While I was on hiatus last month, a letter appeared in the Journal Star from Mayor Jim Ardis promoting the Peoria Charter School Initiative (PCSI). It lays out his argument for supporting a new charter school in Peoria, and concludes with a call to the public to write or call their school board members, asking them to approve PCSI’s application. According to another Journal Star article, that approval would come with a price: “$1.7 million, or 70 percent, of the initial costs.”
In this post, I’ll respond to each of his three arguments:
1. Proven model argument
First, this charter school will follow a proven model that produces outstanding results in urban districts. A similar school in Chicago, the Chicago Math & Science Academy, is rated one of the top three charter schools and non-selective high schools in that city. CMSA graduated its first senior class in 2009. Every graduate was accepted into college (some into multiple schools), and 100 percent entered college this fall. These are exactly the results we want for students in Peoria, and we shouldn’t accept any less.
Yes, they follow a proven model, but it’s not a secret recipe like Kentucky Fried Chicken or Coca-Cola. The model includes all of the usual ingredients for improved student performance: longer school day, smaller class sizes, individualized instruction, parental involvement, highly-qualified teachers, challenging curriculum, community support, etc. Why is it that these things can only be provided by third-party companies like Edison Schools or Concept Schools, Inc. (at considerable cost), but can’t be provided by Peoria Public Schools district-wide? If this model produces “exactly the results we want for students in Peoria,” then why should it be implemented at only one school? Why should only some students benefit?
Keep in mind that the board of the PCSI has made it quite clear that they expect the demographics of the charter school to mirror the demographics of the district at large. So one cannot argue that this method doesn’t work for poor, minority, ELL, or special needs children. According to PCSI, it does. It works for everyone and lifts everyone’s scores. Since the model is no secret, and is universally effective, why the need to bring in Concept Schools, Inc.? Why doesn’t the district just implement the model across the district themselves? Is it lack of money? Political will? Teacher/union cooperation?
The charter school, just like Edison schools, is an attempt to alleviate the symptoms of a deeper problem instead of getting to the root issue. If District 150 education is terrible — and based on test scores, it is for many — shouldn’t our focus be on fixing that problem at the root level and not just trying to provide an escape hatch for some lucky children who (literally) win the lottery to get out of their failing school?
2. School choice argument
Second, District 150 parents want and deserve choice: a high-quality education, a longer school day and year, and more opportunities for their children to be successful. Parents know it is critical for their children to have solid skills in math, science and technology to be prepared for college and career. They’re asking for options, and our School Board must be responsive to those requests.
I expected this argument to be advocating choice between a school with a math and science emphasis and a school with another emphasis, such as fine arts or vocational training. But instead, it appears the choice he’s talking about is between things like a poor education and a high-quality education, or a shorter and a longer school day. What kind of choice is that? Who opts for fewer opportunities for their children to be successful?
District 150 parents want and deserve and have been asking for a high-quality education at every District 150 school. The Board must be responsive to that request first and foremost.
3. Federal funding argument
Third, President Obama and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan are calling for education reform and emphasizing charter schools as a key component. They’ve seen firsthand the success of charter school students. Establishing a charter school in Peoria increases the possibility of additional federal funding for District 150. Without a charter school, we’ll have a much harder time accessing Race to the Top funding.
It’s funny that politicians see “the success of charter school students” when a recent Stanford University National Charter School Study found that 17 percent of 2403 charter schools showed more growth than their traditional public school peers, 46 percent had performance that was “indistinguishable” from traditional public schools, and 37 percent of charter schools were actually worse. But never mind that.
Here’s the carrot for District 150 to say “yes” to spending $1.7 million on PCSI: more federal funding. If you want to get access to “Race to the Top” funding, you first have to race to establish a charter school. Of course, there’s no guarantee you’ll actually get much, if any, “Race to the Top” funding. It just “increases the possibility.” It’s a gamble. Spend $1.7 million on a charter school, spin the wheel, and hope Arne Duncan remembers what a grand time he had with the mayor when he starts writing checks.
The conclusion
I don’t often agree with school board president Debbie Wolfmeyer, but I do in this case: How can the district seriously consider opening a new school for $1.7 million after they just closed Woodruff to save $1.5 million? How can a group like the Chamber of Commerce, who just got through advocating that we close numerous schools — including a high school — because we have excess capacity and need to save money, turn around and say we need to fund a new charter school that includes middle and high school grades?
I share everyone’s desire for District 150 to offer a better education, but I don’t believe the charter school is the answer. I believe it will only exacerbate District 150’s problems the same way Edison has. Because of the money we’re paying to maintain Edison’s contract, cuts have been made in the traditional schools, including a shortened school day for primary school students.
There needs to be a comprehensive solution that improves public school education for all students district-wide. A charter school with limited enrollment in a failing school district is not much of a draw.
I was supportive of the earlier concept of the Math and Science Academy, a school intended for those students who had demonstrated some sort of aptitude in math and/or science. I’m not sure about this current concept. Why can’t the energy and enthusiasm some have for creating one school be magnified to spur re-creating Peoria Public Schools to be the kind of innovative and successful district that we need in our community?
Haven’t we realized that closing Woodruff proper and ‘closing’ Central on paper wasn’t really about the money? Isn’t it more about resetting the no child left behind clock and that the money really is just a smoke screen?
It would be a tad hard to sell the closing of the school on the basis of dodging accountability. Who wants to be sitting on the Board or in an administrative position when a school is taken over? Wouldn’t that be a resume killer.
CJ, very well stated–I really have nothing to add (that’s rare); you’ve said it all.
These questions deserve to be answered, and preferably by a Charter School leader that lives and pays taxes in Peoria County. Are there any? The most troubling aspect of the Charter School concept is that the people that are driving it are not in touch with the day to day circumstances inside the classrooms, and most of them don’t even have kids in the district. Have they observed the classrooms, interviewed teachers or parents or kids? Do they realize what the average D150 kid has to put up with in terms of the lack of discipline inside most classrooms? Watching Roberta Parks stand in front of the school board and encourage them to close Peoria schools, increase class sizes and overcrowd the schools left open, then in her next breath go on network television and encourage outsiders to support her in creating an elite school in her image with the money saved is revolting. If these people are so smart and know it all where have they been for the last ten years? Why don’t they want the parents and D150 taxpayers sitting on the Superintendent Search Committee? They’ve stacked it to their advantage. The Charter School seems like one more way for suburbanites to pull the strings of Peorians, put control of the public schools in the hands of outsiders, and enhance their own personal circumstances at the expense of the circumstances of the families and students fighting to remain in the district.
I dare Glen Barton, Jim Mcconawhatever, Roberta Parks or whoever to log in and answer these questions. Let the sun shine!
CJ, I think you answered your own question:
“Why doesn’t the district just implement the model across the district themselves? Is it lack of money? Political will? Teacher/union cooperation?”
The focus being on the latter. Right now the district is trying to gain some control back just to determine where to implement its primary resources – i.e. which teachers teach in which schools. The result? A vote to authorize a strike.
More importantly, to be blunt, CJ, you don’t seem to understand the financials here, arguing the same point that Wolfmeyer is:
“How can the district seriously consider opening a new school for $1.7 million after they just closed Woodruff to save $1.5 million?”
By that argument, how can the district pay a law firm when it just closed Woodruff? How can it pay any other SERVICE PROVIDER when it just closed Woodruff?
The answer is simple: They are “paying” $1.7MM so that they DON’T have to pay the expenses of 225 students directly themselves. They are OUTSOURCING the responsibility to someone else.
Why?
First of all, the charter school will do it CHEAPER AND offer longer hours/more services. They will do it at 90% of the current average per student cost. Secondly, they just may do it better. Lastly, it is what many of the “customers” want.
Back to those numbers – the $1.7MM so-called cost and the $1.5MM so-called savings from Woodruff. PLEASE treat the numbers the same. The $1.5MM “savings” is a NET savings. You don’t say, it costs $10MM (or whatever it is) to currently run Woodruff so we’ll SAVE that amount by closing it. You would incur additional costs at the other schools to teach those students. The net is an estimated savings of $1.5MM.
What happens if the district goes with the charter school? Is it a $1.7MM NET cost? NO. The district will not need as many teachers, won’t need the to provide the supplies and will very likely CLOSE a middle school and won’t have that building’s operating costs. Sure, in the short term, there will be some net cost as the district reacts to such changes. In the long term, it will be a savings because the charter is doing it at 90% of the cost.
Now, the argument that we should do this for ALL schools: Good luck with the current administration and teachers – just look at the current 8 month long negotiations going nowhere. Even so, who is to say that EVERYONE wants this option? That is the CHOICE argument – not everyone wants the same thing. TRY the charter – see if there really is a demand for it. If the demand is much greater, then maybe you start another one.
A one size fits all approach will not work (has not worked) in a district this size, with demographics this disparate. Similarly, all or nothing won’t work either. You are NOT going to change an organization the size of D150 wholesale overnight. You HAVE to take it one step at a time, not only because of the problems associated with any change, but because you need to offer choice with truly different options.
The Charter School Initiative is designed to segregate the attending students into two groups. The administration in adopting this program is admitting that there are two kinds of students. There are students who want to learn and succeed, and there are those that just want to screw the system. “They” won’t succeed no matter what. That is why in the past they have just been passed through the system or kicked out of it. By offering this choice, it is assumed the students that want to succeed will and the rest will just drop out or barely get by where they are.
Of course EVERYONE should want to be this program, but since the openings are limited, the administration OBVIOUSLY doesn’t believe that to be true. So there will be a couple of decent schools and bunch of lesser quality schools for “those” people to attend. Isn’t that unconstitutional? Isn’t that what Brown vs Topeka Board of Education was all about? (Not race, but EQUALITY)
“A one size fits all approach will not work (has not worked) in a district this size, with demographics this disparate. ”
Hang your demographics… they are all children. OUR children. There is no other relevant demographic.
A one size fits all approach will work if the approach is the appropriate one. The problem is that we are engaged in “job preparation” instead of education, and there is not just one kind of job out there.
The old “blame it on the teachers” argument. Do you really think that anyone with half a brain buys that after watching the ridiculous antics and decisions out of the district over the past couple years? So The School District is looking to save 1.5 million dollars. Have they ever thought of looking here?
http://www.psd150.org/community/docs/2008-2009_Contracts_$25,000_&_Over.pdf
Check out all these ridiculous contracts. If they had asked the teachers, they could have told them that half that crap is worthless and saved us a few cool million $$. But no, the district is worried about a penny here and a penny there, paying their crack legal team thousands of dollars to squeeze out every last nickel from the teachers, at the same time forking out millions for worthless programs. What an interesting money trail that would be if someone bothered to follow it.
Let me think, hmmmm, Ken Hinton made horrible financial decisions as well as educational decisions and he is part of the charter school team. That alone is enough to say no to the charter school.
Don’t forget Gorenz and Spangler – both on the Charter committee.
I didn’t have anything to say in response to C.J., but I do have to respond to Jon, especially with regard to the transfer issue. By closing Woodruff, District 150 has put itself in a bind with regard to staffing Manual High School. Most of the Manual teachers are non-tenured; they will undoubtedly not be hired back for next year. Woodruff tenured teachers will have to be placed–and I doubt that any of them will want to go to Manual. This year Dr. Kherat has already sent out several letters to her current teachers (as she did last year), stating that these teachers are not a good fit for Manual–these are her handpicked teachers that replaced the “old” faculty that was unacceptable to Kherat. With or without a change in the tranfer policy, District 150 is going to have a problem staffing Manual. Doing it the fair way–by tenure–would, at least, cut down on the complaints of unfairness regarding the transfer policy. Having just finished my study of high school class sizes, I am convinced that Peoria High cannot handle 700 more students and that classes are too large at Peoria High and Richwoods to accommodate the incoming Woodruff classes without adding sections or, at least, maintaining the same number of sections–which, to me, seems to defeat the whole purpose of closing a high school. I FOIA’d class sizes for all current English, social studies, math, science, foreign language, and business classes. While some are under 25 (38% of all classes are 25 or over), I can’t see the possibility of combining the lower count to existing classes without ending up with classes of way over 25. That’s my guess–I’ll be curious to see how it turns out–and personally I believe 150 will be caught by surprise. Thirteen of PHS’s current rooms are used for special ed and 8 are used for Fine Arts–so I don’t think PHS has spare rooms for expanding. The latest rumor is that 150 does not intend to eliminate any administrative positions as a result of closing Woodruff.
Thanks, Peoriaparent, that list is another good reason for FOIAing (just who uses these programs and for what). Just the name “AHA Project” is a name that arouses suspicion. 150 buys these programs and has no way of evaluating their worth–teachers should be asked to evaluate–of course, their opinions count for little.
We have paid enough to Edison and to multiple Administrations with no results, Well some results ; Way in debt,people leaving for better well run schools,kids failing etc.Just try and teach the basic’s . do not repeat same mistakes over ‘n over. Until you have a balanced budget, spend no more $$ on pie in the sky programs.if you use tax payor money for this charter school attempt I for one will sell and move else where!
I think they should keep things exactly as they are, it’s working oh so well.
Doesn’t a Baldwin threaten to move out of the country every time there is an election? Popijw, any relation?
He is an ASS ,have no use for so called actors ,rather phonies! I offered to buy his ticket out but he declined!
Really Cameron, and where do your kids go to school? Let’s take a guess and say not Peoria Public Schools. Isn’t it amazing how those that don’t pay taxes or have kids here are such experts on Peoria Schools? Throw out all the carpet baggers and put power back in the hands of parents and taxpayers. No outside Admins, consultants or Committee people allowed. Then watch the quality of decisions being made on behalf of those “they serve” skyrocket – STAT!
I think the problem continues to be the hiring practices at 150. Carpetbaggers is a term I would not have chosen, but seems to fit well. We hire a H/R person with zero H/R background from an absolutely failing district in every sense of the word….does she live hear yet?? We hire a principal at Richwoods from another sub par performer in Centralia and ???Cahokia?? are you kidding me, this person has alienated everyone including the previous administration with his”higher standards”…it absolutely sickens me to see people like this given four year contracts when plenty of excellent candidates are passed over inside our district. Mcormick and Plunkett come to mind. Until we elect a BOE that doesn’t fall over themselves with every study, suggestion or rec from an outside consultant that hasn’t heard of Peoria Il but has all the answers we will continue to chase our tails and throw money down the drain. We have excellent talent in the classroom we need excellent talent on the BOE and in the offices on Wisconsin.
district150 parent2: Lets add the director of special services to that list. She, Mary O’brian lives in Towanda. Do you really think she is spending her money in Peoria? Is she paying taxes into Peoria county? NO. Plus she has done a horrible job.
Amen, why and how do these people get hired HELLO is anybody awake on Wisconsin?
we’d be in better shape if we dispensed with school board elections, and just picked several people randomly out of the phone book to serve on the School Board. Frankly, that would work just as well for the City Council, and several other entities.
All comments are well said. Did you note that one of the strong promoters of this “concept” is Tom Fliege lives in Metamora? Interesting that his small business is in Peoria and probably pays property taxes, if he owns the building personally, but that won’t affect his take home pay.
I have long supported competition to the public schools but funded by the private sector, not more taxes on the already overtaxed property tax payers in the district. I am opposed to this “charter” school.
I have “breaking news”, maybe old news to some, on my blog site about more taxpayer funding of the PRM.
C.J. – As progressive as you are, I am surprised you would take such a stance on the Charter School. I have to agree with Jon that Charter Schools are a solution worth trying in order to circumvent some of what ails the District. Attempting to convert the entire District to a charter concept will never work for all the reasons you identified.
I am sorry, but I believe you are completely wrong, in stating that a charter school will “only exacerbate District 150’s problems the same way Edison has.” IMO, the “choice” of Northmoor Edison has kept many families from fleeing the District and this alone has value, even if it come at a slighter higher cost.
I do agree with your statement that “the charter school, just like Edison schools, is an attempt to alleviate the symptoms of a deeper problem” and that is does not COMPLETELY address “the root issue,” however, that root issue in the case of the District is very hard to stomp out.
No strike. Tentative agreement reached. (Source: A friend in the meeting.)
Frustrated: I know how strongly you feel about the charter school–and from your point of view of a parent looking for an escape from 150, I understand your desire for this option. However, as you know, I agree with C.J. because 150 can’t continue to provide escape routes while doing nothing to improve the path that the majority of 150 students are forced to travel. The problems of the inner city schools just have to be solved or the schools north of War Memorial will fail also–it’s inevitable. The solutions, as you have pointed out, might not be the same for all schools, but appropriate solutions must be found for each of the schools. 150 is only as good as its weakest schools–that is how it has been and will continue to be judged.
Much of CJ’s premises rest on the idea that District 150 is exclusively focusing on the charter concept as a way of improving. While they may be failing in many or most respects, it isn’t for a lack of trying. That may not be good enough (and their progress is not acceptable to me), but it is a bit disingenuous to make it sound as though they are putting all their eggs in this basket. A charter school is just another attempt to correct their problems, but not the only one they are trying.
As for why not apply the charter concept district-wide, that is simply unrealistic. At the risk of running afoul of the “It’s Better Than Nothing” albatross, you do need to start somewhere. Tell me, CJ, if form based codes are such a great idea, why did your group “settle” for only two or three areas rather than changing the zoning code?
Sharon – I think a Charter School can be established while simultaneously addressing the student performance issues that plague the District. I do not think the District has done “nothing” to address the problem, but unfortunately, what it has done has been ineffective.
I think the future viability of Peoria depends on restoring a more representative socioeconomic mix back into the public school system. Sixty percent poverty in a school system makes it near impossible (see City & District budget) to operate effectively no matter how stellar the leadership is. I believe the Charter School will be a draw, and in any event, it offers those students already part of the District a much needed option.
“I know how strongly you feel about the charter school–and from your point of view of a parent looking for an escape from 150. . .” What does that really mean, Sharon? I am looking to opt into the District, not out. BUT . . . the District has to offer the type of programs that meet my children’s educational needs. And really in the end, don’t you want me on the team??? I am the room mom, the PTA rep., the fundraiser, and my children are equally involved in making whatever school they attended a success. I am sorry, but why would the District want to drive me, or Carrie, or Jon or any of the other pro-choice bloggers away from a school system that so desperately needs what our families offer??
In any event Sharon, Happy New Year!
Frustrated: I do understand your point about the charter school being a draw for you (but not into 150)–that is, of course, assuming the lottery system chooses your student (and Jon’s and Karrie’s). Clearly, you seem to be saying that you will only opt back in if the charter school or some other school draws you back in–that the current 150 schools are not satisfactory. I guess that’s my whole point. Drawing students into a charter school is not drawing anyone into 150–the charter school will not really be a 150 school; in fact, it will take tax dollars away from 150. I realize that the charter school will be a “public school” paid for with taxpayer dollars, but it will not be a 150 school. No 150 administrators, no 150 teachers, no 150 school board or central administration–not a 150 school, period. So you will not be returning to 150. I understand why you want it, but I don’t understand why 150 would want it–it will not help 150 in any way. After January 11 we won’t have to argue about it any more; one of us can rejoice; the other can whine–I will probably be the one whining. 🙂
EmergePeoria’s blog had a list of 4 types of school reform…D150 has engaged in all 4 kinds. (Link: http://emergepeoria.blogspot.com/2009/12/pushing-harder-line-for-weakest-schools.html). I don’t think that transformation is enough for D150’s schools. You have to change the entire culture of what happens in a school to move it from failing to achieving. It CAN happen, but not easily, and not without a wholesale buy-in for changing the status quo. We’ve all watched D150 long enough to note that change is not easy to sell here…educationally or otherwise.
There is real value in other types of school reform. The current set-up at Manual is likely not a turnaround that should be the basis for other similar reforms in D150…it might work better with a different approach in other schools. You all know I’m a fan of the Restart option (I swear I wont’ get into Edison here!)and I don’t see why it shouldn’t be given a try in the form of a charter school in Peoria. As an aside, I have a son that plays competitive soccer with several third grade boys, each of whom attends a non-D150 school (some in Peoria parochial, some in other districts). Of the 5 families that I’ve talked to in detail about the charter school, 4 would be willing to leave their current schools –even move– for a chance to attend a program based on science/math/technology. My point is that the interest is there, and it could well be a draw for D150. We need that from a PR standpoint in a very big way.
Do I think that every student in D150 is entitled to a fabulous education? Absolutely. I don’t think that one size fits all, though, when we consider how educational opportunities should be structured…choice is good. I think the charter school has the potential to be very successful and would be worth the financial output.
Entitled to a fabulous education? Entitled, really? Potential to be very successful? All schools have the potential to be successful if properly run. Most private schools are. Loucks Edison was very successful until administration placed “politically correct” and by “tenure” teachers in the position of Principal. Franklin Edison and Northmoor Edison were/are very successful under Valda Shipp and Nicole Wood. I believe Valda Shipp is now principal of Glen Oak so I do not know how Franklin is doing at the present time.
A Principal using a bull-horn in the cafeteria? Did any school board member ever visit a problem school unannounced to see what was actually going on?
If this charter school could break loose from the current sdministration (not including Durflinger) and the union, I could probably could support it.
The actions being considered right now are addressing some of the same problems the district had 15 years ago. The badly needed vocational school is still all “talk”. Check old files and you will find Roberta Parks and Linda Daley were prime pushers of the failed Academy concept that was finally discontinued in 2006. (see my blog in my archives dated 1/10/06. Teacher unions all across this country are opposed to ANY competition.
My children are beyond the age to attend the proposed Charter School, but should it be approved, it will indicate to me that the Board “gets it” – that is, the need to make radical changes to the way the District does business. Sharon, I will have difficulty otherwise, committing to purchasing property within a District that I believe is headed for further decline. I would love to live in one of the older established neighborhoods when I return, so I am still waiting for the Richwoods’ principal to implement my suggested College Prep Academy so that I can live anywhere in the City and still have my children attend Richwoods and take AP classes rather than participate in the IB program (which is an outstanding program, but perhaps not a fit for all students depending on their intended college major). But for now, I would be satisfied with the approval of the Charter School.
This seems odd – I have both a Mac and a PC – am on the PC now and see Charlie’s comment to my post – but didn’t see it previously on the Mac? Anyway…
Charlie said “Hang your demographics… they are all children. OUR children. There is no other relevant demographic.”
Here is what how wikipedia defines “demographics” – Demographics or demographic data are the characteristics of a population…Commonly-used demographics include sex, race, age, income, disabilities, mobility (in terms of travel time to work or number of vehicles available), educational attainment, home ownership, employment status, and even location.
So when I say “disparate demographics” I ain’t talking race – just in case that was your inference. I’m talking income, I’m talking disability, I’m talking mobility (in terms of how the district describes it – the high mobility in D150 wherein nearly 30% start in one school but finish the year elsewhere). And check out the test scores for those different demographics – the results are rather diverse. Sure, you can have high expectations of every student, regardless of demographics, but the simple fact is you generally have a much more difficult time teaching a kid who has no steady home, who is dirt poor, who has emotional trust issues, etc. than you do some kid with engaged parents and a stable home. So don’t you think your approach to those kids would/should be a little different?
And, Charlie, maybe you’re not talking race either – just equality, like you said. But in keeping with that equality theme, and your example of those who want choice and “those” others as you called them, remember that the charter will do it for 90% of the current cost, so why do you assume “those” will be in a a bunch of “lesser quality” schools? What is preventing them from being of the same quality? Financially, it is the charter school that is at a disadvantage. And that’s OK, because even though the charter school kids CAN come from the same population, the reality is that it won’t likely happen – that those parents who are involved with their children will be more likely to sign their kids up in the charter school.
D150 has much more varied demographics than the schools in Morton, Dunlap, Canton, et al, and I’m taking about demographics that I believe DO matter in education – namely income, disability and mobility. I believe that diversity is one of D150’s strengths (and yes, now I’m including race and different ethnic groups as well), and with its mass, it not only can but must provide additional choice.
This blog is living proof of that need to provide more choice – CJ wants one thing, Frustrated another, Peoria Parent something different and Merle, too. And Sharon, I really don’t care who gets the “credit”. I don’t care if it’s a “D150” school or a “charter” school – I just want as much choice as possible.
So there you have it in a nutshell, Charlie. You say one size fits all WILL work. Well, I don’t want it, Frustrated doesn’t want it, JC doesn’t want it, Merle doesn’t want it, etc. Or even those who might want one size often can’t agree on what that size is. Doesn’t sound like that fits us. Force it upon us, and D150 will continue down the path it has been on – continuing to lose more and more families to private schools and other communities like Dunlap. Yep, you’ll have one size fits all – for those who either like that particular approach or can’t go anywhere else.
Now I recognize you can’t offer every choice. Many would choose to have Woodruff, or Kingman, Tyng and Irving back. Let’s take Woodruff for example. If all of those working at Woodruff, that’s the administration, teachers, janitors, etc. simply chose to work with a budget of 90% of the average per pupil funds, as the charter school is proposing, then there would have been no need to close Woodruff.
Choice – those that we can make – or choose not to make.
Charlie – I bet you don’t have a horse in the race else you would have a different point of view. Demographics are the name of the game in terms of educational outcomes and for District 150, they have been their demise. For any chance of success, the District has to acknowledge and act upon those differences. The Charter School is just one stinking little school. It is not going to rob all the others of students or funds. My gosh!
18 teachers have left Glen Oak since Shipp took over a year and a half ago. She is very good at bullying parents, teachers, staff and students. Perhaps that is why she appears to be doing a good job. Oh, and discipline is out the window over there too! BTW, most of the teachers and staff left Franklin after she took over, not to mention how many families she “councelled” out of there”
Guys… take a few minutes and really read the other people’s comments… notice the language and the business point of view that they have. Education is not and can not be a business concerned with $ profits and losses. The profits are a future for our society and the losses are what are we are experiencing now with violence, apathy and economic collapse.
“Who wants to be sitting on the Board or in an administrative position when a school is taken over? Wouldn’t that be a resume killer.”
“put control of the public schools in the hands of outsiders, and enhance their own personal circumstances ”
“the charter school will do it CHEAPER AND offer longer hours/more services…it is what many of the “customers” want.”
Everyone is talking about the bureaucracy and not the students… it is precisely this fact that insures no program will work. It isn’t about the students or the community or the future… it is all business. It is all about the economy.
When are you going to stop and listen to those who care about WHAT the students are learning? Not how much (test scores), not how expensively (budgets) and not what for (job training). When are we going to simply EDUCATE the children and let them find some meaning in their own lives? After all, IT IS THEIR FUTURE, not ours.
Did you hear about the National Association of School Accreditation (or something like that) calling for extensive overhauls of the teacher training programs because they are not learning to teach… they are learning to MANAGE???
Jon says: “This blog is living proof of that need to provide more choice – CJ wants one thing, Frustrated another, Peoria Parent something different and Merle, too. And Sharon, I really don’t care who gets the “credit”. I don’t care if it’s a “D150? school or a “charter” school – I just want as much choice as possible.”
Jon, Choice is good so long as it is a choice between one successful model vs. another successful model. The only “choice” offered under the current proposal is 1. Choose to attempt to gain admission into the charter school or 2. Choose to remain in a failing, disfunctional, often unsafe non-learning environment (that after the closing of schools as recommended by the Peoria Chamber of Commerce we can only assume will be exasperated.) What kind of “choice” is that?
Lets be honest. The Charter committee is a one-issue group. Their only focus is advancing the development of the Charter School. They have not proposed a single idea to address the numerous remaining problems of the District proper. That is a glaringly huge flaw in their mission.
Charlie you make some very good points. IMO one huge obstacle is who is sitting on the charter school board. Get rid of Hinton, Spangler and Gorenz and I believe more people will listen to the positive features of the charter school. Even with good intentions those three were vital players in bringing District 150 down.
Yes, I did hear about the overhauls of teacher training. I hope something does change because it needs to. Too much theory is taught to future teachers. That is one reason I think ex-college professors make poor public school administrators, they are not practitioners they are theorists. They just don’t get it.
Frustrated: About your contention that, “The Charter School is just one stinking little school. It is not going to rob all the others of students or funds. My gosh!” Isn’t the money (1.7 million start up cost) the reason the board is giving for possibly not approving the charter school (wrong reason but theirs nonetheless). Isn’t money the reason Caterpillar is trying to get businesses and people from the private sector to kick in funds to support the charter school? I am confused–after the start up money is provided, will the charter school have all the money it needs to operate or will it continue to ask the public for more money? Jon, I am not asking that 150 “get the credit for the charter school.” My concern is that the charter school will not solve any of 150’s problems. As you have stated, the charter school will probably draw from students with “motivated” parents; therefore, 150 will lose more of the few motivated students that are left. Frustrated, I don’t know when you are planning to come back to Peoria, but I don’t think the problems will be resolved to your satisfaction any time soon; I doubt that you will be buying a home in Peoria. As always, I still firmly believe that 150 has to pay attention to its weakest schools–its reputation and success depends on it. Fix those schools and the others will improve also. Add programs, etc., to the highest performing schools and the weakest schools will just get worse. Frustrated, by that I don’t mean throw more money and programs at the weakest schools–I mean resolve the discipline issues–and I do believe the alternative school is an absolute necessity, but no one is talking about that.
I think all on this blog agrees EVERY child in District 150 deserves the best educational opportunities the district can provide.
My issue is that I see models working (yes, EDISON!), and yet they are not being replicated. If memory serves, one of the reasons the district wanted to bring Edison in was “to steal the best parts” and replicate them within other district schools. One of the cornerstones of the program is the benchmark testing and since that has been implemented in other schools, teachers are seeing how valuable a tool the system is. Of course it was a hard sell for some, but those who were open found them very helpful.
In addressing district wide issues, I would love to see more collaboration and cooperation between schools. If a school has a program that works – share it! We are all on the same team…why don’t we act like it?
Carrie, did Edison work at Loucks? I never hear much about Rolling Acres, but some of what I hear is not that great (considering the money spent on Edison)and other schools have better scores. I haven’t looked at this year’s scores at Franklin. With its current student body, I believe Northmoor would be a success without Edison.
On my way to work this morning I heard a commercial touting the advantages of a charter school in peoria, hoping to drum up financial support from the community. now where will future monies come from to run this wonderful school? off the backs of the rest of the children who arent fortunate enough to get in. dont kid yourselves, within 5 years the charter school will be filled with the who’s who of peoria. just another albatross to hang around the taxpayers…
I also have a real problem with Rob Parks being so involved in the charter school. Since when does she know anything about the field of education. How would she like it if educators came in and told her how to run the Chamber? She could actually use some tips.
“just another albatross to hang around the taxpayers…”
How is that any different then the current situation at district 150?
Charlie, you must have a brother – or maybe a shared soul. Your discussion of the current business focus on schools reminded me of someone:
http://kcdad.livejournal.com/20427.html
Judging by that link you two are obviously both aware of the discussion of revamping teacher training. You might want to read that blog as well, if you haven’t already. You might find some discussions you will like. I find it rather thought provoking and sometimes spot on 🙂
Sharon, I don’t know all of the specifics with regards to Loucks closing, nor will I speculate. In terms of Rolling Acres, I currently have a student there and I can say that the issues I hear of and experience are no different than what I hear about happening in other middle schools. From what I have heard, most of the issues come from administration and that can happen anywhere.
In terms of comparing the scores of Rolling Acres to other schools, Rolling Acres is most compatible in terms of demographics/population to Mark Bills. They both have 52% low income. Rolling Acres has 35.9% white, 55.9% black, 3.8% asian, 4.1 hispanic and .3% multi-racial students. Mark Bills has 36.9% white, 56.8% black, 2.1% hispanic, 3% asign, .4% native american and .8% multi-racial students. (Illinois Interactive Report Card).
2007 Meet/Exceed percentages: RAE – 78% MB – 68%
2008: RAE – 83% MB – 73%
2009: RAE – 79% MB – 74%
In 2009, RAE met AYP – MB did not
People can take these numbers and use them how they want to, but Rolling Acres by the numbers here show they are helping bridge the achievement gap between socioeconomic & ethnic groups. Isn’t that what we want for all of our schools? As a parent, diversity is important and when a school like Rolling Acres hosts that type of racial/ethnic mixture plus achieves respectable gains, certainly something right must be happening.
I am curious as to what folks expect from Edison other than what they are currently doing. I hear and read comments from those saying, “well, considering what the district spends on Edison”……What does that mean? Were people expecting Edison to fix every problem in the district? Sharon, you said with the current student body, Northmoor would be fine without Edison. The current student body is a result of 10 years worth of culture/achievement building. I will check with the school to see what percentage of students at Northmoor actually live within the school boundaries. It is easy for someone on the outside looking in would look at Northmoor’s scores and make that general statement about Northmoor being fine with or without Edison. Ask a current (not one who was there and then left!) Northmoor teacher if they think the school would be the same without Edison – interesting comments I am sure.
Again, everyone is going to decide for themselves if they think Edison is worth the cost. I know that the Edison benchmark system is now implemented in most primary/middle schools within the district. Did Edison have to offer? I think they are trying to be a good partner to the district as 150 tries to address raising student achievement. That willingness to partner and collaborate has to be worth something.
Carrie, I don’t disagree with your data, what I want to know is WHY D150 has not “replicated” this so-called “savior program” for ALL of their schools. Do you not get that ONLY the kids at the Edison schools have the extras. If it is such a grand program (Edison) then WHY did Loucks fail? Many students (with academic/behavioral issues) are counselled out of the Edison schools. Trust me, I know what I am talking about. It is easy to “achieve” higher scores when you have “dumped” the low achievers on the surrounding schools. They are NOT making low functioning students higher functioning students, they are simply taking higher functioning students to another level—which is done at EVERY school in this district.
As to Valda Shipp’s tenure at Franklin? I can only say when I visited her school and observed including asking for parent comments, things were positive. I have stopped visitng schools so I have not visited Glen Oak in two years.
150 Teacher – I don’t think anyone has ever claimed the Edison partnership schools to be “savior” programs. Why don’t you ask administrators or board members why the program hasn’t been replicated – it is their job to make those decisions, not mine.
Do I get that ONLY the Edison students have the extras? Are you kidding me???? I’m sorry, but my child isn’t at Manual where the District is spending over $11,000 per student…..what extras are you talking about? I CHOSE to send my children to a school partnership where they offer foreign language, fine arts, technology, and boasts a phenomenal character education program. What???? I’m taking advantage of other children because I made a choice for my children that other parents didn’t make for theirs???? The opportunity is available to every primary student in Peoria, so you criticize me for making that choice?
Again, in terms of Loucks – why do you feel Edison is the reason the school failed? I get the impression that no matter the real reason for Loucks closing, Edison should still be held responsible, right?
“Many students (with academic/behavioral issues) are counselled out of the Edison Schools. Trust me, I know what I am talking about.” I have a difficult time trusting someone with such a strong opposition who comes with no proof.
Thank you 150 teacher for helping me prove my point that no matter what is said or shown, people either like Edison or fear it….
Carrie, thanks for the numbers–I just hadn’t taken the time to check out the scores for Rolling Acres. I have meant to FOIA the Northmoor info–as to the area from which the school draws, but it’s been at the bottom of my FOIA list. I do agree with 150teacher with regard to the “cherrypicking” that goes on in the Edison schools–making it much easier to show improvement, etc. I believe it happens for the same reason Jon (somewhere above) believes that the charter school will succeed–the most motivated parents seek these opportunities for their children. However, I don’t blame parents for choosing the best for their children–I expect parents to do that. I blame 150 for not attempting to offer the best for all. You are so right about Manual–money right down the drain and way, way too much of it. As I pointed out at the BOE meeting, because of the Johns Hopkins program of 90-minute classes, Manual teachers see only 3 classes (75 students) per day instead of the 5 (125) that the teachers at the other schools see. That alone is a waste of money. I think Loucks with Edison failed for the same reasons that Loucks without Edison would have failed–students with many discipline and academic problems.
why is it that almost everyone I have spoken to is in agreement that Manual should be the school that is closed not Woodruff? Why are we spending that kind of money at Manual?