The School Reform Commission (that is the School District's direct boss
these days) announced the sixth straight year of gains in test scores
since the SRC took over Philadelphia's public schools in December 2001.
The mood was upbeat at SD HQ on N. Broad St. this afternoon. It's not so
much that 2008 posted handsome gains; rather, the reform model the SRC
followed from the beginning was very research-oriented, very
outcome-oriented, and over time has delivered what it was asked to deliver.
From 2002 to 2008, the percentage of students rated "advanced or
proficient" in reading has gone from 23.9% to 44.8%. Those scoring
"advanced or proficient" in mathematics have gone from 19.5% to 49.0%.
"Below basic" numbers have tumbled accordingly -- in reading, from 49.4%
to 33.2%; in mathematics, from 59.2% to 30.8%.
A confident hope expressed by SRC Chairwoman Sandra Dungee Glenn was the
ever-more-impressive results delivered by the Philadelphia School
District will be rewarded by the General Assembly with substantial net
gains in this year's Pennsylvania State budget, which is in the final
hours of negotiations now.
The press conference was ill suited to single-school or single-manager
discussions. Dungee Glenn did, however, emphasize the SRC is relatively
satisfied with all three management models -- SD schools, charter
schools and EMO schools (which include the Penn partnership three)
because all three models have been showing impressive gains.
"We are moving away from model comparisons and an emphasis on
competitiveness," Dungee Glenn elaborated. "What we do need to learn
from those schools that are doing well, are best practices that can be
transmitted to other schools under different management."
At this point, I'm not prepared to follow Ray's advice and "move out" of
the SD's "catchment areas" -- just give up on Philadelphia, in other
words. There are remarkable signs our city may be in the process of
figuring out something new and important about urban public education.
Pessimism never goes out of style in this area, with good reason, so I
respect everyone's cynicism to a point. But we should stay open to the
possibility something new and better is coming down the pike -- maybe
even in our neighborhood.
-- Tony West
Anthony West wrote:
Markets don't, in themselves, maintain inequalities. Segregationists
who argue people of different classes should never live side by side,
because that can only harm the lower classes -- they do maintain
inequalities, don't they? I don't share their views.
We have fundamentally different interests in this discussion. I am
interested in the real challenges and choices facing urban education,
because I have a kid in the system and that makes me think about the
subject more than I otherwise might. You are looking for occasions to
complain about Penn and capitalism, as usual (two obviously allied,
but somewhat distinct, critters). Outcomes don't matter to you; only
judgements matter. Always the same judgement, too.
I'll leave you to your pet judgement. I'll continue to comment on the
real challenges and choices. Urban education in Philadelphia is at a
crossroads. Wherever it is headed next, one thing's for sure: it's
not going back to that "egalitarian" quagmire of guaranteed low
expectations for every child, especially when he's a child of color.
the solution to your school choice problem is simple: sell your house
and move out of the catchment area. why limit your options now that
your son has graduated to high school? instead of freaking out about
the system and the egalitarian quagmire, shop around! it's outcomes
that matter -- and besides, only segregationists, not markets,
maintain inequalities.
..................
UNIVERSITY*CITOYEN
----
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
<http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
