Eleven District 150 schools will split $1.3 million earmarked for underprivileged students under a plan still being finalized by school officials.
Okay, remember those numbers: 11, $1.3 million.
But the plan, nearly doubling the number of schools designated as Title I, comes at a cost to 13 other schools within the district already receiving the grants.
Ah, so 13 other schools already receive Title 1 funding. If we take that number, plus the aforementioned 11 schools that will be added, we come up with 24 schools total. Got it.
Despite the district increasing the number of Title I schools from 15 to 24, it won’t receive any additional money.
Wait a minute. Now they’re saying 15 schools already receive Title I funding, but the total is still only going to be 24, which is an increase of 9. This must be a typo; I’m sure they meant to say “from 13 to 24.” Maybe the editor will catch it before the paper copy goes to press.
Essentially, it would redistribute the same $7.5 million it receives annually.
What? How did we get from $1.3 million to $7.5 million? From the article, it appears the $7.5 million is the total funding District 150 gets, and of that amount, $1.3 million is going to be going to the 11 additional schools. But how is that figured? How did they arrive at that number?
Enrollment at the 13 additional schools represents a combined 5,000 students.
I thought it was 11 additional schools. Thirteen was the number of schools “already receiving the grants,” wasn’t it? This is so confusing!
Of the little more than $7.5 million District 150 receives, $2.2 million is set aside for pre-school, $755,000 for professional development, $75,500 for parental involvement and $255,000 for administrative needs. The remaining $3.5 million goes directly to the schools.
$2.2 million, plus $755,000, plus $75,500, plus $255,000, plus $3.5 million equals $6,785,500. Where does the other “little more than” $714,500 go? That ain’t chump change, especially on an annual basis!
Not being factored in is some $4.4 million in federal stimulus money headed for Title I programs at District 150.
Good, because none of the other numbers are adding up anyway. Does anybody at 1 News Plaza have a calculator?
“It was shocking to see so many teachers wanting to be administrators”
I was always under the impression that a lot of those teachers were seeking those jobs more because they wanted the bigger paycheck than anything else.
People generally don’t want to be in a ‘dead end’ role. They want to feel like they are getting someplace in their careers. One way people measure that is in getting ‘promoted’. If there are a great number of teachers seeking administrative positions who really don’t have what it takes or the heartfelt motivation to do the job that should be an indicator that these people are not satisfied with their current role. It could be a pay issue. It could be a ‘grief’ issue. It could be simply not enough people appreciate the job they do. Who can blame them. If you are going to get shit upon on a daily basis for not being a miracle worker, why not get paid more to get shit upon daily for not being a miracle worker.
Mahkno: Again, I agree with you. I know that there are those (many) who think that teachers earn too much. I believe all this started when mostly single women taught school, especially the primary grades. In fact, when I was young, married women were not allowed to teach. Later, they could teach until they were pregnant–and had to leave 3 months from the date of conception. Because women were the primary workforce, salaries were understandably low. In fact, even now, the general public seems to view teachers as volunteers who should be on the job 24/7. When I hear Ken Hinton’s slogan “It’s all about the children,” I always think that it is also about the children of teachers, who need to make a decent living to care for their own children, send them to college, etc. Also, I agree about problems with the “dead-end role” of a teaching career. My biggest complaint about teachers becoming administrators is that they soon forget what it was like to be a teacher. They immediately take on the mindset of an administrator. I suppose that’s natural, but it is disconcerting.
Frustrated: Again, we agree.
We have been having a good discussion on EmergePeoria.com about teacher qualifications–I don’t have time to repeat it here. But briefly I believe administrators hire teachers with poor grades in their subject-matter. More attention is paid to their grades in education courses–how they teach and how they get along with students and, most of all, administrators. When administrators hire unqualified teachers, unions get blamed for representing those teachers later on. Problems could be resolved if administrators paid more attention to qualifications in the first place.
Steve: Sorry to admit this, but you are scoring points with me. Glad to hear ideas and the fact that you were hired anyway… gives me hope.
Mahkno and Sharon: Maybe we all coming to some agreement here… miracle of miracles!
“these people are not satisfied with their current role” Because their role is no longer to teach, but to make the administration look good?
“they soon forget what it was like to be a teacher” Because it is all about justifying their salaries and jobs to the State and public? They become bean counters instead of educators?
Who wants to be told what to do by those kind of administrators? Who wants to be told HOW to teach by someone who gave up on teaching for a bigger paycheck?
If I were a teacher in that kind of system, I would say to myself… “why not become a administrator, be able to blame teachers for everything and make twice as much money? I am tired of being the subordinate being blamed for everything while the boss plays CYA… its my turn to do some harassing.” Don’t misunderstand me, I don’t think ALL teachers or administrators think that way, but apparently enough (a significant amount) do.
(Kind of like as Freshman we always caught grief from the Seniors so when we became Seniors we “carried on the tradition”.)
Frustrated w Unethical Behavior – I was “frustrated” the Mayor would make such a statement on the record. I thought there was suppose to be a partnership of sorts, a closer alliance between the District and the Council???
Frustrated- I understand your concerns. Hopefully these two groups can work together to address the concerns. It is one thing to talk about problems. It is another thing to actually do something to fix the problems. “Walk the walk”.
Frustrated – Mayor Ardis, like everyone else, has most likely reached the breaking point in trying to deal and comprehend with the ridiculous decisions by District 150 and its Board of Education. It comes to a point where you just have to call a spade a spade.
His own credibility has been somewhat diminished for not having taken a more proactive role in expecting a minimal set of performance standards from the district. The fact is, is that someone like him or of his ilk better step up to the plate TODAY and start throwing out gauntlets or there will be very little left of this town in the not too distant future.
Mayor Ardis sees the exodus of families from the city and hence the writing on the wall. At this point he doesn’t have to have re-election in the forefront of his mind – he has earned signficant “political capital” via an election victory of over 90%.
It is now time for him, along with all other elected leaders to stop the bleeding and respond to the families and taxpayers who have carried this burden. They must replace the D150 administration through whatever means they have available, (yesterday was too late) and begin to rid our community of the thick coating of self-serving, self perpetuating scum that has engulfed it and taken from our children the right to a decent education.
The far more disturbing comment in that article was this one by Mary Spangler:
“It’s very frustrating to see all the growth there,” said School Board member Mary Spangler. “For some, they are looking for Dunlap schools, but some others have no idea they are not in District 150. They’re just looking for a new neighborhood to live in.”
My jaw is still hanging open on this one! Is she really that out of touch? Scary.
Not everyone that moves up north there has kids. Not everyone chooses where they live strictly on the school district or school that their kids might go to. I sure hope people are not choosing where to live strictly on schools. There is much more to growing up and quality of life than just the classroom. They do a disservice to themselves and their families if they do.
Believe it or not, kids can get a good education in the troubled Dist 150 schools. There are kids who graduate from Woodruff, Manual, and Central who go on to live very successful lives despite all the ‘problems’.
I had someone move in next door to me just a couple weeks ago. She has a 10 year old. She bought the home because of it’s construction (it’s an old home, strong and sturdy). She bought it because of the neighborhood (inner city, urban, everything walkable). When it came to the schools… she hadn’t thought much about that. It wasn’t that it wasn’t important, it was, just wasn’t the sole consideration or even the primary one.
Of course schools are not the sole reason people choose to live where they do, but they do play a large role. Families who do not have school aged children are still concerned about the quality of the schools because of 1. resale and 2. it is an indicator of overall quality of life.
Soooooooooooooooooooo
Is Peoria in trouble or what?
Mahkno,
Does your new neighbor know we will have a “World Class Museum” soon [?]. Maybe that is why they moved to Peoria.?.?.?
Also, people who like the older neighborhoods and the wonderful older homes that they can buy for a reasonable price, will move to the area and then spend their “savings” on private school for their children.
As I stated on the blog on pjstar.com, my co-workers almost had to pick me up off the floor of my cubicle when I read Mary Spangler’s quote in the paper. It was quite the water-cooler chat…..U N B E L I E V A B L E
Mary Spangler is very much aware of the current situation with Dunlap. She has helped to proliferate the unethical practices that have taken place in the district. If this was not the case Mary Davis would be on administrative leave or terminated for her part in bogus addresses being used for kids that lived outside Lindbergh boundaries. It appears that this has been common practice for the last several years in order to keep these families from moving to Dunlap. Spangler lives in the Lindbergh boundaries and is allegedly close to Mary Davis. It appears that the ends justified the means when it comes to getting all of the top notch kids at Lindbergh. This is one way to keep Lindbergh “simply the best”
Cut the crap Spangler!
Dunlap! Heck, people are moving to East Peoria, Pekin, Morton, Brimfield, Canton,…..
I really love the slogan…..where great things happen every day! Let’s make a list: lying, cheating, STEALING, porno, administrative corruption. Yup, great things are happening everyday…..Hello, Kevin Lyons, are you listening……..
Don’t worry……that new museum is on the way!!!!!!
“that new museum is on the way!!!!!!”
Actually… it’s on hold cause the parties that said they had the money, don’t, and so they must wait. Of course we will still have to pay that tax in the meantime.
Oh, my favorite topic, the correlation between the decline of 150 and the mass exodus from Peoria. Diane, great thoughts! You had me right up until “self perpetuating scum.” I do not believe there is evil intent among District Administration as much as ineptness.
Mahkno, you must not have school-aged children. I move frequently, as do many of my friends, and selecting a house within the “right” school district, is first and foremost in the decision-making of those I know. I agree that a good education can be had throughout District 150, the problem is all the rest of the “stuff” that comes with that education. Parents want their children in a safe environment among other students that are headed in the right direction. I think that is evident by the growth of schools such as Dunlap, Washington, etc.
It seems from blog entries that Lindbergh is a hot ticket item for the District. Many wish to attend there. That should be telling the District something . . . . that is what the “customer” wants. The Board should direct its efforts accordingly. The proposed charter school is a step in that direction.
Mahkno, as long as the tax money goes to Belwood, I’m O.K. with it.
Frustrated – fair enough. That actually didn’t come out right. “Scum” didn’t necessarily refer to individuals.
And also, whether you choose to acknowledge it or not, evil exists in the world, and D150 is not exempt. Those committing evil acts should be rooted out and brought to justice, and I believe they will.
“There are kids who graduate from Woodruff, Manual, and Central who go on to live very successful lives despite all the ‘problems’.”
Mahkno: you make it sound like those schools contributed to their having successful lives when the facts clearly indicate otherwise. They achieved success despite the schools. They probably had great support networks, helping them to overcome the burden of their schooling. If the schools were doing their jobs we would be talking about how only one or two kids don’t go on to lead successful lives.
It is rare kid that achieves success in school and the world, it is much more common that kids are failed by schools.
Why is the success rate so much higher at Richwoods??? Those kids have better starts and better networks to deal with the bovine fecality of schools.
Why is that not clear to everyone?
Kcdad writes “why is the success rate so much higher at Richwoods??? Those kids have better starts and better networks . . . . Why is that not clear to everyone?”
It is clear to me! It is crystal clear that a “good” school and “good” teachers are just part of the equation. It is unclear to me why some believe otherwise??? So many continually lambast the District for its failing schools and it lousy teachers, but as Diane states, “It comes to a point where you just have to call a spade a spade.”
Much of the student population that attends District 150 is difficult to educate. I do not understand how the public can realistically expect even the most dedicated teachers or the most talented building principal to overcome all the learning obstacles these children come with when they enter the school building.
Wow… we are in agreement again….. at least on part of your point kcdad (I think that both of you are correct)
I have been in a WIDE range of school systems. Winter Springs High School in Seminole County Florida has been listed as one of the top 200 high schools in the country and Cahokia High School is on the other end of the spectrum.
I have been in wealthy, low income black, low income white, and very diverse schools.
The kids with the better start are much easier to get to meet state standards. kc, you are correct that many will meet those standards regardless of the school. That is obvious, but our job is much more than state tests. The kids that come with a wonderful foundation should also place a huge responsibility on the school to prepare them for competing with students from “top notch” high schools. If a “good” school becomes content with simply meeting AYP then that school will start to deteriate. Schools are either progressing or regressing.
Our job is to take kids from where they are and push them. Our job is to prepare them for successful post-secondary lives and maximize our influence on their future opportunities.
It is obvious when lower income schools are failiing. They don’t meet state mandates and it shows like a sore thumb. But many higher income schools are failing in that they are not maximizing what they do with the kids they get. This failure isn’t as obvious, but it can be just as harming to kids.
That is why, across the state, districts need to do a serious analysis of the state of all their schools. Upon serious scrutiny, they might be suprised at what they find. On this forum I won’t go into detail about the data of Illinois schools that I have seen, but I will show various forms of data if someone visits RHS. I can state that at least three of the respected central Illinois schools are performing below their potential. (My central Illinois area is huge…. so no guessing…lol)
I know that many low income schools are working harder than many higher income schools. This is where I agree with Mahkno. From my 6 years at Cahokia (90 percent low income and minority) I feel certain that I can state that at PHS, MHS, and WHS there are some amazing teachers doing some amazing things with students.
(ONCE AGAIN: these ideas were formed well before I came to this district. My statements are not a commentary on PSD 150, but they are an attempt to foster excellent communication between stakeholders about the state of education in Illinois. I have felt incredibly supported with the plans that I have for RHS.)
KcDad’s “you make it sound like those schools contributed to their having successful lives when the facts clearly indicate otherwise. They achieved success despite the schools.” What “facts” indicate that an individual student’s success is not due, at least in part, to the schools? Success is rather elusive–by your own admission, success is difficult to define. Kcdad, how do you even measure success since you don’t want to measure it by the ability to find gainful employment? Is success becoming a productive member of society (whatever that means)? Is success becoming a good parent? Is success becoming a “good” person? So since you can’t even define success, you cannot really identify the impetus for that success. Was it parents, was it the school (one teacher many teachers), was it the response of students to the opportunities offered to them? My point is that you cannot negate the importance of the educational system in producing successful citizens. Nor can you blame the educational system when an individual student fails to become a success (however you define success). My own opinion, of course, is that it takes the right combination of many factors (parents, school, an individual student’s abilities) to influence the success (or failure) of an individual. All these forces are dependent on one another–no single influence is the determining factor.
Frustrated: “Much of the student population that attends District 150 is difficult to educate. ” So true. At least it is true from the school district perspective. However, there is no such thing as a difficult child to educate.
“I do not understand how the public can realistically expect even the most dedicated teachers or the most talented building principal to overcome all the learning obstacles these children come with when they enter the school building.”
Again so true! It is simple. Schools are not designed for that. They are designed for the student that is prepared to follow orders and stand in line without touching the kids next to them. They are not designed for the student that has their own interests and curiosities. They are ready for those students that know what to expect. And what is it that they can expect from the school system? Conformity, competition and failure.
Steve: “Our job is to take kids from where they are and push them.” Absolutely correct. I presume you used “push” intentionally. Many schools and teachers PULL instead of push. I agree that the purpose of the schools is to push the student in the direction they are already leaning… toward their interests, their talents, their strengths.
The worst teacher in the world is the one that wants his or her students to be just like him or her.
“at least in part” ???? 13 years and $15,000 per year worth of “in part”?
“They are designed for the student that is prepared to follow orders and stand in line without touching the kids next to them. They are not designed for the student that has their own interests and curiosities. They are ready for those students that know what to expect. And what is it that they can expect from the school system? Conformity, competition and failure.”
Once again… I agree and disagree….
I agree in that we sometimes act like “gatekeepers” and determine who is worthy and who isn’t. We want to teach the kids that are “easier” to teach.
But we all know that if we want our kids… all our kids.. to succeed in the “real” world… then all of our students need to eventually be able to adapt to the world and accept some of the basics such as getting to work on time, not mouthing off to the boss…. etc etc
If we don’t prepare our kids for this reality then it doesn’t matter if they graduate with honors or with if they barely earn their diploma.
I invite ALL of you to our incoming Fresh Start next fall. I give a speech about my core beliefs on education and one of those beliefs is that self-discipline and teaching the ability to adapt are CRUCIAL components of our curriculum. Many schools fail in this regard and simply place having students walk at graduation as the sole determining factor for success.
We might have to take kids from different starting points and we might have to adjust how we reach them…. but they have to end up at the same point when our job is complete. That is the only way that we prepare our students to be successful in a world that will not adapt to them.
Steve’s “Many schools fail in this regard and simply place having students walk at graduation as the sole determining factor for success.” Unfortunately, in the last few years of my teaching career, I found this to be the criterion used by administrators at Manual, at least. Teachers were asked to be lenient with grades, etc., implying that the “diploma” appeared to be a sufficient end result–even when it had not been “earned.” Personally, I don’t know of any teachers who believed that a diploma (especially unearned) was a sign of success. I believe the district itself contributes to this mindset in that the board set goals to raise the graduation rate to _____. How can a board set that goal? The board also set goals to lower the suspension and/or expulsion rate. Isn’t it the ability and/or the behavior of the students that determine graduation rates, suspension rates, etc? When the board sets such goals, it is then the teachers who are blamed when the goals are not met.
Mr. Ptacek you write “The kids that come with a wonderful foundation should also place a huge responsibility on the school to prepare them for competing with students from “top notch” high schools.”
This is what I have been waiting for a representative from the District to state, FOREVER!! But actions speaks louder than words. My blog name is “frustrated” for a reason. While my children attended District schools, I felt there was an inordinate focus on improving the bottom one-quarter and little or no attention or resources directed to setting the bar higher for the top 25% of the class, or for that matter even the top 50%. I am glad to hear at least one administrator at the District understands the need to concentrate on the “big picture.”
I agree that state standards and individual school standards for performance are not stringent enough. A U of Chicago study reports that an 8th grader cannot just “meets standards” but must “exceed standards” on state testing in order to have real shot of success in college. I am not an educator, just a parent, and I could have told you that without a study. Why is this such a mystery to the State Board of Education, school boards, politicians, etc. that are charged with chartering the direction of education???
Sharon you know that my red warning light goes off whenever these discussions turn toward specific issues with PSD schools. Its not my place to discuss these matters. I was hired to maximize the education at RHS. Also, I don’t have enough knowledge to state anything about what happens or has happened at other schools. I know that the last time I stated this I was accused on this blog of being another “yes man”, but that isn’t it. I only deal with my experiences and I have not felt any of this pressure at RHS, but then again our graduation rate is high so I wouldn’t be involved in these discussions.
But I have seen this in other schools. This is a problem throughout the state.
Ultimately I blame politicians that place pressure on districts and then stress the solutions in the wrong areas. For example, the state’s school improvement program is about making it “look” like the best attempts to improve is being done and not about actually showing improvement. I have some stories about my interactions with the state while at other districts that would make you cringe. (Or laugh, or cry, etc)
Regarding this issue, I do believe that most districts are doing the best job that they know how to do to satisfy the limitations that the state sets.
Sharon writes:
1. “How can a board set that goal?”
Um, its their responsibility? It’s what they are there to do.
2. “When the board sets such goals, it is then the teachers who are blamed when the goals are not met.”
Well, yes and no. As steve said (indirectly with his comments about the triangle of “politicians, parents, and teachers”), the administrators need to share the “blame” because they’re accountable for taking the board goals and direction, and executing.
I’m going to nitpick on your term ‘blame’ for a moment, because there is a difference between accountability and blame. The mechanism of tenure avoids accountability, so your customer sub-sets (students and parents ARE customers), who have expectations of you find that what they expected may not be delivered, and assign blame. Just as I would blame the mechanic for not fixing my car when I clearly had an expectation for her to do so, a teacher may be blamed – but rarely held accountable – for not delivering. It is not illogical to blame an agent of expectation if that expectation is not met.
In some ways, the same can be said about a lot of employee groups. Illinois is an at-will state, but labor laws still make it very difficult for an organization to rid itself of non-performers. There are also employee groups in the state that can find it very difficult to find any kind of job security. My thoughts here aren’t specifically targeted toward teachers and shouldn’t be read that way. I’m talking about organizational engineering.
From your comments, you paint a picture that suggests a BOE is somehow responsible for creating a capacity crisis in that they establish goals that a workforce can’t meet. Frankly, that doesn’t pass the smell test. A BOE is entirely in their right to set graduation rate goals, establish suspension/expulsion rates – it’s high level direction. An administration should take that direction and map a path to achievement using all the tools of SWOT, environmental scanning, resource allocation, etc. to provide the workforce an ability to work toward the goals. Metrics need to be in place to check and report progress.
Look at the Baldridge criteria for education sometime…
http://www.quality.nist.gov/Education_Criteria.htm
…or the Carver Policy-Governance model.
http://www.carvergovernance.com/model.htm
I think you’d be surprised.
Frustrated,
I am so glad to know you see the big picture.
One of my key steps to analyzing a school is to see how the school is doing with the kids that are easier to teach.
If a school isn’t doing as well as it should with the high end kids then there must be something wrong with the system. If the system is flawed then how can the school ever be expected to do well with the students that are more challenging to reach.
I don’t have the exact data as I sit and get ready for bed…. (you guys are keeping me up too late…lol) but one of the most glaring signs of problems at Centralia was that the exceeds rates in math had dropped severely over the previous 6 years. I think that the rate had dropped from somewhere around 10% to 1.8%. In the first couple years of the drop the overall pass rate had risen and one veteran teacher told me that she remembered celebrating the increase.
But what happened over time… it all fell. If you are not performing at the higher end then you will regress. Our job is to push all the students up. It is not to meet somewhere in the middle.
By adding weighted grades and increased expectations at the higher end, including the first emphasis on AP across the curriculum, the exceeds started to rise and the overall scores went up.
I don’t believe in the “bubble kids” mentality that is sweeping the nation. It provides short term gains that quickly go away. Eventually it all lowers.
Erik,
I disagree on one thing about tenure. I don’t think that administration can ever use unions or tenure as a crutch until they have given every attempt to remediate and, if necessary, dismiss tenured teachers that are not performing. It is difficult, but we have to try.
Also, districts can take care of many of their problems by not granting tenure to teachers that have questionable competency.
The best teachers in every school that I worked at wanted administration to do these things even if they wouldn’t say it out loud.
I let go of 8 non-tenured teachers while at Centralia. (Which was a huge change from the past). Getting an excellent staff is the best thing that a Principal can do. I took many trips to job fairs across the state looking for the best young teachers and selling CHS to them.
In most schools, administration isn’t doing everything that it can regarding personnel.
(Once again: I said this a year ago before coming to Peoria. I learned it from the best Principal I have ever seen… thanks Wayne Epps!)
Steve, I certainly don’t mean to put you on the spot nor do I expect you to respond to my specific examples–in fact, I truly do not believe–as you pointed out–that Manual or District 150 are exceptions. I believe that these problems exist throughout the country–it is the educational system, in general, not just in Peoria that is in trouble. Furthermore, I don’t believe the schools or even District 150 created the problems. Since I lived through and taught through this most difficult period in the history of our schools, I think I understand how we have gotten where we are. I don’t think any of us (administrators, teachers, etc.) believed things would get as bad as they have gotten. For one thing, I don’t think any of us anticipated the extent to which so many have left Peoria and District 150. I don’t think any of us expected the number of private schools and their respective enrollments to grow as rapidly as they did. If everyone had “stayed put,” I think the problems could have been worked out. But that didn’t happen. I remember about 25 years ago when a District 150 administrator (no longer in Peoria) told us that the end of the factory system in Peoria would change the educational system. Nevertheless, the end of good-paying unskilled jobs took us completely by surprise. Suddenly we found ourselves having to prepare all young people for a whole different job market–requiring skill levels never needed before by the general population.
Therefore, I shouldn’t be as hard as I seem to be on District 150. However, I do think they do need to be challenged to find a new approach soon or public education as a viable institution in our society will be destroyed. Furthermore, I will continue to believe that much of the change has to start with making students more, not less, accountable for their own behaviors, etc. That would be good, not only for the system, but also for the students themselves.
Steve, your response to Erik about tenure makes much sense to me. Also, you are correct in saying that good teachers (even “union” teachers) want administrators to dismiss nonperforming teachers. Most of all, as I have stated often on this blog, administrators frequently are not diligent in eliminating incompetent teachers before they become tenured. Your action in letting 8 non-tenured teachers go proves that you understand my point. On EmergePeoria.com we have been having a discussion about unqualified teachers–as in Massachusetts where 75% of math teachers failed some sort of tests for teachers. My complaint is that, all too often, administrators hire teachers who did not do all that well in college–especially, in the subject matter that they are hired to teach. Part of the problem, as in the case of math teachers, is that those with the highest grades will get jobs in the private sector where they can make more money than they can in education–or they will prefer to teach in college. Administrators hire the less qualified teachers and then complain that they can’t fire them because of union protection, etc.
Erik’s “A BOE is entirely in their right to set graduation rate goals, establish suspension/expulsion rates – it’s high level direction.” I do not get this kind of goal setting at all. A BOE can set goals as to what it expects of its teachers, but the board cannot set goals as to how a given student or students will respond to the opportunities given to them. (Maybe the old “You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink” seems a bit too simplistic, but it does contain an element of truth). Erik, you seem to think educational goals for humanbeings can be set in the same manner as a business can set goals for its product. Producing an educated humanbeing is not the same as producing a superior tractor.
Hi Steve,
My observation about tenure is clinical as measured against the Baldridge criteria for performance excellence, specifically as it relates to Workforce Engagement. I encourage you to click on the link above for the Education Criteria. I just spent the last three days with folks from districts all over the state learning how to examine award-seeking applicants on the criteria.
It’s highly unlikely to achieve excellence against the national standard for excellence when the organization is impeded from linking performance to compensation via a contractual agreement.
Again, that’s not a judgment of tenure, but an observation of tenure’s relationship to continuous improvement.
This thought:
“The best teachers in every school that I worked at wanted administration to do these things even if they wouldn’t say it out loud.”
I’ve found that applies to all sectors, and organizations. Poor performance/performers create re-work for others. A leader’s responsibility is to design effective work processes and protect the integrity of the same. A leader who allows poor performers to shift the burden onto others isn’t leading and likely losing the trust, support, and engagement of the rest of their workforce. In that situation, the value lost by carrying the poor performer compounds.
“In most schools, administration isn’t doing everything that it can regarding personnel.”
Again, it has been my experience this applies universally. I’ve been in the military, private sector (retail, manufacturing, and finance), education, local government, and consulting. It’s everywhere.
I think where education struggles is in seeing itself as a business. A general observation, again. Local government struggles in this regard as well.
One of the folks I spent time with over the last few days was Dr. Peter Flynn at Freeport District 145. They’ve received two of the three levels of the Illinois equivalent of the national Baldridge award (Pekin is an award winner as well). Really interesting conversations about how a school district starts looking at quality and continuous process improvement. The best take away was finding these similarities that exist, no matter what sector you’re managing.
Hi Sharon:
“Erik, you seem to think educational goals for human beings can be set in the same manner as a business can set goals for its product. Producing an educated human being is not the same as producing a superior tractor.”
Obviously I think you’re wrong. Sorry. I don’t blame you though. Did you read either of the links, or just respond? …It’s an honest question.
If the latter, what specifically did you find about the tested and established criteria which is specifically aimed at providing education services to be off the mark?
case in point, click on the link and read District 158’s response to performance evaluation. They have to have two different systems in place to accommodate tenure.
See p. 36 of 49 under 5.1b: Faculty and Staff performance management system.
If the link doesn’t work, let me know and I can email you the doc.
http://www.lincolnaward.org/Documents/Ctrl_Hyperlink/2003_School_Dist._158_uid4292009204162.pdf
Erik said “I think were education struggles is in seeing itself as a business”. Mindful of the “Triangle of Blame” I agree with the assessment as it relates to the administration, but not so as to teachers – or at least I don’t see it yet. I am also against tenure for many of the same reasons you have outlined, however, I do not believe it to be a major contributor to our district’s failures.
I’m also going to avail myself to Steve’s data regarding at least three of our respected central Illinois schools, not because I want to know which ones may not be performing as well as they should (Ok, I am curious), but I do want to better understand how to compare schools like Dunlap, Morton, Eureka, etc. other than just ISAT pass rates and/or ACT test scores.
Erik: Your, “I think where education struggles is in seeing itself as a business. ” No, I haven’t had time to read the information from your links. I will. Until then, I will continue to disagree with the premise of your above statement. Isn’t business all about producing a product to make a profit? The primary problem I see in equating the two is the nature of the product. No one expects a “tractor”–the example product–to respond in any way during construction. How many viables are there in producing a tractor? Can the variables be controlled? If Caterpillar provides inferior raw materials, can the employees be blamed for producing an inferior product (I hate using that example because I do not think of students in that way). However, frequently either the nature or the nurturing aspects of a student’s life can be inferior–there are just too many variables where humanbeings are concerned.
About the BOE setting graduation goals and/or suspension/expulsion goals. Frequently, what happens is that teachers–not wanting to be blamed for student failures–just pass students who really do not fulfill course requirements. The students graduate and the BOE meets its goals. (That worked much better before the NCLB test results, not the diplomas, became the determining factor for success). As for the suspension/expulsion goals, administrators simply lower the standards for behavior and amazingly enough, the BOE meets its goals. In both cases student learning or behavior does not improve–but the goals are met.
I believe education can be considered a business only in regards to how its financial affairs are handled or mishandled, as the case may be. That’s where the similarity ends. Of course, teachers could be paid (or fired) based on their productivity. Does a teacher have to get a student from “F” to “A” to be a success? If a high school junior reads at the 5th grade level, is the reading teacher a success or failure if the student reads at the 7th grade level at the end of the year? Just how are you going to measure a teacher’s success? If a teacher has 100 students, how many have to pass for the teacher to be considered a success? Should a teacher of students who are all below grade level be judged by the same standards as a teacher of students who regularly perform above grade level? I do know of cases (more than you might think) of teachers who do not put much effort into teaching but give all passing grades; they are never questioned by administrators and are often praised. Are those the kinds of administators that would be deciding which teachers should be fired or which should receive merit pay, etc? What determines who is a good teacher and who is a bad teacher? More importantly who decides?
O.k. Jon – What data from Steve? I am interested too in a few of the area schools? I went back and read all of Steve’s posts — what am I missing?
Erik: From your link above–I presume your argument about the success of a school run like a business. I’m sorry, but I didn’t give much credence to your argument after I read this:
The District’s student demographics is 85.4% Caucasian, 1.5% Black, 8.6% Hispanic, and 4.2% Asian. Approximately 3% of the students are considered low income and 2.5% of the students are identified as having a limited English proficiency.
I would expect that “business” to do quite well because of or inspite of the teachers–whichever.
Mr. Ptacek: If one of your goals is to continue to set the bar higher and push all students it is my hope that you give consideration to more emphasis on the IB program. I was thrilled when I learned that the District was implementing this program and there was much fanfare upon its introduction. But . . . my impression is that this program has languished. I cannot find information about it readily on the Richwood’s web site. The program does not appear to have grown in terms of the number of students participating. Please set me straight if I am wrong??
My children currently attend an IB focused school and those graduating with the IB diploma seem to be writing their own ticket to whatever university they are interested in. People complain that the District is failing its students and then when it offers a competitive program, students do not avail themselves of the opportunity. I am confused???
I like that you subscribe to President Kennedy’s famous saying “that a rising tide lifts all boats” in regards to your educational philosophy. I can see how such measures can be implemented in high school but how can such a strategy be implemented in primary and middle schools? My children are in upper middle school now and certain classes are grouped based on academic ability and this seems to be work better to address different students’ learning needs. But . . . in the lower grades it is impractical, I think, for one teacher to be able to address the vastly different learning needs of 20 some students in one classroom. Even in lower grades, students need to be “pushed” to their potential. A young person needs learn how to “exercise their study muscles” as we used to say at our house in order to understand that concentration and effort are part of the learning process. Because of diluted curriculums in the lower grades, many bright students reach middle school without ever having to truly apply themselves and when they finally need to, their “study muscles” are not strong due to lack of use. For students to truly achieve their potential, educational opportunities need to begin to be differentiated long before they arrive in high school.
“A BOE is entirely in their right to set graduation rate goals, establish suspension/expulsion rates – it’s high level direction”
I can’t let you get away this Erik… This presumes the Board of Education has any education themselves, any experience themselves in teaching and any independent ability to evaluate the situation. What we have in Peoria is NOT a School Board but a Board of Directors, like at Cat or any other business. You can’t run a School Board like a business where there is a bottom line.
Our BOE has proven over and over again they are simply the “yes-men” for the administration, and their business backgrounds color every decision they make.
” a systems perspective for understanding performance management. ”
“to empower boards of directors to fulfill their obligation of accountability for the organizations they govern. As a generic system, it is applicable to the governing body of any enterprise”
Yeah… I looked at the links…. So are the students “customers, resources, stake holders, or impediments to reaching the goal”?
From one of your links: Evaluation, with such carefully stated expectations, is nothing more than seeking an answer to the question, “Have our expectations been met?”
OUR expectations? I thought this was about the students?
These “programs” are typical bureaucracy double speak: “In contrast to the approaches typically used by boards, Policy Governance separates issues of organizational purpose (ENDS) from all other organizational issues (MEANS), placing primary importance on those Ends. Policy Governance boards demand accomplishment of purpose, and only limit the staff’s available means to those which do not violate the board’s pre-stated standards of prudence and ethics.”
Wow! Professionals realizing there is a difference between ends and means… between their purpose and their issues!?!?!?!?!?!?!? Do we typically have monkeys on these school boards? I certainly hope any graduate of a public school system would already understand these concepts.
“Subject: Why Is Baldrige Important for You Now?
Because the Baldrige Education Criteria for Performance Excellence are about students excelling! Because they also are about a successful organization that is high performing and has high integrity. Because the Baldrige Criteria ask you all the right questions.”
(Doesn’t the author know about complete sentences?)
“Customer Focus addresses how your organization seeks to engage your students and stakeholders, with a focus on meeting students’ and stakeholders’ needs,”
students and stake holders… (I smell Six Sigma baloney)
Who is the stake holder other than the students?
“Although many of the needs of stakeholders must be translated into educational services for students, the stakeholders themselves have needs that organizations also must accommodate.”
“Your student and stakeholder satisfaction and dissatisfaction results provide
vital information for understanding your students, stakeholders, and markets.”
AND MARKETS!?!?!?!
“A relationship strategy may be possible with some students and stakeholders but not with others.”
WTF !?!?!?!
Erik Erik Erik… come back… come back… the real world of HUMAN BEINGS is calling to you!
kcdad
“I can’t let you get away this Erik… This presumes the Board of Education has any education themselves”
yes and no. it presumes the superintendent fulfills their responsibility of educating the BOE.
look, you all raise good points. i would disagree with your “typical bureaucracy double speak” for two reasons
1. it’s your excuse for everything you disagree with that in any way looks established, systematic or programmatic. you’re answer frequently appears to be, “if it weren’t for bcats, we’d all be better off…”
while there is some truth to that, it also convicts a whole group by the nature of their profession. does that sound like a fair approach to life? your worldview is such that you make the assessment, but it doesn’t validate your assessment of the results programs like this produce for companies.
2. the history of continuous improvement programs suggest your assessment is again, cynical, instead of evidence-based.
“Do we typically have monkeys on these school boards?”
Sigh.
Look beyond the verbiage and read into what the concepts seek. No, you don’t typically have monkeys on school boards, but my points aren’t specifically about school boards, or Peoria, or CAT, or D150.
Believe it or not, there are school districts other than D150, there are companies other than CAT out there. Shocking, I know. What’s really crazy about that, is that they all struggle with getting better. That it’s difficult to run and lead an organization was my point and that the issues a school organization faces are not unique, no matter how much you hold your breath to try and convince me otherwise.
“I certainly hope any graduate of a public school system would already understand these concepts.”
Understand? sure.
Apply? not so much.
Two different things.
“Erik Erik Erik… come back… come back… the real world of HUMAN BEINGS is calling to you!”
First, I appreciate you for reading through the criteria.
Second, recognize the world of HUMAN BEINGS is LARGELY messy, emotional, self interested, depraved, and random.
I’ve always been a systems guy Kcdad, which is probably why we clash idealistically. I repaired huge radar systems while in the navy and that’s how i learned to troubleshoot problems. Organizations are systems, so that’s how i approach, standardize, normalize, and manage them.
It has gotten me into trouble in the past
1) “it also convicts a whole group by the nature of their profession”
What is the School Boards “profession”? What is a politician’s “profession?
2) “history of continuous improvement programs suggest your assessment is again, cynical” Yeah… and your point? A new program every 4 or 5 years (actually usually the same exact same program just retitled and printed on different colored paper) and results continue to decline… yeah… I guess I am cynical.
3) “Look beyond the verbiage and read into what the concepts seek.”
Uh… don’t pay attention to the man behind the curtain? It says what it says… Education is, for the most part, a VERBAL endeavor. If you can’t communicate, get the F___ out.
“Understand? sure. Apply? not so much.”
And here we get the real insight into how a bureaucrat thinks… only WE truly understand and are able to implement that knowledge… WE have a system. WE have a MEANS to a desired end. Follow us and see the rising sun of success just over the horizon.
“my points aren’t specifically about school boards, or Peoria, or CAT, or D150”
too bad… this is where the problem is.
“world of HUMAN BEINGS is LARGELY messy, emotional, self interested, depraved, and random”
not my world view…
(I appreciate your Navy experience. My brother was in GTMO for 6 years during the Vietnam War. He says they had three shifts on their radar unit… 1st shift would break something and the 2nd shift had to diagnose and fix it. Then the 3rd shift would break something and the 1st had to fix it… and he went scuba diving weekends in Puerto Rico.Nice duty!)