Wilmington City Council’s Meeting On Priority Schools
Last night I attended the City Council Meeting on Priority Schools.
I’ve stared at the above sentence for quite a while, not sure how to proceed. Mainly because I think last night was simply window dressing, a box checked off… the deal is done. These schools, imo, are headed for charter conversion, privatization or closure. The only question is when this will happen. Shortly after the December 31, 2014 Plan deadline? Or after the specified four year, approximately 6 million Plan doesn’t meet the standardized test bar?
Let’s look at this 120 day requirement. By my reading of the MOU that deadline is December 31, 2014. Today is October 10th. By my calculations that leaves approximately 50 working days (more if we count weekends, Thanksgiving and Winter breaks, but I’m not seeing that happen) to agree upon and sign the MOU, locate, interview and hire a school leader and develop the School Turnaround Plan. All of this must be completed by December 31, 2014. If not…
If the State does not agree with the LEA’s [District’s] proposal, the State can refuse to agree to the MOU. 14 DE Admin Code provides that if an MOU is not agreed to within 120 days, the LEA’s options are then limited to closure, reopening as a charter or contracting with a private management organization to operate the school.
Based on this paragraph, these six public schools could be closed, converted to charter or privatized on, or after, January 1, 2015. So… all this will happen if the Districts do nothing, or propose a plan that the State doesn’t approve. And make no mistake, the State has the final say in all things.
At the meeting last night, Theo Gregory said, “It’s rolled out as a priority plan, but it’s really a takeover plan.” I agree.
BTW, what happened to the last school the State took over? Well…
“After more than a year of warnings, Secretary of Education Mark Murphy and the State Board of Education voted unanimously Thursday to revoke the Maurice J. Moyer Academic Institute’s charter, meaning the school must close at the end of the school year.”
That’s one school. How will it go with six? And there were several people last night who called out the DDOE for being MIA and not supportive of these “priority” schools until now. I would be interested in knowing exactly how the DDOE has been working with these six schools for the past 12 – 14 years.
Take a look at what the State says in regards to the School Leaders:
Selection: The District superintendent is responsible for developing a plan to recruit, assess and select one or more nominees for a School Leader. The plan should include a position description, a strategy for recruiting candidates, and a protocol for interviewing, assessing, and selecting a School Leader nominee.
i. The State and District must agree on the selection of the School Leader by December 31, 2014. After the District nominates a School Leader, the State will interview the nominee and approve or deny the nominations. If the State denies the nominations, the District must make another nomination.
ii. Should the District fail to produce an approved leader by the Plan deadline of December 31, 2014, the State may provide a list of candidates from which the District must select. [emphasis mine]
So after the District develops a plan to recruit, assess and select school leaders – along with their recruiting strategy and protocol for interviewing, assessing and selecting their nominee – the State must agree with the Districts choice. If the State doesn’t agree then the District MUST make another nomination. And… if the District doesn’t get State approval for any of their candidates by December 31, 2014, the State MAY provide a list of candidates the District MUST choose.
Take a look at those capitalized words. Why wouldn’t the State be required (MUST) to provide a list of candidates should they reject the District’s choices? If they choose not to provide a list of candidates (and it seems that is an option for them) then the District wouldn’t meet the MOU December 31st deadline and the schools would close, go charter or privatize.
See how all roads lead to these consequences. And I think charter conversion and privatization is the real priority for these “priority” schools.
What’s infuriating is that we begin these discussions pretending we’ve actually tried to help these schools. We haven’t, and the State and Districts are both guilty of this. It isn’t as if the State and District are saying, “Hey, we tried smaller class sizes, putting more teachers in the schools, implemented equitable funding, added resources like wellness centers, school psychologists and put back programs such as TAG, Technology, Reading/Math specialists, Arts, etc. and these schools are still struggling so now we need to try something different.” They can’t say that because they never did that.
Last night several council people and the public questioned the testing and asked why the test kept changing? Seems as if the answer was that the DSTP and DCAS weren’t good enough? If that’s true then what have we been basing performance on all these years? What are we basing these priority school standards on? Why do we keep changing, and paying for, tests? I wonder where our State leaders end up after leaving office? I can take a guess, but I’ll wait and see.
And can someone please tell me why, yet again, our Secretary of Education keeps citing Eastside, Kuumba and Howard as schools to emulate? Howard is a high school. It’s Vo-Tech and has a different funding mechanism. Eastside and Kuumba are charter schools. All three of these schools are all choice schools. No student is assigned to these schools by an attendance zone. And up until recently, charter school applications and requirements were constructed to control their population – mandatory volunteer hours, asking about IEPs, a parent code of conduct form, not offering free and reduced lunch, assorted fees, etc. None of which a true public school can implement. And I really resent the comparison. So, let’s cut it out.
Another point made was how the 6 million over 4 years wasn’t adequate. Sec. Mark Murhy pointed out that the schools/districts could apply for additional funding through grants and other programs. The several teachers, parents and administrators I spoke to said they already did apply for most of these, but some monies came with heavy strings attached. I didn’t get into a lot of detail over this so if anyone has insight…
But another point about funding kept coming up. Secretary Murphy said several times that schools needed to look at their budgets and apply the money they already receive in a better way. Okay, maybe that’s true. I’m a bit doubtful since school budgets seems very specific and restrictive, but okay. Now, here’s what I’d like to do. I’d like to look at every cent the DDOE and District office spends and use it in a more productive way. Talk about a ton of make-y up positions. Just think of all the money that could be directed to the classrooms if we cut DDOE and District office by 30%. There are simply too many people at these organizations – Talk about top heavy. Seriously, DDOE and Districts, cut your budget, make your staffs reapply for their jobs – Do it for the children. And, if you won’t do this then why should we take you seriously when you talk about the urgency of now and drastic measures must be taken? Stop putting our children’s skin in the game when you refuse to put your necks on the line.
In closing, I’m not feeling hopeful. I think the deal is done and DDOE and Districts are simply going through the motions. Then again, I did call this years ago. The plan for the city is charter. At the time I said they’d have to keep one or two District public schools because they’d need these schools to take the children charters won’t take or keep, but now I see that those won’t be necessary since we’ll simply privatize those public schools.
It’s really sad. I don’t think there’s anything the city can do to change this trajectory. Any ideas?
Tags: Education, Featured, Priority Schools, Wilmington City Council
I noticed the lack of intellectual curiosity. Seizing an opportunity because the DOE uses a new label “priority school” without any due diligence, like what you have done here Pandora is reckless. I watched a few council members and civic groups last night give blinded buy in with no interest in what may happen if they purchase this “solution” from Dover.
It’s OK to support priority schools, but please, know exactly what it is you are supporting when you do.
Reckless? How so?
I don’t support this “priority school” plan, but tell me what happens if Districts hold their ground and refuse to sign the MOU, find a school leader, get a plan approved, etc. by December 31st? What happens then?
I am reminded here that the ‘new leaders’ have to be chosen and state executive branch approved by the deadline as well as the plan. And that the timeline is even more shortened by the holidays etc. to the point of all-but-curtained planned failure or built-in obsolescence.
I have heard there may be winds stirring up on the legislative branch to find some relief from this mandate. We’ll see.
Just as we all successfully insisted that a lot of other people needed to be in on the scheduled DDOE + Superintendent meeting last month, the same process should be followed every step of the way. So SICKENING.
Pandora,
The reason we have laws and administrative regulations is so that the lawyers can fight about them in court.
John no doubt knows more about the Christina board’s thinking, but I have a strong suspicion that, if DDOE unilaterally moves forward to take over any of these schools, one of the affected school boards will file a lawsuit, and that will forestall implementation of any new plan for another year.
One problem with that scenario, however: it would give Murphy one more year to pontificate about how the needs of poor kids are not being served while the onus would be on the districts to act on their own to improve learning conditions because DDOE won’t give any help while it’s the defendant in a lawsuit.
More likely, DDOE will back down slightly, give the districts a little more room to maneuver, and neither will come up with anything that will result in significant change in the outcomes in the classroom. They’ll tout their compromise as an example of the Delaware Way in action, and they’ll blame each other when there’s no change in test score results.
I don’t disagree, mediawatch. Perhaps John should have said that.
I have a problem with this timeline – it’s unrealistic and seems to be set up to trigger closure, charter conversion and/or privatization. This end game isn’t a secret. My pointing out the facts of the MOU/timeline, and how difficult it will be to meet the requirements, doesn’t make me reckless or a priority school supporter.
Its the Delaware Way to have public discussion AFTER the decision has been made. DNREC does it all the time.
Pandora,
I’m with you on the timeline.
It’s totally unrealistic to expect anyone to create a plan that’s meant to guide a school to immediate and long-term success within such a compressed time-frame.
The only logical inference is that DDOE wants the districts to fail. But I wouldn’t have any faith in the DDOE paperpushers having the talent to develop a plan that’s any better than what the districts develop.
I don’t have any faith in a DDOE plan or the Districts’ plans. Both have failed these kids for years.
Pandora, please please please accept my apologies. I meant to write, Unlike what you have done here. Effectively I I attacked you while meaning to point out your thoughtful and reasoned approach.
I certainly whiffed on proofreading.
Again, you HAVE the intellectual curiosity I was so desperately not seeing from public officials last night.
I was sobbing, John. 🙁
(No problem! But that did knock me for a loop!)
Actually, it was a comma that really did me in. Right after “Pandora” and all would have been well. My mind just missed it.
Commas matter.
Thank you for making the point about Kuumba and Eastside. The only reason they like making those comparisons is because those kids are black. They do not take into consideration the fact that choicing into those schools itself, weeds out the students who have parents who are not too involved in their children’s education. So all you are doing is creating a school where you only serve African American and Hispanic students who already come to the table with one of the greatest building blocks of scholastic success; devoted and attentive parents.
Of course their numbers are going to be good. You have essentially stolen the cream of the crop from the surrounding public schools. Not just stealing the students, but the activist parents as well. By dismissing that crucial fact, you boil the comparison down to only skin color. Spot on assessment Pandora.
Public schools generally suck in DE. Give us a MAJOR tax discount so that we can send our kids to CHARTER OR PRIVATE schools.
Public schools do not generally suck in Delaware. Know who has questionable intelligence? The person who thinks they need a MAJOR tax discount to attend a Charter school.
This is a pretty compelling argument for why Mark Murphy should be fired.
I was late to the meeting last night so only saw the last 45 mins or so. Murphy turning down a chance to respond to more questions was just arrogant. He had said his piece, he was going to say his closing piece and what anyone had to say or what questions anyone had were simply immaterial.
And why not? That MOU is a set of train tracks to charterization or privatization of those schools. Neither the state or the Districts wanted to do the work to make these schools work, so now there is a way to outsource their most persistent problem. If you are a parent with kids in the public schools here you have a very real problem. And at its core, you are sending your kids to educational facilities that are meant to be deficient. You are also living in a city whose leadership hasn’t been able to kick the door well enough to make the state or districts do better by their own kids (and why I do not endorse a city district). If you are someone who owns a house in the city, then you can prepare yourself for even more value from your home to be lost. Because no one moves to a city for a charter school. Unless you are the Charter School of Newark.
There is a repugnant odor emanating from Dover and DOE that is intended to mask the failures of all parties complicit in this conspiracy to give “more” taxpayer money to the corporate and non-profit speculators that are infesting public education with bureaucratic expansions and wasteful spending that does not reach the classrooms (eg $100 million in RTTT grants to consultants and panhandling non-educator groups that spring up like weeds in your garden)
Mr. Murphy, you are manipulating the facts and distorting the truth when you state that there has been “any” collaboration between the parties. You are implying that your department is offering “new resources” to these inner-city schools when you know damn well that you are offering pennies when dollars are needed and even these pennies are not intended too nor will they ever reach the children/classrooms. You proclaim that offers of support are being rejected when your blatant attempt to takeover schools is not an offer of support but a propaganda message intended to distract desperate families and city leaders by roiling the seas of anger against dedicated teachers, administrators and locally elected (obviously not your circumstance) board members. You state, “our system failed to provide low-income and minority children access to high quality education”. No! No!, Secretary Murphy, your system has failed to provide adequate resources and has, in fact, eliminated critical programs from public school by not replacing (or at least fighting to replace) funding cuts totaling over $30 million per year. Perhaps most offensive was your statement to wit: “For our young men of color, it is especially dire. They are more likely to be spending their days in jail than they are in a job,” Murphy said. “Collectively, we as a community can do a much better job for and with our children.” is an insult to the collective conscience of those (read: every teacher and administrator in all public schools that accept this challenge every day of their lives) who are trying to do a better job for “our children”. Maybe it is time for you to move on Mr. Murphy for the good of “our children”
Representative John Kowalko
Kuumba Parent/Guardian Commitment: http://www.kuumbaacademy.org/modules/groups/homepagefiles/cms/953202/File/2011-2012%20Parent%20Handbook.pdf
Keep comparing CSD/RCCSD schools to this Mr. Murphy…it reveals what you know and don’t care to address…
Parent/Guardian Commitment
ATTENDANCE and PROMOTION
1.I will ensure that my child comes to school every day at 7:30am to be able to begin the day’s activities at 8:00am. I understand that after 9:15am, my child will be marked absent for the day without a note.
2. I understand that school ends at 3:30pm. I will not interrupt instructional time to pick my child up early. I understand that I will not be permitted to go to the classroom and get my child, or request that my child be called down for an early dismissal at 3:00pm. I will be asked to wait until 3:25pm. If I make a scene, I understand that the Head of School or other administrator will be called to speak with me.
3. I will not schedule family vacations during school time. I will do my best to schedule important appointments for out of school time.
4. I will make alternative transportation plans if my child is required to stay at school 4:00-5:30pm (Monday-Thursday).
5. I understand that after school commitments are mandatory. My child will only be excused in case of an emergency, a maximum of one time permarking period.
6. I understand that my child will be automatically retained if he/she fails 2 or more core academic classes, or is absent for more than 18 days of the school year.
HOMEWORK and ACADEMIC SUPPORT
7. I will provide a quiet place to study and see that my student completes the necessary homework and 20 minutes reading nightly.
8. I will check my child’s planner and homework every night. I will sign my child’s planner and/or homework sheet every night.
9. I will help my child study for tests and quizzes and give them support when they need help and praise when they do well.
10.I will arrange for my student to be at tutoring if assigned by my student’s teacher.
11. I will stay informed about my child’s education and communicate with the school by promptly reading all notices from the school and respond, as appropriate.
BEHAVIOR and DRESS CODE
12. I will send my child in proper dress code everyday. If my child arrives out of uniform, I’ll arrange for a family member to bring proper attire. I understand that my child will serve after school detention from 4:00–5:30pm if he/she dresses out of uniform.
13. I understand that my child will receive a in-class cool down, recess detention, after school detention 4:00–5:30pm; Exclusion, In-School Suspended or Out-of-
School Suspended if they violate the code of conduct.
14. If student behavior requires it, I will come to school immediately. If Out-of School Suspended, I will remove my child from the building.
15. I understand that my child may be recommended for a behavior hearing with the
Board/Admin School Climate committee if he/she earns more than 2 suspensions/detentions in one month.
FAMILY SUPPORT and COMMUNICATION
16. I agree to work as part of a team for the academic success and behavioral
growth of my child. I will return phone calls, review and sign documentation sent home including planner, weekly progress reports, interim reports, report cards, and letters. I will attend parent-teacher conferences and meetings about my child.
17.I understand that instructional time is sacred at Kuumba Academy, therefore I will refrain from calling the school during the school day to speak with the classroom teacher. I understand that from 7:45am to 4:00pm if I contact the school, the front desk receptionist will take a written message for the teachers/staff members. These messages will be placed in the mailbox. Phone calls will be transferred to the classroom from 7:30am to 7:45am, and after 4:00pm.
18. I agree that if there is a change in a student’s routine, a note will be sent to school by the student in the morning. Notes can also be emailed to staff members. I understand that for the safety of my child(ren), changes to students routine WILL NOT be taken over the phone except in the case of extreme emergency.
19. I understand that in order to ensure effective communication between teacher and parent, parents are asked to arrange to meet with the teachers or staff during times when the teacher/staff do not have the responsibility of children.
20. I also understand that without an appointment, I may have to wait or schedule to meet with staff or administrators.
21. I will participate in the parent involvement program which includes 30 volunteer hours to the school community.
22. I will promote positive use of my child’s extracurricular time
.
It’s not as easy as saying East Side and Kuumba are successful because, as charters, they’re “choice” schools. By the same logic, Moyer should be successful, as should be the many Red Clay schools into which students choice to escape their neighborhood attendance zones.
In Moyer’s case, more than half its students at one time attended one of the to-be-designated “priority schools” — so their parents have choiced them out of schools that failed them, but choicing them into Moyer didn’t magically make them better students. (For what it’s worth, I’ve been to Moyer this year, talked to its staff and believe they’ve got a chance of achieving real gains for their students this year. Maybe they won’t get back to grade level in a year. Considering where they started, that’s asking too much. But I think that, at year’s end, the results may well show that the state board acted prematurely in ordering the school’s closing.)
Anyhow, it’s not as simple as choice vs. non-choice. It’s more about the resources (financial, human capital and, yes, involved parents) and how they’re deployed. It’s fair to say that neither the state nor Red Clay nor Christina has done a good job allocating and deploying resources at the schools designated for the priority program. With regard to the charters, the evidence (anecdotal, anyway) seems to suggest that involved parents are a valuable resource to have and that, in many cases, the charter managers, by virtue of being in the building, do a better job than administrators in district or DDOE offices in deploying resources for the benefit of students.
Maybe that’s a lesson for the districts to learn from the charters — that the building principals need more autonomy to decide what’s best for the kids they see every day. DDOE, of course, will try telling you that that’s what “priority schools” are all about, but the reality is that their rules put them clearly in charge, and autonomy becomes a sham when it must conform to DDOE’s preconceived notions.
Sorry, I’m rambling tonight and not perfectly clear, but there’s not a lot of clarity to this issue. Let’s keep the discussion alive.
agree, just suggesting the Secretary stop making comparisons when there are significant differences in rules and selection and always will be as public non charters must and should take, every child entering their portals.
Also, failing = test scores. No proof of efficacy for the scores having meaning, just because. And remember, and I’ll piss off some teachers here, these tests are administered by teachers. Yes, the same ones facing consequence for the results.
In Delaware, Charter schools are the cicrca. 2009, “too big to fail” effort in education. RTTT money came directly from ARRA stimulus.
http://www.nea.org/home/31061.htm
See Atlanta.
“You are also living in a city whose leadership hasn’t been able to kick the door well enough to make the state or districts do better by their own kids (and why I do not endorse a city district).”
They’re kicking the door barefoot. They have no power, and the schools people know it; therefore there is no amount of kicking that will “make the state or districts do better by their own kids.” There are lots of legitimate complaints to be made about the city’s so-called leadership, but this is not one of them.
They have no legislative power, certainly. But the possibility of some political power is certainly there. There have been I don’t know how many State Rep and Senator elections where the city’s political leadership did not push these folks for some commitments on better treatment of city schools. Has anyone asked the DOJ to look at discriminatory practices by the state and school districts towards Wilmington schools? (They might have, I don’t know). Or even just taken the state or a school district to court to try to force better behavior? How about getting a review of school board organization to make sure that the city is better represented? Or even an organized effort to recruit and get elected better representatives on the school board for the city? There isn’t even a voice to rally around on this issue, but there are plenty of council and administration voices to complain when the cameras are turned on. I think that there are pressure points, but I don’t think they’ve been used. And none of those things is a guarantee of change — but it does up the squeaky wheel factor.
“There have been I don’t know how many State Rep and Senator elections where the city’s political leadership did not push these folks for some commitments on better treatment of city schools.”
Agreed, but it’s a chicken or egg situation: Do they not campaign on that because they know it’s fruitless, or is it fruitless because they don’t campaign on it?
My thought is that campaigning on this would be somewhat dishonest — it’s an easy issue to demagogue, hard to do anything about. City leaders are kept on an economic short leash for a reason: To rob them of control.
I know squeaky wheels who have hollered about this for 30 years. They’re still squeaking, and no oil can has ever been spotted. It’s disenfranchisement of the minority population, pure and simple, and the schools are just one of many victims.
@geezer Do they not campaign on that because they know it’s fruitless, or is it fruitless because they don’t campaign on it?
I agree that campaigning for a city school district or legislation to give any control of oversight to city authorities would be disingenuous if not dishonest, because the chances of mustering a veto-proof majority in the GA (which is what you’d need with either Markell or Biden as Governor) are somewhere between zero and negative one.
On the other hand, I think there is a legitimate hope (in the 2-3 year range) of changing the conversation toward more decentralized administration and revised funding of these schools in such a way as to pragmatically (de facto) if not formally (de jury) tie them to the city.
If we could every get to the point where we had School-Community committees with actual fiscal and hiring/firing power, there are models that would allow the city to take a more direct (and positive) hand in school governance and other issues.
And I honestly don’t think that anything is going to change until they are able to do so. Theo Gregory’s comment about this being the only city of its size in the country without its own school district (if accurate: I haven’t checked) is both telling and damning.
I agree that campaigning for a city school district or legislation to give any control of oversight to city authorities would be disingenuous if not dishonest, because the chances of mustering a veto-proof majority in the GA (which is what you’d need with either Markell or Biden as Governor) are somewhere between zero and negative one.
I agree with this and nor am I advocating a City District. Mainly because the people running this city are not doing a good job of running what they are responsible for now.
The list of actions I posted above (which are abit more than hollering) would be focused on getting the DOE and school boards more accountable to city parents and kids. You don’t need your own school district to have the DOE direct school boards to stop waiving class size standards in specific schools. You don’t need your own school district to work with DHSS to see how they could help wrap some needed services around families that need it. If the DOE can direct the selection of school principals, they can direct the provision of tutoring and counseling services. You get the idea — this is basically a rehash of Pandora’s point in this post.
When candidates campaign in the city, education is certainly part of the pitch. Even by people with no hope of having any control over education here. It is eye roll worthy because it is pandering — none of the folks talking about improving education are willing the throw the kinds of bombs needed to get the DOEs attention. Seriously, this year is supposed to be the Dem GOTV year, right? What would happen if the City Committee told Gov. Markell that the city party is sitting this election cycle out. If we’re going to be that disenfranchised, then maybe we should play the part.
No one in the city has these kinds of cojones, but still.
I appreciate what both of you are saying. Maybe they pass up the opportunity to even demagogue on the issue because they know they can’t deliver anything and they’ll look bad when they fail to.
Maybe if we create a mechanism to shift the handling of all the social ills that the public schools have to handle to the public libraries it will lead to a more equitable distribution of the money?
Only kidding, I think.
Interestingly enough, Governing Magazines cover story is on Memphis, TN and “a year inside the nation’s most ambitious effort to fix failed schools.” Maryland quite famously took control of Baltimore schools in 2006 and was able to produce pretty good results and turnaround over the next 4 years and Memphis seems to be doing the same.
I understand it has to be very difficult for those in charge and employed in these schools, like the state is looking at all of them and saying its their fault. Truth is, the entire system around these schools is broken, there is no one easy culprit to point to.
I think there is enough evidence and precedence from around the country that shows school takeovers and turnarounds can have positive outcomes to say blowing up the current system and trying something different may be the most efficient way to achieve better results.
Unfortunately blowing it up and starting new means blowing up SOMEONE’s system, and that sense of ownership and responsibility will like get in the way. The only outcome people should be worried about is a better education for the students, not whose name is on letterhead, whose plan it was, or who got to pick the color of the dodgeballs ordered for gym class.
Mediawatch.. Moyer does not count because many of those kids, not all, were forced to choice there because they were kicked out of the other school districts.
So it was a not a situation where their parents rushed them to moyer for a better opportunity at a great education, but rather Moyer became the only school within the region that would accept them and had the space available. Totally different scenario.
Bane,
You’re leading right to a point I’ve made about Moyer in a number of conversations: the school has taken kids who have failed elsewhere, who are years behind grade level, who have bad discipline records and often have special education needs — in other words, the stars are perfectly aligned for massive failure, and the State Board of Ed then orders that the school be closed because the kids aren’t performing up to their standards. And they voted to close the school even though Moyer has a new administration that is already showing signs of cleaning up the mess that it walked into.
And the Moyer situation also feeds into what’s going on with the schools designated for priority status — given all the circumstances that are part of the schools’ mix, each one has to be judged differently, and each one may have to be turned around differently.
A big part of the problem with the DOE’s proposed fix is that, to the extent that each school’s turnaround is “individualized,” it will also have to satisfy the mandates that DOE has promulgated in its turnaround manual. That may or may not be good, but given that Delaware’s state education system, with its rigid funding and staffing requirements and its excessively formulaic data-driven standards has in a very significant way contributed to the deteriorating performance of these schools, perhaps DOE should first acknowledge its share of the blame before imposing its will on those who have been victimized by its leadership.
in other words, the stars are perfectly aligned for massive failure, and the State Board of Ed then orders that the school be closed because the kids aren’t performing up to their standards
These stars have *always* been aligned for massive failure here — yet the state gave them a thumbs up, gave the school to a turnaround agent and still can’t fulfill its mission. The thing about charters was that they were supposed to do so much better with so much less. They were supposed to be these labs of innovation and achievement and Moyer never really got off of the ground, right? Charters that do not deliver on the miracles they promise *should* be closed. And the state’s DOE should use this as a lesson on the limitations of charters.
I’ve written about the charter changing objectives/messaging in the past. It started out being: Charters get better educational results for less money. When that proved to be a lie, the message morphed into “Choice!” When was the last time you heard that first message being used? Not lately.
But charterizing and privatization remain the end goal of the MOU and the state’s plan. Just watch how the MOU ends up – and how everyone (not those on this blog) will cheer about district/state compromise while ignoring the trigger that sends these schools into charter conversion or privatization. Then, four years down the road – when those who’ve implemented this under-funded plan are gone – we’ll either begin the charter/privatization conversion or be saying that the schools already converted have failed.
That’s the end game, and my bet is no matter how much tweaking the state and the districts do to the MOU, neither will touch the part that mandates closure (not happening), charter conversion and privatization. Keep your eye on that, because that’s the point.
Really?
I think you are on the right path.
“I think there is enough evidence and precedence from around the country that shows school takeovers and turnarounds can have positive outcomes to say blowing up the current system and trying something different may be the most efficient way to achieve better results.”
What your talking about is leadership.
“Because management deals mostly with the status quo and leadership deals mostly with change, in the next century we are going to have to try to become much more skilled at creating leaders.”
John P. Kotter
Pandora has been right on about the objectives here, and clearly a lovely privatized take-over is planned. What I’m so stuck on, however, isn’t that the state wants to privatize the schools…we are, after all, corporate lackey’s in every other instance possible. What brought m to a halt was this, “For our young men of color, it is especially dire. They are more likely to be spending their days in jail than they are in a job,”
He DARED to go there? He DARED to tell a room full of parents, teachers, and community activists, people who live this every day, that their work wouldn’t rescue their children, so they had to step aside and let The Great White Father do it. Reapply for your jobs, and we’ll see.
I still cannot believe it. We have destroyed, as a matter of policy, those schools, the City of Wilmington, and the neighborhoods for… what number shall we place? Charters? Building I-95? Segregation? Slavery? What would we like as a start date? So now, step aside and let the grown-ups handle it.
You could hear my howl all the way to Boston.
That was why Justin Wright called him out for his arrogant, condescending remarks and tone. On the spot.