There is one thing that everyone agrees on. Chicago Public Schools are failing the kids. What people can't agree on is how to solve the problem.
The Illinois Hunger Coalition (IHC) finds that the Chicago Public School’s participation in the School Breakfast Program is deficient. On Tuesday, August 7, IHC released the School Breakfast in America’s Big Cities survey conducted by the Food Research and Action Center (FRAC) that finds Chicago is in last place out of 23 of the nation’s largest cities. In the Chicago Public School system only 28.7% of low-income students that participated in the National School Lunch Program actually participated in school breakfast in the 2005-2006 school year.
Diane Doherty, Executive Director of the Illinois Hunger Coalition, stated that “Everyone agrees, school breakfast increases school attendance, student attentiveness and achievement, and lowers the risk for childhood obesity. By describing the successes of other large school districts, this report prescribes a positive plan that can be implemented here in Chicago which includes; free breakfast for all students, inclusion of breakfast into the regular school day served in the classroom and “grab and go” programs, along with widespread promotion of the program, collaboration with anti-hunger advocates, and strong support and leadership within the schools. We talk about hosting the Olympics—lets talk about producing kids who can be future Olympians!”
Joe Moore alderman of the 49th ward seconded Doherty’s remarks by commenting, “When I learned that children who eat school breakfast consume more fruits, drink more milk and eat less saturated fat than those who don’t eat breakfast or eat at home, I agreed to introduce a resolution in the City County for a universal school breakfast program in CPS. The time has come for Chicago to move from last to first place in providing breakfast to our kids.” Rick Munoz alderman of the 22nd Ward noted, “The Chicago City Council voted unanimously to direct the Chicago Board of Education to provide breakfast to all CPS students; this study illustrates precisely why we need breakfast for all children in the Chicago Public Schools.”
Everyone has an opinion about what to do.
Harvard is one of several public schools here to get a top-to-bottom housecleaning in recent years – including replacing the principal and most teachers – in a bid to lift student achievement out of the nation's academic basement. The drastic approach is known as "turnaround," and Chicago is embracing it more than any US city, though it's unproven and is controversial among teachers, many parents, and students.
"It's risky in that it's new and has an untested track record," says Andrew Calkins, senior vice president at Mass Insight, a nonprofit group focused on school reform, and coauthor of a report on turnaround schools. "It's logical in that the other choice is to keep on doing what's been tried before, and we know what the results of that will be. What you try to do if you're Chicago is to minimize the risk and maximize the possibility of a good outcome" by thinking through everything that's needed to improve the climate for learning at a school.
As Principal Cowling sees it, the risk paid off. Until Harvard Elementary went through turnaround, the school was like "Beirut," he says – 50 kids running through the halls at any time, holes in the floors and peeling paint on the walls, fights on or near campus, no order in the classrooms.
"Now, you can tell it's a school," Cowling says.
In fact, the entire state is ranked 49th out 50 according to A+ rankings. So, the state's educational system is in crisis and every idea is up for debate no matter how radical.
State Sen. James Meeks (D-Chicago) plans to sponsor such legislation in the Illinois General Assembly next week in a special session called by Gov. Rod Blagojevich to address education funding.
I don't expect either measure to pass.
Meeks believes abolishing the property tax is an idea that could gain significant support.In any event, the ideas are likely to spark a new round of newspaper editorials and public debate about school funding in Illinois, and that's really the senator's initial goal as he attempts to force his colleagues in the Legislature to actually address the unfair and inadequate school funding system in this state.
One of the few bright spots in the state's educational system, and frankly in the country entirely, is the proliferation of charter schools in Illinois. Charter schools are smaller, with less bureaucracy, and allow for more flexibility and innovation. For instance, in my voluntary role, I have students "shadow" me while I work and thus each year a group of high school students get first hand experience in the mortgage business. Yet, an Illinois law recently limited the number of charter schools in Illinois to 100.
Now, one of the biggest opponents of charter schools is the teacher's union.
So teacher unions support charter school laws, right? Not quite!
Both major teacher unions, the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers view the charter school movement as a direct challenge, perhaps the greatest from any source. Thus they have opposed laws authorizing the establishment of charter schools, weakening charter school laws as much as possible and limiting the number of such schools that are authorized.
Even after all of this has failed, they continue to try to sweep back the sea. In Ohio where charter schools are called community schools, the Ohio Federation of Teachers wants the authorizing legislation to be found unconstitutional. Why is this so?
Primarily because of one thing that wasn't mentioned in the preceding positives about the charter school movement. That one thing is that charter school teachers, in overwhelming numbers, do not vote to affiliate with the teacher unions, nor do they tend to join the unions as individuals.
More than anything else the charter school movement is illustrating that teacher union rhetoric about teacher autonomy, professionalism, and conducive working conditions are just thatrhetoric.
Because charter schools are by nature smaller, often times teachers at such schools are usually paid better than their counter parts at traditional public high schools. Furthermore, charter schools, as this piece points out, have no trouble attracting and keeping the best teaching talent.
Even where others start a school, it is common for far more teachers, including large numbers of public school teachers, to apply for jobs than there are teaching positions available. This has been a common, almost universal, experience, from Marblehead, Massachusetts where a new charter school had 500 teachers apply for seven positions, to Arizona, where 200 sought one of ten openings.
Once hired, teachers also frequently find a better teaching environment, such as a school in Boston where teachers have their own room, a computer, e-mail, telephone, and no more than two preparations, four classes or 80 students daily. This enhanced autonomy and improved educational climate for teachers are all things that teacher unions say they advocate.
The opposition to charter schools from the teacher's union is entirely about power and nothing to do with policy. Charter schools perform better. Furthermore, there is always a waiting list for students attempting to enter a charter school. (about 13000 in Illinois)
What this shows, more than ever, is that the bureaucracy and power structure within our educational system is not merely part of the problem, it is the problem. Charter schools succeed because they are small enough to limit the bureaucracy. Rather than some bureaucrat telling a teacher how teach math, science, etc. charter schools have a novel idea. They allow the teachers themselves the freedom to teach their own subjects. By being outside the sytem, and being successful doing it, they threaten the system. The system shows where their loyalties lie. It isn't in improving the system. No, it is in maintaining their own power.
1 comment:
My sophmore student at Prespective
Charter School is now an "A/B" student. He graduated from a public school as a "C/D" student.
Smaller class sizes and teachers willing to teach,listen, answer questions and encourage each student to succeed has been priceless. My child has a supportive family but it's double encouragement to him and all of our young people, especially minority young men. I am very greatful for these institutions of learning and pray for their continued success.
Post a Comment