., health care, medicare, public education, prisons, etc.
Next, we all need to get a copy of Dr. Gerald W. Bracey's books, The War Against America's Public Schools (Allyn & Bacon, 2002), What You Should Know About the War Against America's Public Schools (Allyn & Bacon, 2003), and Setting the Record Straight: Responses to Misconceptions About American Public Education , to be published late in 2003 or early 2004 (Heinemann). He holds part-time positions with George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia and the High/Scope Educational Research Foundation in Ypsilanti, Michigan.
Too many of us are operating and perceiving from a vacuum created by the powers that be (political and corporate) and the media.
4/14/2007 1:49 PM
Well said Helen Louise!
All but the corporations are short sighted in this country. No one will even attempt a contingency plan for public education if companies like Imagine Schools and Edison Schools decide that there isn't enough money to be made in the St. Louis area. Who will hear the parents' protests if they suddenly pull up stakes?
I'm reminded of the "long term commitment" made by American Airlines to St. Louis. They told us that we'd be one of their hubs. Our side of the bargain was to build another runway despite the protests of the people of Bridgeton. American Airlines is just another carrier at Lambert and the new runway doesn't get any more use than the others.
We can't go back now and dig up the new runway and rebuild peoples' homes without incurring additional expense.
Trusting American businesses like American Airlines and AmerenUE seems like folly to me. I haen't seen any reason to trust private education companies any differently.
4/14/2007 2:45 PM
Helen Louise,
Let me add this excerpt from an interview with J.Kozol which discusses his excellent book, Shame of A Nation:
"In some of your earlier books you raised fears that the aims of Brown v. Board of Education were quietly being undermined. But "Shame of the Nation" goes so far as to call the contemporary American educational system an apartheid regime.
In earlier books, like "Amazing Grace," I certainly made it evident that the schools of the South Bronx were stunningly segregated. But it wasn't until the last five years that I realized how sweeping this change has been throughout the nation, and how reluctant the media is to speak of it. Newspapers in general, including those that are seen as vaguely liberal, by a convenient defect of vision refuse to see what is in their own front yard -- or if they do see it, they refuse to state it. So, in a description of a 98 percent black and Latino school, the newspaper won't say what would seem to be the most obvious starting point: This is a deeply segregated school. They won't use the word "segregated." They do the most amazing semantic somersaults to avoid calling reality by its real name. "Gritty" is the New York Times' euphemism for segregated; "serving a diverse population with many minorities" -- as though they might be Albanians! Then I go to this "diverse" school and there are 1,000 black and Latino kids, 10 whites and 12 Asians. So "diverse" has actually come to be a synonym for "not diverse."
Do you think the media is afraid of race?
Most newspapers, with a few notable exceptions, have a far greater interest in defending civic image and civic stability than in removing the cancer of segregation from the body of American democracy. It would cause them a lot of problems if they attacked school segregation in their own communities head-on, because then they'd also have to attack residential segregation. That would mean shining the spotlight directly at the prime architects of residential apartheid -- major banks, lending institutions and realty firms. A large amount of the advertising revenues for newspapers comes from real estate.
Newspapers tend to boost almost any educational policy that seems to offer redemption, so every few years there's a new one, and basically every expert has a seven-point plan to prove that segregated schools can be successful. I call it the myth of perfectible apartheid. Most of these plans are organized bamboozlements, full of unassailable banalities. For example, No. 1: "Principal should have clear goals," as though most American principals have a secret predilection for obscurity. Or, No. 2: "Teachers should strive for excellence," as though most teachers had a genetic attraction to mediocrity. I've seen dozens of these plans come and go; they're boosted, schools claim immediate success and scores go up 3 percentage points -- and five years later it's declared a failure and abandoned. I refuse to play this game.
Clearly, you're angry.
"Shame of the Nation" is a dead serious book, the angriest book I've written in my life. It is not a recipe book for polishing the apple of apartheid. It's a call for an all-out struggle for decent citizens to wage an onslaught on apartheid schooling itself. The percentage of black children who now go to integrated public schools is at its lowest level since 1968. If you took a photograph of the classes I visit in New York, Chicago or St. Louis, it would look exactly like a class from Alabama in the 1940s.
Your view of the government and prevailing American culture is quite scathing. But do you really think policymakers and suburban families are actively racist? Or is this simply a case of cruel indifference?
Look, whether it's cruel indifference or the natural predilection of a parent to do the best she can for her own child, or originates in some very profound racist suppositions about minority children -- it doesn't make a damn bit of difference to the kids that I write about. There are unquestionably overtly racist white folks in the country, but I don't think that is an accurate portrayal of most white people in America. I think there is something peculiar about the culture wars that thrive in New York City; there's a venomous atmosphere around racial issues here that I don't find in most of the United States. Most white Americans with whom I talk -- and I don't mean people who read the Nation and the New York Times, just regular Americans -- are fair-minded and generous.
For instance, some of the children I write about endear themselves to readers. One little girl in the Bronx named Pineapple, whom I first met in kindergarten, and still remain close friends with, was just an irresistibly charming little kid; she used to boss me around, like a pint-sized Oprah Winfrey. And people read about her in Ohio or wherever, and they fall in love with her. And if they met her, they would do anything they could to give her the same opportunities they gave their own children. The genius of segregation in America is that it never gives most decent white Americans the opportunity to meet a child like Pineapple. And because they don't know these children in their years of innocence, they are protected from their own best instincts. If they knew them, most good people in this country could not tolerate the destruction of these children's destinies. People are more decent than the politicians they elect. At the highest levels of government -- and especially George W. Bush -- our politicians appeal to the worst instincts of Americans rather than their most generous.
I couldn't help thinking as I was reading your book that one unexpected outcome of Hurricane Katrina has been that it has revealed to Americans the state of poverty and segregation in their country, and given a pretty clear picture of what happens when the privileged desert the powerless.
Yes, it's a lot easier for white folks of good conscience to acquiesce in the immiseration of thousands of black and Latino children if we keep them at a distance. To me, segregation is not simply a demographic dilemma or some kind of a bureaucratic mistake -- it is a conscious, deliberate and morally intolerable form of social policy. It doesn't happen by accident, it's not like a weather pattern. American segregation has been created by men and will only be undone by the acts of men and women. And that's why this book calls for another passionate political upheaval in this country. I hope I live to see it. I think there is a huge, untapped political restlessness in young people today, especially young teachers. And the teachers are the best witnesses to this crime because they see it in front of their eyes every day. You can't tell them that apartheid is a vestige of the past; you can't buy them off with sentimental stories of black kids crossing the color line 40 years ago.
Segregation is the oldest failed experiment in U.S. social history. We all know it didn't work in the century just past, and it's not going to work in the century ahead. And those that tell us otherwise are guilty of absolute deception. And if you read the newspapers, you know how it works -- every year there is a new plan. This year it's small segregated and unequal schools, last year it was segregated and unequal schools with scripted phonics texts and kids in uniforms, and another year it was segregated and unequal schools with self-help incantations plastered on the walls. There is a kind of evasive game being played by many liberals, which is basically, "Let's try another cute and poignant way to make these schools more 'innovative'" -- and the press loves this because it gives them something entirely unthreatening to promote. But if interesting and even benevolent innovations on the part of school reformers were able to create successful segregated schools, we would have learned it in the past 100 years.
Is segregation simply inherently incompatible with effective education?
Yes, I don't believe that segregated schools, with the exception of a very few boutique examples, will ever be equal to the schools that serve the mainstream of society.
And that is because there are more than academic issues at stake when you talk about school segregation?
Yes, it goes far beyond the question of academic concerns -- it goes to the question of whether we are going to be one society or two, whether our children will grow up to know one another as friends or view each other eternally as strangers, and especially as fearful strangers. But it also speaks directly to academic issues, because overwhelmingly segregated schools in the United States are the schools that have the lowest scores, the highest class sizes, the least experienced teachers, and the most devastating dropout rates. And of course these are the schools that always receive the least amount of money. Segregated schools, despite occasional exceptions, are almost always funded at far lower levels than the schools that serve white and middle-class children. Nationally, on average, a school serving primarily black and Latino students gets $1,000 less per pupil than an overwhelmingly white school. That's a lot of money when you realize that kids aren't educated individually but in a class of 25-30 kids -- that's a difference of $25,000-$30,000 every year for every class. So when the neocons ask in their perennially idiotic way, "Can you really buy your way to better education?" I want to tell them to ask any principal anywhere in America what she could do with an extra $25,000 per class. In New York, the difference is twice that high. The kids up in the Bronx that I write about get a little over $11,000 per pupil, per year. But lift up one of them in your grown-up arms and plunk her down 10 miles away in the Westchester suburb of Bronxville, and she'd be getting $19,000 every single year.
So it is basically a capitalist system where kids are seen as investments -- and it comes down to who is worth the money and who isn't?
Exactly. What's happened in many of these inner-city schools is that kids are no longer perceived as children but rather as economic units -- like pint-size deficits or assets for the American economy. No one asks whether they are good or they are happy. The only question is will they be useful to our corporations in a global marketplace. It is not like this in the suburbs. There, children are still valued because they are children and childhood is still regarded not merely as a prelude to utilitarian adulthood but as a perishable piece of life itself. In the inner-city schools, even though most of the teachers I know would like to do the same, there is tremendous pressure on the principals to view these children as products, with "value-added" skills that they pump into them. And if you view children as products, it makes sense to have a lot of product testing.
4/14/2007 3:01 PM
Snead,
How on earth can you express your skepticism for the Government on another comment list and still expect that same Government to educate your children?
The Government is not the answer to anyone's problems.
4/14/2007 6:05 PM
There was an article in Vanity fair in march about saic---a government contractor much bigger than Halliburton--I had never heard of SAIC. They sell 12 billion dollars worth of brain power to the government this year.
I thought this was a startling quote:
"It is a simple fact of life these days that, owing to a deliberate decision to downsize government, Washington can operate only by paying private companies to perform a wide range of functions. To get some idea of the scale: contractors absorb the taxes paid by everyone in America with incomes under $100,000. In other words, more than 90 percent of all taxpayers might as well remit everything they owe directly to SAIC or some other contractor rather than to the IRS."
The government is people. Contractors are people. A lot of government people become contractor people and vice versa.
The corporations should be more efficient than the government, because they have less accountability to deal with. The thing is, this lack of accountability often leads to the job not getting done.
There is a small example of that in the present board's desire to run its own janitorial and food stuff. The outside contractors can do it cheaper--that is why Roberti hired them. The rub is the definition of "do".
I am skeptical of the largely republican idea that the government should be a check cashing service for private enterprise.
4/14/2007 6:49 PM
CWEGuy said...
"Snead,
How on earth can you express your skepticism for the Government on another comment list and still expect that same Government to educate your children?
The Government is not the answer to anyone's problems."
I've never posted in favor of a State takeover. Maybe you equate public libraries with public schools, making public libraries actually "government" libraries.
Your views strike me as Libertarian. If so, maybe you could start a Libertarian thread. Or, maybe the Libertarians can pick a different battleground to win over more minds to your way of thinking. What about the public library? Why not advocate for shutting down all public libraries and replacing them with Barnes and Noble Libraries or Borders Libraries or something?
4/14/2007 7:10 PM
Yes, I tend to agree with the Libertarians... However, I don't see where Antonio made this a Democrat or Republican site.
I guess he could ban me if I don't toe a party line... ;-) I would guess that he'd hate to think that his site was used for distributing propaganda for some party's myrmidons.
Or, is your mind already given to one of the Party's way of thinking?
4/14/2007 7:32 PM
I already made a choice. I took my daughter out and changed schools. I don't have a couple of years to see if the "new" board gets it right. My daughter is a junior. Accountability starts with the parent. I am the board that will make a difference in her life. Waiting, wishing, and hoping for someone else to do it is disempowering and ludicrous.
I also never indicated that Blunt was not conservative. I am probably the most liberal persons you will ever know in terms of my beliefs. I find it interesting that traditional liberals are now against choices for the common people and in fact want to keep them locked into a system. When did liberals start believing in limiting opportunities when they have typically been just the opposite?
One size fits all doesn’t work for women’s dresses. Why do you believe it works for educating children? It only worked when the goals were to prepare one type of child to work in a specific type of job. Even as you mention children who do need more attention, wouldn’t it be better to have schools that were set up to address specifically their needs and IEP’s.
4/14/2007 9:27 PM
In all of these posts I have been reading I feel that we have gotten away from the real reason of education (public or private), which is preparing the next generation for life’s challenges. For all of you 40 somethings felt that you could or did enter the workforce with a skill you learned in high school. I know I did. My first job was an engineering draftsman (long before computer aided drafting design systems), which I learned at a public high school.
Fast forward to today. What are students really learning in high school – how to take the tests in preparation for MAP test. How many employers are looking for proficient test takers to produce a product? School Districts have become so worried about MAP scores that they lost sight of the fact that they need to teach a student a skill beside test taking. Districts like the SLPS have cut out family and consumer science classes, industrial arts (not technology), and many art classes. These are the classes where the student can see how the theory classes (now considered core classes) of math, science, communication arts, and history classes come together. I learned more about math in my drafting and woodworking classes than I did in math class. I got to see first hand how heat and/or pressure worked on the elements in ceramics. Also in the visual arts I got a visual image of life as it occurred in a particular time. I also was able to get some insight through art about the culture that was being discussed. I can go on but the fact of the matter is that students do learn what interests them. Just like us when we were in high school how many of you could memorize a song but couldn’t recite an assigned poem?
Then there is the whole social thing. Why is it we are willing to pay $150 to go to a concert, spend approximately $200 to take our family to see the Cardinals play, for that matter willingly accept athletes being paid millions of dollars to play playground games. These athletes claimed they had good teachers but I do not see many of them contributing a million of their millions to help pay for the education they received. Then we yell and scream when there is talk about raising personal property taxes to pay for public education? The problem of public education in America is lack of respect. We Americans want our children to be educated but we want someone else to pay for it. For example teachers in Japan get paid up to three times as much as their American counterparts. Germany is not that much different. But in these two countries the teachers are well respected by the parents and community. Plus the average education consultant spent only about ten years in the classroom. But districts are willing to spend thousands of dollars for a curriculum because it works in Philadelphia, Chicago, or New York City. Says a lot about those of us who stayed much longer. Further more have you ever noticed that what works in one part of the country doesn’t work as well in another part of the country. The same goes for the classroom where teachers have to modify lessons for special needs, race, sex, religious beliefs, and so on. Everyone learns how to learn differently.
4/15/2007 2:07 AM
I see a lot of posts about what whites or upper income people are doing to the SLPS. But please tell me what we as blacks have done to insure the education of our children and the success of SLPS. And are we holding the school boards that we elect accountable for that education. The simple answer is NO! As the public schools have become more and more black, the students and the teachers, we as a community have decided that education is not important. Look at the communication arts rates in Beaumont, Vashon, Soldan. That is not what whites are doing to us, that is we are not holding people accountable. The district is about 85% black, and has been moving in that direction for the past 20 years.
So please, anyone, tell me why we didn't as a community come together about the education of our kids and hold those in power, (Jerome Jones and Cleveland Hammonds) accountable for educating out kids.
4/15/2007 5:39 AM
cweguy,
I've said in other threads that the 2 major politcal parties aren't really very distinct. So, in this case, the problems with the SLPS are not necessarily attributed to the neglect or sabotage perpetrated by one party or the other.
There was a time when I thought that liberals (Dems) were less likely to be racist that conservatives (Reps).
I used to see this locally and nationally. Not so anymore.
It seems that money talks. IMO, the issue with SLPS is about social justice (as Helen Louise and others have pointed out.) race and class.
Government has failed us. Private, corporate institutional philosophy has failed us. Right now the schools are in the hands of the government and citizens the PEOPLE have chosen to do the job of removing politicians and their greed from the operation of the schools.
Charter schools will have their private boards stocked with people connected to politicians and businessmen. The cronyism was rampant when Slay's appointees were on the BoE of the SLPS. I think that will be the rule with Charter schools. I expect Charter schools to be run on a Drucker-like business model and be run as cheaply as possible with friends of Board members making out like bandits.
4/15/2007 8:13 AM
africasdaughter,
I disagree with your "one size fits all" analogy here. I am certain that it is not what I'm advocating for. In suggesting that we fund public education across the board the way we funded the Magnet schools I'm calling for different sizes of the same quality.
It was the Magnet schools that enabled different sizes. Metro and it's feeder schools were the purely academic schools. The we had Gateway Institute of Technology that taught things like medical sciences and aviation technology. Central became the Visual and Performing Arts Academy, etc.
Kids that had a clear talent or interest could hone that interest. I can assure you that these schools were not on the agenda of the Slay appointed BoE except to dismantle them.
In '04, I was personally told by a school administrator to stop saying that SLPS didn't have Magnet schools anymore. Even though the same administrator told me that he was mandated to admit an 18 year old to the 12th grade at a Magnet school even though he only had 3 credits toward graduation. THAT is one size fits all. THAT is what we'll get if the State takes over.
I hope your daughter doesn't get that. If she does, you'll have no other recourse but the SLPS.
4/15/2007 8:24 AM
Robert Barnes said...
"I see a lot of posts about what whites or upper income people are doing to the SLPS. But please tell me what we as blacks have done to insure the education of our children and the success of SLPS."
We can readily see what Veronica O'Brien has done, or not done. The same can be said about Ron Jackson. Mr. Suggs of the St. Louis American has also sold out African-Americans, IMO. Money talks.
I see Donna Jones and David Lee Jackson fighting hard for their kids and all SLPS students; students who are mostly African-American.
4/15/2007 8:29 AM
To snead hern: So you are saying that the schools were not going down hill for the past twenty years? Are you saying that they only got bad in the last four or five years. The SLPS reports into DESE and the fact that a huge majority of kids who have been in the district all their lives and are now in the high schools and can't read or do math certainly suggests otherwise.
And that is my point. We refuse the reality of what is in front of us. The problems with the district probably go back 20 or 30 years, through various mayors, various school boards and various board presidents. The only constant is that year after year no one took a look at what the district was (or was not) producing. Look at all the indicators over the pasat even 10 years and anyone that tries to have an open mind can see failure on a number of levels.
But when are we going to stop trying to blame people and MANDATE that our kids are educated and prepared for productive citizenship in this society- BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY.
4/15/2007 1:04 PM
Robert Barnes said...
But please tell me what we as blacks have done to insure the education of our children and the success of SLPS. And are we holding the school boards that we elect accountable for that education. The simple answer is NO!
The problems have taken a long time to get to the place in which they are now. It will take a long time to reverse them.
I would ask you to zoom in on what happenedbetween 2003-2007.
Slay's slate led to Roberti-which led to loss of accreditation points-which led to disappointment at a level high enough to cause the small percentage who care enough to vote to replace most of Slay's slate.
The recent election indicated that there was a direction the voters wanted to go--but it will not be allowed--the power will go to those most likely to be defeated in elections of st. louis voters.
Much that has happened since Williams left has been good---perhaps too good for the comfort of those with the agenda which has been discredited by the voters.
4/15/2007 1:59 PM
Antonio D. French said...
Q. Who will monitor these schools?
A. A three-person board appointed by the Governor, the Mayor, and the President of the Board of Aldermen.
4/14/2007 10:15 AM
Since the charter schools do not have to meet a lot of the accountability standards required of non-charter schools---how comfortable should we be accepting the reports from the 3-member board? How much honest accountability is likely to be demanded of them by the local media?
I have to admit---witnessing the incompetence of dese regarding how they handled the takeover issues---I really cannot trust them much,either. The best hope still lies with the partially disenfranchised voters. They will still be allowed to vote for who they want for president, governor, and mayor in 2008.
4/15/2007 2:08 PM
To snead hear:
My final comment for the moment on this subject; the district was only provisionally accredited before Slay, Roberti and everyone else came to the seen. In fact, did the district lose accreditation while Purdy was Board President and Hammonds was the Super?? If I remember, dropouts were high, poor school performace and kids weren't going on the 2 or 4 year institutions.
And weren't they responsible for the 90+ million dollar cash shortfall (verified by both the State Auditor now Senator and the state NAACP) the district found itself in. I certainly call that management, how about you!
By the way, speaking of management, when is the district going to annouce anything regarding summer school. While Bourisaw is out trying to rally kids to stop the takeover, perhaps she should be working on a summer school place. There are only 6 weeks left of school and teachers and parents, and certainly not the students, have heard anything.
Management at it's best!
4/15/2007 2:55 PM
"By the way, speaking of management, when is the district going to annouce anything regarding summer school"
March 28th
Accreditation F.A.Q.
By Antonio D. French
Will students and families be affected in other ways?
State law requires that students not performing at grade level must attend summer school (with the exception of special education students).
Students reading at grade level or above, or at one grade level below, may be promoted to the next grade. However, the law states that students not meeting this requirement must be retained. For example, an 8th grader who cannot read at the level of at least a 7th grader will not be able to move on to high school with his or her peers. Again, there is an exception for special education students.
or--from dese--
15. Will summer school be required for all under-performing students in the St. Louis Public Schools this year?
No.(read this carefully--they threw themselves a softball so they would not have to answer with precision)
16. Will the SLPS be required to retain students who are performing below grade level in their current grades for the upcoming school year?
No.
I find this confusing---but not necessarily contradictory. Antonio seems more precise---typically--the state's answers use vague terms like "under-performing", instead of 1 year below, etc.
You are criticizing management about summer school---it will be one thing if the takeover happens, which will trigger budgetary considerations like tuition for st. louis students to other districts, and it will mean a different plan for grade placement and summer school with the 7 member board and the 3 member board. 8 weeks to go---and you are criticizing Bourisaw or whoever for not having contingency plans for both boards.
The great god Creg Williams would not be irresponsible like this, would he? You need to write this criticism up for the pd---they welcome anything that trashes Bourisaw and the new board.
4/15/2007 3:50 PM
"By the way, speaking of management, when is the district going to annouce anything regarding summer school"
March 28th
Accreditation F.A.Q.
By Antonio D. French
Will students and families be affected in other ways?
State law requires that students not performing at grade level must attend summer school (with the exception of special education students).
Students reading at grade level or above, or at one grade level below, may be promoted to the next grade. However, the law states that students not meeting this requirement must be retained. For example, an 8th grader who cannot read at the level of at least a 7th grader will not be able to move on to high school with his or her peers. Again, there is an exception for special education students.
or--from dese--
15. Will summer school be required for all under-performing students in the St. Louis Public Schools this year?
No.(read this carefully--they threw themselves a softball so they would not have to answer with precision)
16. Will the SLPS be required to retain students who are performing below grade level in their current grades for the upcoming school year?
No.
I find this confusing---but not necessarily contradictory. Antonio seems more precise---typically--the state's answers use vague terms like "under-performing", instead of 1 year below, etc.
You are criticizing management about summer school---it will be one thing if the takeover happens, which will trigger budgetary considerations like tuition for st. louis students to other districts, and it will mean a different plan for grade placement and summer school with the 7 member board and the 3 member board. 8 weeks to go---and you are criticizing Bourisaw or whoever for not having contingency plans for both boards.
The great god Creg Williams would not be irresponsible like this, would he? You need to write this criticism up for the pd---they welcome anything that trashes Bourisaw and the new board.
4/15/2007 3:50 PM
pd---they welcome anything that trashes Bourisaw and the new board.
By new board--I meant the one with two new members which removed Veronica O'Brien as president---I guess that is actually the old board.
The takeover board, so far as i can tell---has a different set of requirements regarding retention and summer school----or-----maybe they don't. Their questions 15 and 16 do not make it clear what under-performing means. I guess special ed students are exempt under all scenarios. or not.
4/15/2007 6:13 PM
Robert Barnes,
I'm not saying that the SLPS doesn't need help. I'm a strong proponent of free public schools who have a Board of Education that includes parents and is not beholden to political interests.
Charter schools are unproven, with mixed reviews at best. And once you dismantle a publicly funded institution, restarting demands even more resources that could now be used to educate.
I'd like to see MO increase the amount of money allocated to all public schools instead of trying to figure out the msot cost effective way to do it.
Our children are our future.
When Hammonds retired, SLPS was provisionally accredited and 2 points from full accreditation. When Shoemehl, Clinkscale and Co. took over, the accreditation score dropped continuously until they were voted out.
The current Board of Ed. and superintendent know how to restore accreditation and should be allowed to do that.
4/15/2007 7:54 PM
This comment has been removed by the author.
4/15/2007 11:11 PM
CWEGuy said...
Snead,
How on earth can you express your skepticism for the Government on another comment list and still expect that same Government to educate your children?
The Government is not the answer to anyone's problems.
I agree, however, I was taught that if you aren't part of the solution, you're part of the problem!
4/16/2007 10:54 AM
Robert Barnes said:
"The problems with the district probably go back 20 or 30 years, through various mayors, various school boards and various board presidents. The only constant is that year after year no one took a look at what the district was (or was not) producing."
The CONSTANT is the declining social support systems and assistance to the poor, especially poor, predominantly black areas of St. Louis and other American cities.
The DIFFERENCE now is that the federal government, through NCLB, has diverted everyone's attention from the REAL problems of social decay and poverty in urban environments by placing the blame for urban children's educational failures solely on their school districts.
Decades ago, people were not blaming the schools because people understood that the educational problems of urban children STEMMED from their home environments, and hence the way to improve their educational success was to support their human needs OUTSIDE the schools.
America has been sold a lie that if we let corporate conglomerates educate urban children, they will produce good test scores and all their problems will magically disappear. The truth is that the only thing that will magically disappear is our tax money into the pockets of the corporate conglomerates.
What we are living in today is a twilight zone of denial.
4/23/2007 9:20 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home