The reality about small schools
Here's my response to this brief about small schools. My own child attends a small school and I well understand the advantages. And I agree that SFUSD needs to support all its schools. But I'm concerned about the inaccurate script in some cases (as in a report in the past couple of days on KGO TV).
The script has it that there is a need for more small schools in SFUSD, and based on that idea, there's a current proposal on the table for a new one in the Bayview. But here's the real picture:
The script has it that there is a need for more small schools in SFUSD, and based on that idea, there's a current proposal on the table for a new one in the Bayview. But here's the real picture:
- Enrollment in SFUSD is dropping as families move away, a situation univerally blamed on San Francisco's astronomical housing prices. That means that if a new school is started, an existing school will have to close, a painful and divisive process.
- SFUSD has a number of small schools, and demand for seats in them is not exceeding supply overall. So there isn't a sound basis for adding more. SFUSD also has at least two larger high schools organized into Small Learning Communities.
- There is not a clear pattern of higher achievement at SFUSD's existing small schools, nor of higher achievement for African-American and Latino students.
- Most of the high schools in greatest demand, with the most applications per opening, and with the highest achievement are the larger, comprehensive high schools.
3 Comments:
i think one good point made in the tv news reporting on the small schools advocacy in sfusd is that is is focused on the southeast part of the City, and in the neighborhoods with the most need for new and creative educational programs.
i think people have to visit june jordan and other small schools to really understand that 'small schools by design' aren't just about size. they are part of a larger movement that is trying to provide new and better opportunities to the nation's most struggling communities.
But that doesn't answer any of my points. A new school in this district cannot avoid harming existing schools; the existing small schools overall are not full and are not turning away applicants; and the existing small schools do not ovearll show higher achievement and are not closing the achievement gap or raising African-American/Latino achievement.
Since the script that new small schools are needed is based on a series of myths, and new small schools will actively harm existing schools, the implication that new small schools are justified needs to be challenged.
In addition, the group proposing to open a new Bayview school is already running (or involved with) one struggling SFUSD charter school, Leadership, so its track record here is lackluster.
And based on discussion on that organization's blog, parents who are hoping for the new small school are badly misinformed. For example, one parent of a future high schooler posted that no SFUSD high schools except School of the Arts have strong arts programs, which is -- I'm happy to say -- entirely inaccurate. So if parents are lobbying for a new small school based on misinformation, that's another reason to question the proposal.
Caroline,
Great comments and you're correct, Mr. Mar's response doesn't address any of your points. We are experiencing a similar small schools push at the expense of existing schools here in Sacramento. Each of the small schools opened over the past five years is quite significantly under-enrolled and none have demonstrated achievement gains,yet the district continues to open new ones. This situation has created a fiscal mess, which is putting enormous pressure on our large high schools that continue to enroll over 75% of the district's students. Not to mention the chaos created by students bouncing from one school to another all year long.
Post a Comment
<< Home