A Good Day Teaching

SELL 440 North Broad Street!

2011-12-01T16:37:00.000-08:00

As School District of Philadelphia principals got the bad news about further budget cuts today, I could not help think about ways the district could raise money without hurting the students they supposedly exist to serve. If everything is really on the table as far as budget cuts go, it might be time to think radically about how to raise money and cut costs. The school district has many empty parcels of real estate sitting around, but most of them are not in a condition to be sold for market value. However, there is one building and parcel that is worth at least thirteen million dollars that the head honchos could unload if they REALLY meant what they said about caring about children--that parcel is School District Headquarters: 440 North Broad Street. According to the Office of Property Assessment website, the SDP headquarters is valued at 13,000,000.00 dollars and is owned by the school district. Why does this building need to exist anyway? All the people that work there can be dispersed to buildings that the district owns and can't get rid of. The recently abandoned George W. Childs School comes to mind: after all if it was good enough for students to inhabit last year, it should be could enough for adults to work in now. In this age of electronic communication, every central office employee does not need to work in the same building, or even the same neighborhood. Different offices could work in different buildings, superintendents and their staffs could be dispersed throughout the regional offices that already exist. The SRC could take its act on the road and have the meeting in a different school auditorium each time--that would not only bring them closer to the people they supposedly serve, it would enable them to see the conditions of the schools they expect the students to learn in. What could be the possible objections to this plan? Why not get at least thirteen million for the schools? Certainly SDP officials and office staff will not mind sacrificing their nice, air-conditioned, secure building with functioning elevators for less plush digs? After all, if our purpose is to serve and educate the children of Philadelphia, how can the big-wigs object to doing everything possible to save money? If we cannot afford enough staff and supplies for our schools, how can we afford a big, half-empty building that exists largely for show? It is time for officials to put their money where their mouth is, and--if they really care about the children of this city--sell 440 North Broad Street and join the rest of us in the real world of school buildings!

The Myth of the 70,000 Empty Seats

2011-11-14T15:12:00.000-08:00

When the SRC’s Facilities Master Plan was unveiled last week, there was some surprise, some relief, and some criticism. Many media outlets wondered why so few schools were being closed when there are 70,000 empty seats district-wide. But, let’s take a closer look at the alleged 70,000 seats sitting empty in our public schools. Do this many empty seats truly exist? Many of us who work in buildings with ‘empty seats’ contend that this number is vastly inflated. Kristen Graham, of The Inquirer, recently reported that 10,000 of those empty seats are in ALREADY closed buildings. SO, why include them in the total? Those seats are already out of circulation. Some parent advocates and educators point out that the number of alleged empty seats seems to keep rising rather quickly.

Although the authors of the facilities master plan insist they counted accurately, I can think of several reasons why they might not have: Special Ed Rooms, Science Labs, Computer/Writing Labs. For example, my school (like many others) has a variety of Special Education classrooms. These rooms are for Life Skills Support, Autistic Support, and Multi-Disabilities students and have a legal cap on the amount of students assigned to them. That legal cap is far less than the 20-33 students a regular education classroom can hold—in some special education classes only 6 students may be in the class. If the people tallying up empty seats mistakenly count the rooms used for special ed classes as being able to hold 33 students, they have vastly over-counted “empty’ seats. In our school, we were lucky enough recently to be able to turn two rooms into a science lab. Although that lab can serve all 400 and some kids in the school, those two rooms can no longer be counted as classrooms that can hold 66 more students than we already have. The same holds for the computer and writing labs that some schools have. Most people believe that the Ohio firm hired to tally the empty seats never went through buildings to see actual use. I do not believe they had an accurate picture of how space is utilized in our buildings. They simply used old data to count classrooms, multiplied by students, then took 75% of that number, and came up with a number of “empty seats”.

The ways space is utilized in schools in the twenty-first century is necessarily different that the way space way used when many of these buildings were constructed in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. To give our kids the “Twenty-first Century Education” all the edu-crats keep talking about, space is needed for more than just classrooms crammed to the gills with 33 students apiece (just ask some of the over-crowded Northeast schools). Students need libraries, other research spaces, meeting spaces, and laboratories. If we are going to close schools based on some theoretical number of “empty seats”, the powers-that-be should at least do the hard work of walking through every single building to see how space is actually utilized every day.

We Need More Good Guys and Fewer Test Prep Gurus--Guest Blog by Natalie Hunter--

2011-10-09T13:43:00.000-07:00

Fresno County California School Superintendent, Larry Powell, has decided to save his school district by technically retiring and foregoing his $288,000 yearly salary for the remaining three and 1/2 years of his term. The first plan was to be rehired with a $31,000 per year salary, yet Powell has decided to give that to charity. Powell said in an interview on MSNBC TV's 'The Ed Show,' "It's time for us to step up and do something. America has always given. It's a time to do that thing right now."

Powell's approach to education reform appears in stark contrast to that of Philadelphia's superintendent who leaves office with a controversial $905,000 buyout package. Education Week states that the controversial private donors have withdrawn from the buyout, leaving the Philadelphia School district to bear the entire cost. "How much do we need to keep accumulating? There's no reason for me to keep stockpiling money," Fresno's superintendent, Larry Powell, 63, is quoted as saying by the Associated Press.

Powell also gave up his $250,000 life insurance policy and says that he will be added to his wife's health care plan. Because of taking early retirement, according to the superintendent, he will receive $28,000 a year less in pension payments for the rest of his life. Larry Powell said that the decision was a serious one that he discussed at length with his wife. Computing that if he lived to be 87, the age of his parents now, he would lose $900,000 in pension benefits, including $200,000 less in earnings for the remainder of his term. Clearly a significant sum of salary, pension and other benefits, Fresno Superintendent Powell decided to sacrifice personal gain for the sake of education in his district.

U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan has applauded Powell for his gift. Duncan issued a statement that said in part, "Larry Powell's leadership is an absolute inspiration. Through a lifetime of dedicated service in education and his generosity, he has made it clear that he is personally and professionally invested in the students, parents, teachers and principals in Fresno. They are very lucky to have him."

Indeed Fresno is very fortunate to have such a leader as Larry Powell. In a time when school districts across the country are struggling to make ends meet and countless teachers, media specialists and other educators are unemployed causing the quality of education to decline, the example of Mr. Powell is like a beacon in the wilderness that is the United States' public educational system, whether we're dealing with traditional or online schools. Individual courage to stand up and make sacrifices for the greater good is just what is needed now, and perhaps others will follow his lead to save our education system. Natalie Hunter

Arlene Has Left The Building!

2011-08-22T13:09:00.000-07:00

Well, something many teachers, administrators, parents and others interested in education have been hoping for has happened: Dr. Arlene Ackerman has left her position as Superintendent of Philadelphia Public Schools. There are many reasons this has come to pass, and there are many reasons most people I know are relieved (if not thrilled). What mistakes made Ackerman reviled by so many? How can this be avoided by our next leader? The key word here is leader. In my mind, and that of many others, a true leader works collaboratively and values the opinions and ideas of his/her subordinates. To quote General Eric K. Shinseki: "You must love those you lead before you can be an effective leader. You can certainly command without that sense of commitment, but you cannot lead without it. And without leadership, command is a hollow experience, a vacuum often filled with mistrust and arrogance." This was the problem with Ackerman's "leadership"---she never really got her troops on board. While I never particularly liked her or thought she did an effective job, I do believe she did/does care about the children she serves (at least some of them). Her main mistake was her imperious and arrogant attitude and actions. Ackerman claimed to not be sorry that she is not a politician, but some basic human relationship skills are needed to run a school district. Ackerman never seemed to be able to connect with teachers--sometimes a seemingly simple thing can leave an irrevocable bad impression. This is how 'the queen' lost the teachers at my school early on in her tenure: A lovely and understandable photo-op--Ackerman was going to read to the kindergarten and pre-k classes. First mistake, she arrived with a large retinue--one member's major function seemed to be to hold her purse and hand her her reading glasses. Imperiousness does not play well in Philly (as many sports stars and politicians can attest). Her biggest mistake, though, was to leave the school with the two 'goody baskets' of books and stuffed animals that publishers had donated for the reading. The kindergarten teachers were appalled--they had thought they could have the books for their classrooms--and they never forgot that the queen walked out of a North Philly high-poverty school with two baskets of books that students could have used. Now, maybe Ackerman donated those books to some place that needed them--but the problem is she did not communicate, and so left an indelible impression of haughtiness, greed, and disconnection with schools. Teachers have long memories, and they take a slight of their school and kids quite hard. Ackerman also seemed to be quite bad at communication in general: she evinced a "my way or the highway" tone that many found hard to swallow. No one faulted the fact that she wanted schools improved, but many of her initiatives (scripted curricula) seemed to imply that teacher expertise and commitment were non-existent. Over and over again, Ackerman's apparent inability to empathize with her stakeholders tripped her up. Who can ever forget her spectacularly inadequate response to the abuse of Asian students at South Philly High? She came across as nasty and out-of-touch in that instance and many others. When people wanted to speak their minds or challenge her ideas--even in a collegial manner--she was intemperate and rude: she famously snapped at both a young high-school student at an SRC meeting and at TFA member at a UPENN meeting. All these incidents piled upon each other until many in the Philly education trenches thought she was way too removed from real education life (she has been out of the classroom since 1980) and issues to be of any use in solving Philadelphia's problems. As PFT leader Jerry Jordan stated today, we need a leader who wants to collaborate and work with ALL constituents--parents, students, teachers, administration, and politicians are all important to the smooth running of the district. I think we can all hope that our next leader has learned something from our last one: If we all want what is best for our students and schools, we need to come together and work collaboratively in a collegial manner on ideas and initiatives to benefit our students.

The (almost) Unbearable Sadness of Teaching

2011-06-23T19:52:00.000-07:00

The texts started coming in early on a Saturday morning: "Did you read...?", "Isn't that the name of....?", "Wasn't he in Mrs.________'s class?" And, sadly, the answers were, yes, yes, and yes---the 20-year-old man who was being sought for an awful crime had once been a student at our school. This is the kind of outcome that none of us wants for our students, but it is one we sometimes live with nonetheless. The alleged criminal had last been a student at our school in sixth grade--his fifth grade teacher remembers a quiet, sweet-faced boy who she cannot quite connect with the crime he is accused of committing. She said she felt like she had been 'punched in the gut' when she heard the news--unfortunately, I knew what she meant--I had felt similarly short-of-breath and deeply sad when one of my former students was arrested last year. My grade partner said about the same situation that 'it hurt her heart', and I knew the feeling: many, many times teachers' hearts and spirits are battered by the things that happen to their students. I think it is one of the great, silent burdens of teaching: as uplifting as it can be on many days, you always seem to be waiting to have your heart broken--and you will. We are with our students many hours per day. We know their parents, siblings, grandparents, their struggles and triumphs, their favorite foods, what they are allergic to, what they worry about, and what they are afraid of, proud of, and wish deeply for. In many ways we are a particular kind of family. Like family, we see each other at our best and worst and somehow find something to like about each other every day. We drive each other crazy, make each other laugh, and stand up for each other, and when one of our own comes to a bad end our heart is broken a little. This is one of the costs of teaching, and most of us bear it, but sometimes the sad things come a little too close together, and we find ourselves thinking the cost is too high. Fortunately, those feelings are usually fleeting, and our students can also give us the will and strength to keep coming back every day. For most of us, our students live in our hearts and minds long after they leave our classrooms: we hope for them, believe in them, and want the best for them. When the worst happens instead we always wonder what--if anything--could have made things end differently. Too often, the answer is something that we could not control--and that is sometimes very hard to live with.

The Tragedy Of Cheating Scandals

2011-05-01T16:55:00.000-07:00

One of the lovely legacies that the pressure inherent in the high-stakes testing that NCLB requires has left us is the cheating scandal. There have been several cheating scandals and allegations in the last several years-- Atlanta and Washington, DC are the most well covered. Well, now our own Philadelphia Public School District has its own (alleged) scandal: The principal at Roosevelt Middle School has been accused of altering tests and giving out answers to 'help' her students make AYP. This saddens me, but if it is true, is not all that suprising.
Let me say that I believe the No Child Left Behind Law to be essentially unjust and the Adequate Yearly Progress goal to be unfair. However, I do not think cheating is ever justified. First of all, depending on how the cheating takes place, students are made complicit in an illegal act, and no educator should ever do that. Secondly, even if students do not know they are cheating (for example, their answers are changed after they hand in the test), they are given inaccurate results and a false idea of their achievement. Thirdly, it does not really help anyone, or address the inequity of many standardized tests or of our present system. And, last, but certainly not least--IT IS JUST FLAT-OUT WRONG.

Having said all of that, I can also say that I can truly understand and even empathize slightly with the thinking that makes such cheating scandals possible. NCLB and AYP put a huge amount of pressure on school districts to 'improve achievement' (notice it does not say improve learning). Despite all this emphasis on improving test scores and achievement, the monetary and social supports needed to help all children learn are not forthcoming. In fact, stating that anything outside the classroom impacts learning (when we all know it does) has become a copout--thereby enabling 'reformers' and corporate 'do-gooders' to put all the blame for low achievement on the people inside the schools--primarily teachers and principals. Some people, when they see the inequities of the system, when they are bullied and criticized at every turn, when their very livelihood and the calling they have poured their heart and soul into is threatened, will resort to a 'by any means necessary' mentality to raise test scores. None of these reasons justify cheating, they just sadly explain it.

The atmosphere at many schools around testing can easily become paranoid and poisonous. Principals are harangued by regional chairpeople and superintendents, and --in turn--return to their schools to pressure teachers and students. We all want to do our best every day to help our students learn, but most of us agree that test pressure and teaching to the test are not conducive to true learning. Some sort of standardized evaluation is needed, but what is the best and fairest way to do this? That is a discussion for another day, but I think that we can all see that this retaliatory and adversarial system that seems to lead almost inexorably to some cheating is not good for our students or our educational system.

When Is A Public Meeting NOT A Public Meeting?

2011-03-16T15:37:00.000-07:00

The sign at the back of the auditorium in which the SRC meets says "legal capacity 240". According to several sources inside the auditorium at about 3:45 PM today, there were 160 people in the room. That is apparently when the (at first unnamed) Fire Marshal (later the name Bill Bankhead was given out by a School District Employee) decided the room was "over capacity" and closed the SRC Meeting to any more members of the public. The School District set up a video feed and seating area in a downstairs lobby--but a viewing area IS NOT participatory, it is passive. Here is an account of what happened when the public, including TAG members, parents, students, teachers and other members of the public tried to attend the meeting:
*When I entered the 440 building at about 3:45, the polite and professional school police officer at the entrance told me the meeting was full, but I could sit in the viewing area. I said I was going to try to go up, he said "good luck" (not unpleasantly).
*When I got upstairs to the hallway leading to the auditorium, about 20 or so people were waiting there. I talked to fellow TAG (Teacher Action Group) members, and asked the school police officer guarding the door from the public if I could go in. He said the fire marshal had declared the meeting over capacity. (I have this officer's name, but will not print it for fear he will lose his job).
*I pointed out that there were clearly empty seats visible on the video feed. The officer told me "do not question me again" and to go sit down.
*I asked the officer for the name of the fire marshal, was it a city fire marshal, a school district fire marshal, what was his/her name? He said he did not know, but that the school district had fire marshals. I again asked for the name.
*During this time, students, parents, community members and other members of the PUBLIC were trying to gain access to a PUBLIC meeting and were being turned away. The officer was professional and somewhat polite, but clearly getting frustrated.
*When questioned again by me and several other people, the officer again said he did not know the name of the fire marshal, but the Lieutenant (nameless) did. He refused a request to call said Lieutenant so we could find out which PUBLIC official had closed a PUBLIC meeting.
*At that point (about 4:15PM), more and more people were arriving, and it was becoming clear that the people gathered were NOT going to leave. The next person who asked the officer why the meeting was closed was told "My boss told me not to let anyone in." The fire marshal/over capacity story had been abandoned completely.
*A School District official came out (everyone I saw was very careful to have their picture ID turned AWAY from the public) and said they might have room for 20 people in a few minutes. The officer said he would pick the 20 people who had been there the longest, and tried to rationally choose people to enter. He was a little rude to some young students (who had not said anything disrespectful that I heard), and several TAG members allowed students to go into the meeting in their stead.
*At 4:30, some us were finally admitted to the meeting. We were instructed to take empty seats and NOT stand in the back. (Although there were many District Officials standing in the back).
*I believe this instruction was given to make sure we could not all stand together for our protest.
NEXT UP: Inside the SRC Meeting:
OK--We were in the public meeting. I sat next to a nice woman who lent me her printed agenda with the speakers listed. We were there to listen to testimony and carry out a respectful democratic action (holding up signs demanding transparency and putting duct tape over our mouths to symbolize our voicelessness).
*I was quite moved by some of the testimony, and perplexed by others.
* Some students from Martin Luther King High School (scheduled to be Renaissanced) spoke movingly about their attachment to their school and teachers/counselors, and their strong feeling that they should not be considered failures, and their hope that their school would not lose the programs they valued.
*Onika Richardson, a well-spoken student from Audenried who squared off against Ackerman last week spoke again, and said she had brought data to prove that the District's stated data about her school was inaccurate. She offered the data to the SRC--they took it. She also mentioned that she and her fellow students also felt disrespected in meetings with District officials because said officials often "played on their phones and texted" during the meetings. Behavior, by the way, which a teacher or principal would not tolerate in class.
*Next was the brave Mary Delsavio who brought a letter from a frustrated and burned out (yet dedicated) Promise Academy teacher delineating the many problems with the Promise Academy model. Now, at the SRC meetings, each registered speaker is announced as he/she approaches the podium and the names are on the printed agenda--however, when it became clear that Ms. Delsavio was reading a critical letter, a member interrupted her to ask her name AGAIN (what, he was not listening?). She continued to read a very lovely and well-constructed letter about the constraints of the scripted curricula and other features of the "promise" model. The letter was long, but the audience was rapt and then Archie imperiously interjected "you will need to sum up, there are other speakers." Many speakers then called out "We'll wait.", but Archie insisted on the summing up--which Mary then did. She left the podium only to be called back by the very people who had wanted her to hurry---they very pointedly said "What is your name again?" Now, her name had been announced TWICE, they had a printed agenda in front of them, but they asked her name AGAIN. There was a palpable and uncomfortable feeling of intimidation in the air. She said her name, they said "You are here as what?" (I guess meaning a community member, parent , teacher, etc...), and then asked her what her position was (teacher mentor), and pressed rather hard to know WHO wrote the letter (she refused to say, citing fear of "pushback"-- I wonder why). They then said, "Can we at least know what school, so we can investigate?" (Perhaps meaning intimidate teachers and pit them against each other.) Mary said she would not answer and said that she knew as a mentor that the letter could have been written by many of her teachers.
*It was during some of these testimonies that TAG members stood (silently) with duct tape on our mouths and signs demanding transparency and voice.
*Up next was Desiree Whitfield, a parent of a kindergartner from Greenfield who has shown up to defend Ackerman a couple of times lately. Which, I will say, is her right as an American. However, she read an ill-informed and inaccurate screed against Hope Moffet--making it sound (wrongly) as if Moffet had personally set up the walk-out at Audenried and forced the students to the rally.
*Lisa Haver spoke eloquently abouth the need for community involvement and voice and questioned why the SRC (as the old School Board did) could not have at least every other meeting at night in a neighborhood school (where parking and access are not limited). Good question--no answer forthcoming.
*A bus company owner (Mr. Wilson) spoke about the need for more transparent bidding procedures for contracters.
*Teacher Sharon Newman spoke passionately in defense of young, enthusiastic teachers like Hope Moffet, and appealed to the SRC to take all the facts into consideration.

At this point (about 5:15 PM) an SRC member noted that they had been "working since 8:30" (though the meeting did not start until 2:00) and needed a 15-minute break. Fair enough, most teachers (and I daresay parents) had been working since 7:30, so we all needed a break. At that point, I left to go home and continue my workday as a teacher (grading, e-mailing, setting up meetings, etc..), and the SRC meeting went on.... All in all, an interesting experience, but I did get a feeling that, at points, the SRC was just going through the motions of hearing the community.

Proud To Be A Philadelphia Teacher

2011-02-28T14:57:00.000-08:00

Last Friday, I had the pleasure and honor of attending the Teacher Action Group Rally for Public Education in front of our (yes, our) administration building at 440 North Broad Street. When my colleagues and I arrived at a little before 4:00 PM, School District Police stood on the top step of the building looking imposing. Of course, they need not have worried, the rally that followed was passionate and spirited but respectful. I believe it showed the best of Philadelphia: an ethnic, racial, and class mix of community members, students, parents, and teachers all coming together to support a crucial part of our city--public education. The young leaders of the Teacher Action Group (TAG) spoke about our community cause (having a true voice in what happens to OUR schools) and read a supportive statement from Jerry Jordan, the president of the PFT. Other teachers and community members spoke eloquently about the impact and meaning of a true public education--the PUBLIC must be involved. After a few speeches, a young man who happens to be a junior at Audenried High School (slated for takeover by a charter company with no community input) spoke. Maurice Johnson, an articulate, earnest young man that any parent or teacher would be proud to call their own, spoke quite movingly about what his school meant to him. He rightly pointed out that his school--about to be given away lock, stock, and 55 million dollar barrel to Kenny Gamble's charter company--was NOT a failure, had not even been given a chance to prove it yet to prove what they know. The juniors in the new Audenried are the first class in that school--and as such have not yet taken the PSSAs which are given in March. (Ironically, although there is no data to prove the new Audenried a failure, there is plenty of data to question the effectiveness of Gamble's Universal Company). Maurice pointed out--rightly from a student's point-of-view--that when kids hear Arlene Ackerman call their school a failure, they hear themselves being called failures. Now this may not be what the "award-winning" Dr. Ackerman intends when she throws the word failure around so blithely, but it is what children hear. Her bullying, top-down, and ham-handed approach to school reform (many can agree we need school improvement) leaves the educational community feeling bullied and bruised. How much more effective could these "reforms" be if students, teachers, and community members without million dollar federal grants were asked what THEY need, what THEY want. Maurice and his classmates (as well as the rest of us) would like to find out. The most barn-burning, rabble-rousing (and I mean that in the best democratic sense) speech of the day came from firebrand retired principal Frank Murphy. Murphy pointed out in a fervent speech that a great leader has many collaborative and communication skills that our current leader seems to lack. If we ever got to choose someone to run our school, Frank would be my candidate. He knows what it is to be a true collaborative educator, not just a "boss". We wound down at about 5:00 PM, happy that-even if we had not been heard by the "bosses", we had stated our piece. Even as we stood in the bitter high winds last Friday, I saw colleagues, students, and community members both familiar and unknown to me whose dedication to children, and schools, and communities made me proud to be a part of this great city where American freedom was born and nurtured.

The Good Things (and they DO exist)

2011-01-11T18:16:00.000-08:00

I read a very dispiriting comment in The Philadelphia Public School Notebook
today. It was from a teacher (I have no idea how new or experienced) who feels completely worn out, undervalued, and disrespected at her job in a Philadelphia public school. It made me quite sad for several reasons: It brings home the point that the teaching profession is under fire like never before, it makes me wonder if we can attract and keep good teachers to this very challenging and rewarding profession, and it forces me to consider if teachers themselves (me included) have contributed to to the negative narrative by talking too much about the sometimes exhausting and frustrating aspects of our jobs. There is no doubt that we in Philadelphia (as well as many other areas of the country) have epic challenges before us, and there are times when we wonder why we do what we do and how much longer we will be able to do it. However, there are many wonderful and rewarding things about teaching--not the least of which is the connections we are able to make with students. If you are lucky enough to work in a good school--and by good I do not mean the best test scores, the richest neighborhood, or the newest building--I mean a place with a sense of purpose and community--you can play a meaningful role in the lives of many children. Of course, we are not as important as parents in a child's life, but we do spend a great deal of time with them. Although it is the big things that make news, it is the little things that make our job worth it every day. So, in no particular order, I am listing some things that have made me smile lately (school things):

*The fact that my corrective reading students (as not-fun as it can be) vie for their turn to read out loud.

*A student stopping by my room at the end of the day to apologize (unasked) for earlier bad behavior in class.

*A girl excitedly telling me between classes that she was asked to interview at one of her chosen high schools.

*A student new to our school and resistant to my small group reading class opening up during a writing assignment about one of his favorite places to go.

*Our former students (now in high school) who come back to see us several times a year just to say hello and touch base.

*Colleagues who help me, build me up, let me blow off steam, and make me laugh every day.

*Second graders who like to say hi to me and think it is a big deal to know the 7th and 8th grade teacher (because I teach their sibs).

*Routinely having children (yes, kids raised in this day and age) who open doors for us, offer to carry our bags and boxes, and are otherwise helpful.

*Having a student smile widely and say "Really?!", when I tell him he can take home the book he was reading from my classroom library.

*The fact that, no matter what the district and the reform "experts" throw at us, I truly believe we are making a positive difference in the lives of children every day.

I am not really a Pollyanna or cheerleader, but I believe in what we do. My school is just a regular Philadelphia public school (not magnet), our kids and staff are not perfect, but there is goodness and curiosity in them, and we are a community. Dozens of schools like this exist all over this city. We need to try to think of the good things that we experience every day, and even though we are tired and put upon, try to reach out to colleagues who are losing heart.

School Safety and Spending Tax Dollars

2010-11-29T15:31:00.000-08:00

School safety has been much in the news lately--and, not surprisingly, Dr. Ackerman (Philadlephia's School Superintendent) has recently been in the news for that reason.
Apparently, Dr. Ackerman's extreme concern for the safety of all her students led her to take a few shortcuts and award a no-bid contract for camera installation in an improper manner. Ackerman's actions with taxpayers' money and her imperious attitude are disturbing enough, but the really bothersome part of this whole issue is that the camera installation was scheduled and paid for ONLY because the State Department of Education was about to release a report saying that many of our district's schools remain dangerous. It does not seem to me and many others who work in schools that Ackerman was truly concerned about the safety of those students in her care--what she was concerned about was the appearance of action. She wanted to be seen to be doing something--it does not matter if the cameras will really help keep kids safe, just as long as it seems that way. As the Metropolis blog discussed this morning, looks appear to be paramount to this administration. Will cameras, which will only record what is happening to identify perpetrators after the fact, really make schools safer? Or, is it just a way to put money in the pockets of school district cronies and place a band-aid on the deeper, more systemic problem?
Anyone who works in a school knows that the problem of school violence is incredibly complex. Almost no student comes to school wanting to wreak havoc and hurt other people. They do come to school, however, very angry and sometimes bewildered with the circumstances of their own lives that are out of their control. Kids act out in school because it is a safe place to do so. Cameras do exactly NOTHING to help these situations. What does help is creating a climate of safely, accountability, and acceptance for all our students. What helps create this climate? Good administrators who are not running in fear from an autocratic leader, stable school staff and teachers who have time to get to know their students and families, and support staff who can work with students. These things all cost money, but they are not machines that can be trotted out for the media to prove that the powers that be are truly doing something. That is not to say that cameras and other security measures are not important and helpful, but they really are only a very small part of the solution. Ensuring safe schools takes time and a schools chief who respects her people and students enough to ask them to collaboratively create good school climates and supports them in the complicated effort to do so.

The Trouble With Scripted Curricula (part I)

2010-09-14T16:19:00.000-07:00

Well, we are in the first full week of school with the Empowerment Schools in Philadelphia using a new, heavily scripted reading curriculum. The K-6 Students are using Imagine It! and grades 7-8 are using Glencoe Literature. Arlene Ackerman is convinced (or at least she says she is) that these curricula will spur our students to new heights of learning. This system was implemented even for schools (such as mine) that achieved AYP last year. Our Reading Specialist posed an interesting question today: If we made AYP using Trophies and Elements of Literature (our former, well-regarded reading programs), WHY do we not get to keep using them?? Why are we instead using a repetitive, mind-numbing set of books that even young kids can see the flaws in? The most obvious explanation seems to be that Arlene has no faith in her teachers OR her students. Good teachers, using the core curriculum and the Pennsylvania State Standards can teach reading very well, and differentiate instruction without reading from a script. Most of us have been doing this for years--all the while providing for the differences and idiosyncrasies in our students' interests, strengths, and weaknesses. Much current reading research that has been done in challenging, urban classrooms like many of Philadelphia's, reaches the conclusion that great and successful reading instruction is cross-curricular, culturally sensitive and relevant, and makes use of students' experiences. Scripted curricula are antithetical to most of these goals and best practices--they do not engage students or give them credit for their intellect. A recent study on African-American and Latino boys' disengagement from school found that these young men need to feel they are not disrespected in order to be engaged in learning. Believe me, most of my middle grades students feel disrespected and devalued by a scripted curriculum. Students in the most impoverished neighborhoods still have thoughts and dreams and ideas that they want to read about, talk about, and write about. That reading, writing and talking IS learning, and it usually includes higher order thinking--something that scripts do not allow for. I do not believe that many parents will be in love with these scripts, either. Today, as a second grade parent stopped by a colleague's classroom to drop off his son from a medical appointment, he paused and said, "WHAT are you doing?" The teacher replied that it was the new reading curriculum and that she would explain more during back-to-school night. If his comment is any indication of the reaction of the rest of our parents, it is going to be very interesting. We are always being told that ALL students deserve their teachers to have high expectations for them--and good teachers truly believe that and try to honor it daily. It is the scripted curricula and the people who promote it that do not have enough respect for and belief in our students to trust that they can learn without being condescended to.

Penny Wise and Pound Foolish?

2010-07-28T16:05:00.000-07:00

I have been spending the summer tutoring and doing professional development (and vacationing), and I have been thinking about school staffing issues. I am wondering if Dr. Ackerman's consistent hiring of more and more administration (perhaps to insulate herself) at the same time she is letting school support staff go is a wise decision. It is very easy to fire or lay off school support staff--this is mostly because, to people who do not work in schools every day, their titles and duties seem to be rather nebulous. Many people might ask what a "non-teaching assistant", or a "parent ombudsman" or a "community relations liaison" actually does. Well, they all do something vital for the life and smooth running of the school. The most well known community liaison currently may be Violet Sutton-Lawson , recently laid off from South Philly High, the woman who used her body and formidable personality to protect an Asian student from being beaten during the horrible events of December 2009. Sutton-Lawson's actions were certainly heroic, but truth be told, there are many unheralded support staff personnel in schools who work heroically with students every day. Sutton-Lawson's work with pregnant teens has probably helped many of them stay in school--kids can't get an education if they do not attend school and feel safe while they are there. Support staff can listen to, protect, advise, and help discipline students every day. Non-teaching support staff help make the smooth and safe running of schools possible. Many non-teaching assistants (NTAs) help keep order in large school hallways and other common areas, and they also give students another adult in the building who can support and mentor them. That kind of support and continuity is invaluable to all students, but especially to those who come from deprived circumstances.
In my K-8 school this year, our parent ombudsman and student advisor were crucial in helping the teachers and counselor help get a student removed from an unsafe situation at home and put with a relative who could give the student proper care. Our support staff was able to arrange appointments, follow up on phone calls and inquiries, and do home visits and gather data that teachers just do not have time to obtain. Because these two people did their jobs well, we were able to work together to turn this student from a child with 3 absences per week into one who attended school every day. If we did not have these two people in our school to help teachers and counselors, it would have taken us much longer to help this child. Stories like this one may not seem important in such a grand plan as Ackerman's Imagine 2014, but it is the thousands of small successes that support staff help us with that will help make the plan come to fruition.
I suppose Arlene would say she is saving money with all these cuts of crucial school personnel, but a beginning NTA makes just over $19,000.00 per year, and the top salary is a little over $39,000.00 per year. In a 3.2 BILLION dollar budget, the pay for these important positions hardly seems excessive. However, Arlene would rather keep hiring administrative staff at salaries of about $180,000.00 per year (yes, SIX figures), than keep students safe and cared for and her actual schools running well. I know that any teacher, principal, or student I talk to has a very clear idea about the great value of our support staff, what we are not very clear on is what a six figure salaried "chief" or "communications officer" sitting at 440 North Broad Street (SDP headquarters) actually does to make the lives and education of our students better each and every day.
+++Update: More administrative positions, more SIX figure salaries.
+++New Update: Arlene and her minions make more than the mayor, governor, and the superintendents of NYC, LA, and Chicago (not including bonuses). http://www.philly.com/philly/news/homepage/20100729_Phil_Goldsmith__Ackerman_and_SRC_tone-deaf_to_Philadelphia_taxpayers__financial_plight.html

Did Saliyah Cruz Steal Arlene's Thunder?

2010-07-03T15:59:00.001-07:00

This post is quite Philly specific, but I feel it needs to be discussed. Did Saliyah Cruz, the successful, dynamic principal of West Philadelphia High School, lose her position this week because she was simply too successful (not to mention received good press), and was stealing the spotlight from her boss, Arlene Ackerman? For those not familiar with the story of West or Saliyah Cruz, West Philadelphia High is a large, comprehensive neighborhood high school (meaning no entrance requirements) that was in total chaos a few years ago. Since Cruz has become principal, West has come off the "persistently dangerous" list, the climate has improved dramatically, and everyone truly involved in education (not those in the "echelons above reality") has been convinced that West was on the road to great things. In fact, Cruz had accomplished that Holy Grail trifecta of principals: She had the loyalty and admiration of her staff, her students, and their parents. West also had another unique and stunning accomplishment--its well regarded car club had progressed stunningly far in the Progressive Automotive X Prize (even beating out MIT). But, according to Ackerman and her minions, West's PSSA scores had not come up enough and Cruz had to go. It is true that West's scores are not good, but reading had improved, and let's face it, climate has to be good before real learning can take place. Cruz and her staff had improved climate--real learning gains would have followed. Sadly, Cruz and her team will not be given this chance. First, West was named a "Renaissance School"-- and the parents diligently went through the district mandated process to pick a "provider" (read outside company). But, when it came time for the School Reform Commission to approve West's choice, politically connected people (including a city councilwoman) literally whispered into the ear of the SRC chairman and had the vote tabled. Many people feel this was a violation of Pennsylvania's Sunshine Act, but, hey, it's Philly.
What is the REAL reason that West was put into more turmoil and is now losing its dynamic and dedicated principal? Well, people, it certainly is not for the good of the children as Arlene and her people would have you believe. I think that the real reason Ms. Cruz finds herself exiled from the community that had come to love her is that she was too successful. She is successful and beloved, and getting good press--and, in addition to all of that--she was making a real difference in the lives of her students. In Arlene Ackerman's cock-eyed world, this can simply not be tolerated. In Arlene's bizarro world, she will defend you practically to the death if you are the principal of another geographically named high school and you allow the climate to deteriorate to the point where one group of students prey upon another group of students and beat them practically senseless. If your incompetence and inaction as a principal lead to a federal civil rights lawsuit, you can keep your job for months and Arlene will defend you until it is discovered you have no principal's certification. But, if you are a dedicated, dynamic principal like Saliyah Cruz, and you put your heart and soul into your job every single day thereby making the lives of hundreds of children better, you will be replaced! This is Arlene's world, and unfortunately, many of the schoolchildren of Philadelphia must live in it.

Continuity, Community, and Change

2010-06-13T18:28:00.000-07:00

Our school had a retirement party last week. We had a great time celebrating the careers of two wonderful teachers and visiting with school staff that had moved on. What our celebration really got me thinking about,though, was the nature of a school community and how change and continuity can act on that community. Our two retirees were kindergarten and first grade teachers who had taught at our school long enough to now be teaching the children of some of their former students. They are well-respected and beloved by both staff and members of the community. Aside from being great, enthusiastic teachers, Bobbi and Cheryl have influenced a generation of teachers with their generous hosting of student teachers and their mentoring of new teachers in the building. Our school community will be the poorer for their loss, but their influence will live on in our school. The same cannot be said for schools in the Philadelphia School District that are losing their entire teaching staffs to the Renaissance process. A school community is a delicate and intangible thing, and wholesale change of people is not usually healthy. The longer I teach, the more I realize that relationships with parents, families, and students are a crucial if ineffable part of teaching. Having everyone in a school change at the same time will leave a huge gap in the kinds of relationships that help students thrive. As I have been at my school since 2001, I am now teaching many brothers/sisters/cousins of students I have already taught. My seventh graders love telling me if I have taught their siblings, and I enjoy reminiscing with them (and sometimes teasing them) about their brothers and sisters. This familiarity means that my relationships with parents (and theirs with me) are already established--and that we have a level of trust that can help us work together to benefit the child. Sometimes, when there is difficult information to convey to parents, a long-standing trust is what wins the day. This year, a colleague needed to recommend a student for testing for a learning disability and the parent was understandably worried and unsure. But because the teacher recommending the testing was someone the parent knew, trusted, and had taught the siblings of this child, the consent was given. Trust is crucial in schools--parents need to know that the teachers have their children's interests at heart. They do not just need to be told this, they need to have experienced it firsthand. Trust and caring take time to build. When school staffs change naturally, through age and attrition, the parents can see new and experienced teachers working together and come to accept and trust new faces. When schools are faced with an almost totally new staff in September, I wonder how isolated the community will feel? Where will that teacher who knows all the members of a family and taught most of them be? Where will the counselor who always asks about your older son or daughter be? How will the level of trust that students need to learn and grow be established? I believe that continuity is crucial to building trust with parents. How will it feel to students and parents to be in the old, familiar school with none of the old, familiar faces?? Change is good and sometimes necessary, but I do not think decimating whole school communities is good for kids or parents.

A Boy We Knew

2010-05-09T18:34:00.000-07:00

Again we found ourselves at a funeral that happened much too soon. One of our former students (only 19), and brother to children still in our school, was brutally shot and killed last week. We can go over and over this, and we will never find an answer. This young man with a huge smile was a promising student, a good athlete, a happy and sunny boy--a kid universally liked by his teachers. He worked hard, tried to do right, and was a good big brother. Those of us who taught him in seventh and eighth grade could no more believe this happened to him than we could believe we'll fly to the moon tomorrow. But it did happen, and who is there to blame?? A culture that glorifies guns and denigrates hard work, that glorifies "gangsta" life (such as it is) leads to the death of too many young black men. Some buy into this mythical, destructive culture, and some are just caught up in the peripheral violence. None of them deserve to die this young--leaving behind more sorrow than they could imagine. What can we at schools do to stop this? I truly despair of finding an answer. We give kids a safe haven all day and an education--but sometimes they still have to go home to communities that have too many guns and not enough jobs. Many of us like to think these are not "our" problems, but ultimately they are. A community robbed of its most precious resource--its young--is a community in crisis. This crisis needs to be stopped by ALL of us--starting with the members of the community and moving outward to envelop and involve all of us.

Knowing Your Kids

2010-04-24T17:43:00.000-07:00

This week, for just about the first time all year, I saw T get excited about something. T is one of my reading and social studies students who has been "a tough nut to crack". He is usually sort of quiet, even sullen--and does just enough work to get by. It has been hard to get to know anything at all about him--he does not seem to find enjoyment in much of anything. But this week, I got a glimpse of something he cares about and it has given me a whole new perspective on T and his life. We were walking from one building of our school to the next, when I heard T's excited voice: "Mrs. Luebbert, Mrs. Luebbert can we stop and look at that?" His voice was so urgent, I stopped and said, "What is it, T?" It was trash and recycling day in our neighborhood, and T had spotted an old aquarium tank someone had put out. "The tank, can I see the tank?" "OK, but what for?" T informed me he had a turtle, and that the turtle needed an bigger tank. He was thrilled at the possibility that he may have found that tank. Unfortunately, taking a closer look, we realized one side of the tank was cracked, so it would not work. But, I learned something important about T--he had a pet that he likes to care for. On the way into class I asked him a little about his turtle and he was happy to tell me. This short exchange was the first real personal thing I knew about T outside of school--and it gives me an "in"-- subjects he may be interested in, or something to talk about or ask about when I see he is in a bad mood or getting ready to fight.
This small incident led me to reflect on how important it is to teachers that we have a chance to get to know our students. It makes a great difference in the lives of students and in the life of the classroom if teachers can form relationships with their students. It saddens me that this time is less and less available to us as we think about testing and documenting results all the time. Not all things that help a child's education are quantifiable in numbers and test results. We used to have an "advisory" period--time that we did attendance while kids read independently or got ready for the day. This was a good time to talk to kids and to find out about their lives. Now, however, we have a "do-now" activity that has to be kept track of for the region. Instead of getting ready for classes, or discussing a problem or issue with teachers and peers, kids now have to do another activity that will be graded. I've had kids tell me all manner of things during advisory ---they range from just showing me photos of things they are proud of--family members, get-togethers, etc..., to telling me they had a fight with a sibling or parents, informing me a family member is ill, or even that they were upset because a brother was "going away" (a common euphemism for prison).
I always figure that my students tell me things because they need to, and it is my job to comfort, advise, or sometimes just listen. It also helps me teach my students better when I know them better. I can give them slack the days they need it and tough love the days they need it. If I know them , I know what might get them interested in a subject, or what they might like to read. Teachers need time to foster these relationships--and in our crazy "Race To The Top" world--we are losing it. Of course, most of us still carve it out somewhere---in the walks between classes, on the way to lunch, and after the bell rings. But what all the education reformers need to realize is that kids need trust and relationships as much as they need math and reading and science and social studies. Letting teachers foster relationships will lead to students who flourish in other areas as well.

Can Charter Schools Compete On A Level Playing Field?

2010-04-01T17:09:00.000-07:00

Well, In the Philadelphia School District we are going to be opening MORE charter schools. This decision by Dr. Ackerman comes during the same week that we have learned that six or seven Philadelphia Charters are under federal investigation for "financial irregularities". Three of the charters even hired a super accountant who (according to her) works between 400-600 days per year! (http://www.philly.com/inquirer/home_top_stories/20100331_City_Controller_questions_payments_to_charter-school_accountant.html). Even during all this turmoil, the powers that be have decided that most of the "Renaissance Schools" (schools that are deemed persistently troubled) will be given over to charter operators. Nine schools will be converted to charters, and Ackerman is keeping six for herself and her cronies--those will be turned into "Promise Academies". The interesting, little discussed part of all of this is that the charter operators will have to deal with a new twist: SUPPOSEDLY, they will be obligated to keep all the students already in the school. This is a complete game changer for charter schools. Anyone who is at all familiar with charter schools knows that they specialize in turfing out any kind of problematic student. The "problems" might consist of a mild to severe discipline problem, an attendance problem, little to no parental involvement, or a child who desperately needs an IEP that the school simply does not want to deal with. For years charters have sent these sorts of students back to their neighborhood public schools with nary a second thought. One of my students lasted exactly 10 DAYS in her charter school, another was given the cliche "the school is not a good fit for you" before they sent him packing. This is classic charter school speak--it is the school equivalent of "it's not you, it's me." The issue for regular neighborhood public schools is that we are open equally to all comers--bad attitude, bad attendance, uninvolved parents, the works. Of course, that is the stated and sacred mission of public education--so we do not really mind. What we DO mind is being compared to schools that get to select students. We also mind entities that spend public tax dollars being exempt from the rules of public schools. However, if you can believe the School District (and I'm not betting the farm on their veracity), the charters that take over the Renaissance Schools will have no choice but to deal with all the students in the catchment area. So, it will be quite interesting to see how this plays out: How many students will be "encouraged" to apply for a voluntary transfer or an extenuating circumstances transfer? What will charter operators do when parents refuse to show up for meetings, or tell their kids it is a good idea to get involved in fights? How will charters deal with the myriad problems that already exist in the schools they are taking over? The charter school toolkit for dealing with difficult students is not really very large--it mostly consists of saying "see ya" to the problems. How will they be able to cope when the difficult students are theirs for keeps? OR, will the district--in a desperate attempt to prove that their initiative is a success--manipulate the students and the numbers and quietly allow charters to conduct business as usual (getting rid of the students that are hard to work with)?? It will be very compelling to see how it all plays out, and I (as well as many other teachers I know) will be watching closely to see what happens.

Another Modest Proposal

2010-03-19T17:44:00.000-07:00

My compatriot "Mick-of-the-Moment" (I don't know him, but he/she is a frequent blogger on Philly.com) had the following take on the Obama/Duncan/Bloomburg/Ackerman idea to improve public school education, Mick would like to carry the great educational reform ideas over to crime fighting: "Areas of the city with consistently poor crime statistics should have all police officers fired and only 50% can successfully re-apply for their jobs. These districts would be forbidden to join any FOP (union) type organization and officers who work in areas of the city with good crime stats can be moved into a Renaissance police district at any time. Hooray for the Renaissance model!! We all know the way to fix struggling communities is to hold the public employees 100% accountable and the community itself completely unaccountable." Does this sound crazy to you? Of course not! After all, a similar idea is about to save public education. All we have to do to make sure that children being raised in poor neighborhoods that are trapped in an unceasing cycle of generational poverty do well in school is FIRE THEIR TEACHERS! That's right, the very people who have dedicated a great portion of their lives to urban education, who feel called to work in places with legions of problems, who feel privileged to offer a safe haven to kids from tenuous neighborhoods everyday, ARE THE ONES TO BLAME for educational failure! Yes, the test scores and achievement levels that the government measures ARE lower for poverty-stricken students, but that may just be because of poverty and deprivation itself. And, yes, some schools have been able to make astounding achievements in extremely poor areas--but they are usually charters that are able to self-select for very motivated parents and children. The children whose parents are unable or unwilling to participate in their education are the children who we work with every day. Not all teachers are great or even good, but wholesale firing of entire school staffs are certainly not the answer. The Unions have already agreed to newer and innovative methods of evaluations and training for teachers. Most teachers put heart and soul into their work--we do not deserve the sole blame for a large, intractable societal problem. The way to come to a true solution for educational reform is to ask parents and teachers what they need. Society and political leaders need to have the stomach to hold parents and communities accountable for their children. We need to attack poverty and make sure children are safe and well-cared for. Only then will we be able to truly institute educational reforms that work.

Who Are "THESE" Kids??

2010-03-04T15:34:00.000-08:00

As I read many responses to education articles (in the Inquirer and Daily News) lately, I have become slightly dispirited. Although many comments can be helpful and germane to the larger conversation on educational reform, there are a depressing number of comments that refer to "these kids". "These kids" the rant goes, are irredeemable, not able to be educated, worthless, beyond saving..... So, WHO are "these kids" in regular (non-magnet,low SES) Philly public schools? What are they like? Well, if a demographer walked into my seventh grade North Philly classroom here is what he or she would see: A class that is over 90% minority and 75% "poor" (judged by the number of children who qualify for free lunch), a class in which only one or two children live in a home with both parents, a class in which 25% of the children receive Special Education services. Those are simply the facts; it is no more the sum of my students than any set of numbers could be. Here is what I see: A group of boys and girls who can be, on any given day, funny, engaging, heartbreaking, infuriating, hard-working, insightful, lazy..... In other words, kids who are like almost any other group of twelve and thirteen year-olds in the country! In my advisory (homeroom class) I have several talented cartoonists, three or four students who read at a 10th grade level, several who read waaay below grade level, an aspiring nurse-midwife, boys crazy for basketball, some kids with worries too big for a seventh-grader, four drum students, kids who are well taken care of, kids who are neglected, and worlds of potential. Most of my students (and the others in our school) truly want a connection with their school and teachers. It never ceases to amaze me how eager they are to say hello in the morning (even if they were reprimanded the previous day), open doors for me, carry bags, and in general seek out positive interactions with adults. That is what I see and experience every day. Others have shown, through words or actions that they see something or someone to be fearful of. One of the funniest and saddest things that ever happened when I was with my students was this: We were walking as a class between our two school buildings to the gym. Many of my seventh graders--especially the boys--are quite a bit taller that I am, so it may not have been apparent to passersby that the students were supervised. We were walking down the school sidewalk, a little noisy but generally in good spirits when a man who appeared to be about 25 or so (and Caucasian) decided to wander down the side walk with his rottweiler. When he saw and heard my students (mostly African-American) he visibly flinched and recoiled. A hale and hearty 25 year old man was intimidated by a bunch of twelve year-olds. One of my boys said, "Mrs. L, what's up with that dude?" I professed not to know, and we headed to the gym. This man, had he known my students, may have found them as endearing and/or fun to play basketball with as their phys ed teacher did. But he saw "these kids" and was afraid. The truth is that "these kids" are really the same as our kids. In fact, in a very true sense, they are our kids.

Why Don't Liberals Really Like Poor Children?

2010-02-24T15:26:00.000-08:00

First of all, I am a liberal--so this post is following common societal mores for truth telling--you are allowed to criticize your own group. Here is what is bugging me lately about people who call themselves liberals: they don't REALLY like poor kids. Oh, they like them in theory, they don't mind tax money being spent to help them, they believe that the children deserve a good education, they just don't want poor children sitting next to their kids in a public school. Oh its OK if there are some really interesting poor families in the school: in other words families with compelling/heartrending up from nothing stories (up being the operative word), or--even better--newly arrived immigrant families with an interesting language or cultural perspective to contribute to the school. That way, they can pat themselves on the back about diversity while not being made uncomfortable by the reality of true poverty. The children they really do not want to have to deal with on a daily basis are the children of entrenched, generational poverty that live very close to their own neighborhoods. THOSE children might have problems, THOSE children might come to school hungry or not have stable housing, THOSE children might cause their children to ask uncomfortable questions. Being poor does not make you a bad parent any more than being wealthy makes you a good one--but being poor probably makes it harder to do everything that good parenting requires. And it definitely makes you more tired.
Liberal parents will say they make many herculean efforts to keep their kids out of certain Philadelphia neighborhood schools (applying to the nominal public schools called charters or trying to transfer to a public school in a high socioeconomic status neighborhood) because they are searching out the best possible education for their children. In many ways that is true. But the truth is that liberals are like everybody else--they are most comfortable with their own kind. If you are a middle class liberal it is really very comfortable to talk to other parents in the schoolyard if your main topic of conversation can be which $500.00 stroller to buy, which house cleaner is the best, or which art/dance/sport class to enroll your kid in. If, however, you are faced with having to relate to a parent who is rushing between two low-wage jobs and may not make rent--well, that might be awkward. And, you might be revealed NOT to be the wonderful, egalitarian, liberal that you thought you were.
The very best, most productive thing that middle-class liberal parents (I'm not criticizing conservatives here because they don't tend to be disingenuous about their educational motives) can do for poor children is to allow their own children to attend school with them! All schools would be improved by the presence of a really diverse student and parent population, society would be improved because children would learn how to move gracefully in many kinds of circles from a young age, and--because a rising tide lifts all boats--I don't believe that any children (liberal middle to high SES or not) would lose out educationally or socially by this arrangement. Perhaps, just maybe, this could put our society on the road to a truly meaningful education for all.

"P" is for Parents and Powerful

2010-02-17T16:58:00.000-08:00

One of the things that can drive teachers crazy is that we are NEVER permitted to mention the "P" Word. When we are in meetings talking about how to improve things in schools and for students, the "P" word is not allowed to be spoken. What, you might ask, is the dreaded "P" word? Well, it is "PARENTS". Parents, we have all been told, are their child's first teachers. Parents are the ones who spend the most time with their children before they go to school, and parents are the ones who transmit (either obviously or implicitly) their attitudes towards school and education to their offspring. Every classroom teacher knows that if you need to do some special or extra work with a student, you must get a parent on your side before it can happen. However, school administrators and government officials who deal with education are extremely reluctant to call some parents out on their neglectful behavior. If a child does not come to school, or comes to kindergarten woefully ill-prepared, or is tired and/or hungry everyday, WHO is responsible for that?? Well, logic would tell you it is the parents, but school districts will tell you that the school (meaning teachers) MUST find a way to overcome all this and make sure the child becomes proficient or advanced in all subjects.
What would happen if we told the truth to parents? What would happen if we said, "You are the single most powerful person in your child's life. Nothing I do can work without your support."? Would parents step up, own their power, and use it to propel their children towards success? I think they would. I hope they would. We know that some parents have always done this. This kind of parental involvement and power does not always tie into to socio-economic status, we have all known poor parents who make sure their children excel in school and wealthy parents who are quite neglectful. However, too often, poorer schools are the schools that lack sufficient parental involvement. There are many reasons for this, but maybe we need to stop listing the reasons, and just ask parents to accept their power. Being a parent is the most important job we will ever do, and we all must realize that it is critical for our children that parents own up to their influence and make sure their children take advantage of all school opportunities open to them.

Turnaround or Boondoggle??

2010-02-12T08:31:00.000-08:00

Once again, the School District of Philadelphia seems ready to turn over some of its most struggling schools to outside managers. Will this work? Have we learned NOTHING from past experience? Last time we gave a bunch of schools to Educational Management Organizations (EMOs), the results were less than inspiring. In fact, the results were so bad that most of the schools were returned to the management of the district. Here is what the School District's website says about the new "Renaissance Schools":
There are three major components of the Renaissance Schools initiative:
1) identifying chronically low-performing District schools that are not likely to achieve dramatic improvements without transformative change, 2) identifying individuals and organizations that are capable and prepared to turnaround around failing schools in Philadelphia, and 3) empowering school communities to play an active role in the turnaround and ongoing support of their school. The District believes that these components must be implemented with rigor and transparency in order to create an effective and lasting process for turning around failing schools in Philadelphia.

SUPPOSEDLY, these EMOs and Charters will have to retain ALL the children currently in the school. But will they really do this? What about parents who want to opt out--where will their children be sent? Instead of bringing in outside managers, why not have a series of thoughtful, exploratory meetings with the current staff and parents? They are the ones who intimately know the school and its students--and believe me--they probably have plenty of useful ideas about how to improve the schools.
Many EMOs and charters come in with many preconceived ideas and cookie-cutter plans that will not fit every school and student. The way they traditionally deal with this is to turf out the kids and families that do not get with the program. The district says they will not do that this time, but can we trust them? Probably not. Will EMOs and Charters be required to treat special education students fairly and legally? I am not the only one worried about this--The Education Law Center's Len Rieser blogged about his concerns on the Philadelphia School Notebook's site: http://www.thenotebook.org/blog/102243/something-can-be-said-school-districts
EVERYONE concerned about children and schools should be worried about how the Renaissance Schools will be doled out. Will they go to Arlene's friends? The SRC members political cronies? Will we really see "rigor and transparency" in this process?
I do not teach at either a Renaissance eligible or alert school, but I am concerned about the students who attend them and the staff who work at them. I hope all these students are not simply handed over to money-making companies to experiment on.

More Scripts

2010-02-10T20:10:00.000-08:00

My last post had an interesting comment from Sandy, a Title I reading teacher. They, too, are under lots of pressure to use scripted programs because they must justify the expenditure of federal funds to help kids read. "Research-based" is the new buzzword--but what does it really mean? Just like with drug and medical research, it matters WHO is sponsoring the studies. Can we really believe in a study that is sponsored and paid for by the publishing company that stands to gain millions from the sale of the program being researched? The common sense answer is no, but school districts seem to be suckers for these kinds of sales pitches. In Philly, and maybe in other places too, teachers often wonder if the programs are being selected because the sales people have some kind of "in" with the district. Are the people in charge buying programs (spending taxpayers' money)from their friends, relatives, former colleagues??? I know that this would surprise NO ONE in Philadelphia if it turned out to be true! How can the process be made more transparent? How can teachers become a part of the process, that after all, should be about helping our students--not lining the pockets of publishing companies?

HEY ARLENE! SCRIPTED PROGRAMS ARE NOT ENGAGING!

2010-02-08T07:59:00.000-08:00

I've tried to give it my best effort, truly I have. But it all came to a head for me one day last week when one of my students (an engaging, interesting 8th grader) said to me, "Mrs. L., why are they doing this to us?" The "this" she was talking about was the "Corrective" reading and math programs that many School District of Philadelphia schools are now forced to use. Philadelphia Magazine reported inaccurately last month that the corrective programs are used in after school remedial programs. The truth is that the "Empowerment Schools" must use these programs for EVERY STUDENT two periods per day. That is 90 minutes of scripted, rote programs, and many students are feeling punished by it! My student asked "what did we do to deserve this, are we that horrible?", and she is not really a drama queen--she truly feels that these two programs (corrective reading and math) are sucking much of the creativity and interest out of her day. My student--an 8th grader from a semi-poor neighborhood in North Philly--could clearly see what the PhD in charge of the district apparently cannot: these programs are not helping her learn, or engaging her interest, or helping her with higher order thinking skills that she will need to fulfill her life goals. When I had this student for social studies last year, she participated enthusiastically in discussions about the problems of disease and colonialism in Africa! This sort of teaching--which students actually find engaging--is being swept aside for robotic scripted programs that most students find mind-numbing.
For years, the district has been telling teachers we need to engage students and differentiate instruction. All of that is true--kids learn better when they are interested, and not every kid learns the same way! So, what are we doing now? Pushing every kid into a scripted program! As usual with large corporate-type entities, the District is talking out of both sides of their collective mouth! We need highly-qualified, innovated, committed, dedicated teachers. Yes we do! And we have many! However, highly-qualified, innovative, committed, dedicated teachers DO NOT want to read from scripts. We know how to teach, we know how to remediate, we know how to raise test scores! LET US DO IT!

The Other Stuff

2010-02-01T14:54:00.000-08:00

Many teachers know that the hardest part of their job is "the other stuff". By that we mean everything that does not have directly to do with instruction and teaching, but has a HUGE, practically incalculable amount to do with whether our students are ready to learn. How can kids be expected to learn well and receptively when they are tired or hungry, or do not know what or who will greet them when they go home that day? Even if school is the best, safest place that they will be that day (and for many kids it is), how can they learn when the rest of life is so upsetting and unsettled? Today, a great teacher at my school saw one of her former students "steaming" through the halls upset and angry. She knew that this child probably was upset because of an unhappy and tenuous home situation--but the kid could not cope with school right now. My friend was able to take the child aside, calm her down and make her feel a little better for the moment. The child went back to her class ready to learn--for the moment. This is an everyday occurrence for many teachers, but it is really only a salve for the underlying problem. Kids need stability, kids need love--until they get that, they cannot fulfill their potential. This costs society in many ways, and for many years--but what can all of us do about it?

One Thing

2010-01-28T16:42:00.000-08:00

When we got the news, of course it was--as it always is--shocking and sad. One of our former students, only a high school senior, had died. She had been sickly off and on, and she died of natural causes. But, at just 18, no causes can really seem natural. The other 7th grade teacher and I went to the funeral to represent our school. I was prepared for the funeral, I have been to too many funerals, though not to any of former students. I had steeled myself to be strong, to "keep it together", to say a few words to the parents and grandparents. What I was not ready for when I entered that room was the sea of faces I recognized--dozens of our former students looked up at us. How could I have forgotten that her friends would be there? Dozens of young, sad faces--not quite ready to take this step into adulthood, but knowing that this--their presence to honor their lifelong friend--was necessary and important, that was the sight that brought me to tears. They looked so young, not fully formed but determined--one foot right into adulthood, and one still back in childhood somewhere. They took comfort in each other, and they remembered their friend, and they made us proud of how they are growing up.

A Challenge to Dr. Ackerman

2010-01-27T20:55:00.000-08:00

This is a Letter to the Editor I wrote to the Philadelphia Inquirer--it appeared in June. Surprisingly enough, Dr. Ackerman never responded!

As a Philadelphia Public School teacher, I am very disheartened by some of the opinions about her teaching staff that Dr. Ackerman has voiced lately. While all of us are not perfect, I daresay a huge percentage of us do our utmost to teach our students well everyday. We do this work because we are called to do it, and we believe that we make at least a small difference in the lives of our city's children everyday. We do this work in crumbling, leaky, rodent, insect, and mold infested buildings. We do this work with some children who haven't slept or eaten or been cared for in any significant way by the people who are supposed to raise them. Most of us take classes outside of the school day to better our instruction and learn new ways to help our students. We love our students and care for them in a way that many, many parents and students appreciate. If Dr. Ackerman thinks that we are doing such a poor job, I challenge her to run a series of "Master Classes" for teachers starting in September. Walk into a school in the morning with a lesson prepared (pick a different grade each week) and walk into a random classroom to teach the class. Rules: no calling the principal ahead of time, no culling the difficult students from the class, come without an entourage--just pick a class and show us your magic. The district could make a podcast so all teachers can learn from it. Perhaps you could teach us something, Dr. Ackerman.

Just A Day

2010-01-27T19:05:00.000-08:00

First high school report card day: As seventh and eighth grade teachers at our neighborhood public school, we can be sure of this one thing: We will have visitors. One of the lovely things about our school is that no one ever really leaves--most of our graduated kids will come back to visit. Today they come back to show us their first high school report cards. Some are proud, some are chastened, but most come back to tell us that we were right (we knew that): high school IS harder, there IS more work. We look at the proffered report cards, congratulate on As and Bs, encourage "Work harder, you know you can" on the Cs, and look rueful and scold a little while encouraging greater effort on the Fs. We ask about families, clubs, sports, etc... This day is a good day, we get to see a small bit of the fruits of our labors, we get to see that even a knuckle-headed, goofy seventh grader matures, we get to look at the students we have now and remember that they, too, will grow, mature, sometimes take our advice. And, we get to hope, and see that hope in them.