"Motivated, advantaged kids are going to do well in any event, because their parents have the ability and resources to see that they do. The really hard job is in creating strategies that will reach disadvantaged kids and their families and in doing whatever it takes to make sure that those kids can also take full advantage of the opportunities those schools present. THAT would be world-changing! Penn, are you up to THAT job?"
Karen, I completely agree with your assessment. But it's not a benign plan which simply doesn't live up to the promises. I like the challenge you put out. But if this plan had social justice behind it, Penn would not have attempted to deceive the local people into believing that Penn was casting a wide net to provide a better education for their kids. It's all about the money. Trickle down economics forces the government to pony up taxpayer money on private schemes. There is always a threat that the big business will pull out unless taxpayer money is diverted from libraries and schools to support the scheme. That threat of pull-out remains throughout the partnership and is sometimes done like Drexel pulling out of schools recently and Penn pulling out from Lea in 1969. Our district is distressed and officials vulnerable. Everyone knows that Penn has a massive propaganda machine. Putting this scheme out as more charity creates a risk if the officials ask the hard questions. I've seen it time and again. The choice is simple. Give Penn what it wants or they are gone and officials are blamed for turning down "opportunities." Why must a distressed district donate a building and fix it up to provide Penn its laboratory. New Penn/Drexel professors buying planned condos pay very little taxes for 10 years. Sure it's nice for wealthy people to get the best free education for their kids while poor city residents pay for it. I want to see the financial proposal for the school because I don't believe a lot of vague promises designed to appeal to a city with very serious financial problems. I think its terrible to fool people desperately hoping for some trickle down effect that never comes. And it's terrible to cheat them out of their meager resources because people feel so desperate to try anything that might help. I don't feel that we should all shut up like Mr. West demands. Asking the questions and discussing these issues does not mean that we are racists wanting to trap people in ghettos. The way I see it, Penn should either take up your challenge, start paying taxes, or build and fund its own laboratory. Maybe all three things should happen. Sincerely, Glenn ----- Original Message ----- From: KAREN ALLEN To: SH ; [email protected] Sent: Friday, April 04, 2008 12:29 PM Subject: RE: [UC] Penn schools > Don't you think that Penn is mainly interested in getting free schooling for their professors and well paid staff in the neighborhood who normally would send their children to private school? > Sharon Yes. And also to make Penn's graduate education program more competitive by offering its own student teachers internships in a highly acclaimed "urban" elementary school [Penn Alexander], populated by a well-behaved, highly motivated, upper middle class student body. If UC High becomes a Penn partnership school, then Penn can offer its grad students teaching opportunities in a similar "urban" high school, and Penn Alexander grads will have a top-notch neighborhood high school. http://www.gse.upenn.edu/cms/cms.php?id=171 http://www.upenn.edu/campus/westphilly/pas.html#PAS4 Although Penn's website mentions working with Philadelphia public schools other than Penn Alexander, having what amounts to its own elementary and high school gives Penn's Graduate School of Education (GSE) its own "lab". This arrangement accomplishes two goals simultaneously: both the GSE student teachers and the Penn Alexander students receive a stellar education. And the GSE has the advantage of not having to waste precious educational time dealing with the social ills that other public schools have do deal with. The existance of Penn Alexander is causing its catchment area to undergo gentrification, and that would be increased if UC High became "Penn-Assisted High". Penn employees and young people with children will want to send their children to a top-notch public school, and will move to the catchment areas, in turn creating a more upscale neighborhood, in turn reversing the public perception of the neighborhood being dangerous, in turn making it easier for Penn to market the University. Rising property values would eventually force those deemed undesirable out of the area. While Penn is saying that 70% of a new UC High's students would come from the neighborhood, the gentrification that Penn-Assisted High would very likely cause would mean that the "neighborhood" would probably not consist of the same people who live there now. Having top-notch public schools is the obvious ideal, and if Penn Alexander and possibly UC High are such schools, that is wonderful. But these schools have to exist across the board, not just in select neighborhoods for select demographics. The key is creating Penn Alexanders in all of the city neighborhoods. Motivated, advantaged kids are going to do well in any event, because their parents have the ability and resources to see that they do. The really hard job is in creating strategies that will reach disadvantaged kids and their families and in doing whatever it takes to make sure that those kids can also take full advantage of the opportunities those schools present. THAT would be world-changing! Penn, are you up to THAT job? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.5/1359 - Release Date: 4/4/2008 8:23 AM
