What Charleston, Philadelphia and Seattle Have in Common

A Feburary ABC News story mentioned that Charleston, Philadelphia and Seattle schools all share the same problem.

An unpopular superintendant? Troubled finances? Well, yes, depending on who you talk to or what you read, you could say both of those things are true as well. But the ABC News story was focused on something different --- parents manipulating the enrollment system.

ABC News: Parents Who Cheat for Their Kids

Comments

Charlie Mas said…
Hey - if people are cheating to get INTO Philadelphia public schools, I take away the message that there is something good happening in those schools. And if people PAY to send their kids to those schools, then I KNOW that something good is happening there.

As for Charleston, it appears to have the same problem as Seattle - they will not expand the capacity to meet the demand. There are 240 students seeking 40 seats at Buist Academy? Then why not create five more of them? I keep asking: if there is so much demand for schools and programs with long waiting lists, such as TOPS, John Stanford International School, or Spectrum in NE Seattle, then why doesn't the District duplicate or expand those programs to meet the demand?

Although any assertion about the motivations of others is never more than pure conjecture, I think the answer is two-fold:

1) The District doesn't care about what the people want. Seriously, what you want is not a factor in any of their decisions. They will look you right in the face and tell you so.

2) They will claim that they have no available buildings. This, of course, is a lie. They would have the available buildings if they were willing to acknowledge their failures. When less than 10 families name a school as their first choice for enrollment for more than three years in a row, that school is available to house a duplicate of a successful program.

ML King school would be open and full today if the District would have acknowledged that the school was not attracting students and had intervened to re-invent it. I know that MLK tried to do that itself with a Montessori program, but it came too late and without District support.
4/10/07, 7:46 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

The speaker list is up for the Board meeting tomorrow; not as packed as I thought with just four people on the waitlist. The majority of the speakers are speaking on high school boundaries (with several wanting to talk about Ballard High). There are only three of us speaking about the Green Dot resolution asking the City to not grant the zoning departures that Green Dot has requested.  It's me, long-time watchdog, Chris Jackins, and the head of the Washington State Charter Schools Association, Patrick D'Amelio.  (I knew Mr. D'Amelio when he headed the Alliance for Education and Big Brothers and Big Sisters; he's a stand-up guy.)
Read more

Breaking It Down: Where the District Might Close Schools

Update 2: an absolutely fabulous interactive map made by parent Beth Day (@thebethocracy on Twitter - she covers Board meetings and is fun to read).   end of update    Update 1: Mea culpa, I did indeed get Decatur and Thornton Creek mixed up. Thanks to all for the correction. end of update   I suspect some who read this post will be irate. Why do this? Because the district seems very hellbent on this effort with no oversight skid marks from the Board.    To clearly state - I do not believe that closing 20 schools is a good idea. I think they hit on 20 because they thought it might bring in the most savings. But the jury is still out on the savings because the district has not shown its work nor its data. I suspect closing schools and THEN leasing/renting them is the big plan but that means the district really has to keep the buildings up.   But this district, with its happy talk about "well-resourced schools" is NOT acknowledging the pain and yes, grief, that is to come fro
Read more

MEETING CANCELED - Hey Kids, A Meeting with Three(!) Seattle Schools Board Directors

 Update 2: So I have seen a message from President Liza Rankin on why she, Director Evan Briggs, and Director Michelle Sarju backed out of this meeting.  In a nutshell: - She says there was no organization to the meeting which is just not true. They had a moderator lined up and naturally the board members could have set parameters for what to discuss, length of meeting, etc. All that was fleshed out. - She also claimed that if the meeting was PTA sponsored, they needed to have liability insurance to use the school space. Hello? PTAs use school space all the time and know they have to have this insurance.  - She seems to be worried about the Open Public Meetings law. Look, if she has a meeting in a school building on a non-personnel topic, it should be an open meeting. It appears that Rankin is trying, over and over, to narrow the window of access that parents have to Board members. She even says in her message - "...with decisions made in public." Hmmm - She also says that th
Read more