Model schools' cherry-picking questioned
When the Small Schools Redesign Initiative was being promoted with SFUSD, the Boston Pilot Schools were cited as a model — one that was an unqualified success.
But today's Boston Globe reports that the Pilot Schools are screening and cherry-picking students, which puts a big asterisk on their claims of success. The Globe cites charter schools that also do that (as do some SFUSD charters).
But today's Boston Globe reports that the Pilot Schools are screening and cherry-picking students, which puts a big asterisk on their claims of success. The Globe cites charter schools that also do that (as do some SFUSD charters).
Pilot schools setting more hurdlesAnd a sidebar about admission criteria:
Original mission skewed, some say
By Maria Sacchetti and Tracy Jan, Globe Staff | July 8, 2007
Most of Boston's experimental pilot high schools, held up as a national model and acclaimed for outperforming traditional public schools, have quietly created admissions hurdles that call into question whether they are stacking the deck with the most successful students.
The pilot high schools, run by the public school system, often demand student transcripts, teacher recommendations, and essays from applicants, practices more common in private schools, a Globe review of admissions policies has found.
Boston's superintendent and others say the hurdles fly in the face of the pilot schools' original purpose, which was to show that given more freedom in budgeting, teaching, and hiring, they could produce higher test scores with the same pool of students. The goal was to have traditional Boston public schools then replicate the success.
Regular school principals who accept any student who walks in the door say the pilots' admissions criteria infuriates them, given how a recent study hailed pilot schools' superior test scores and college-going rates. And, cities around the state and the nation, including Los Angeles, are creating pilots because of Boston's success.
"I think it's unfair, obviously," said Michael Fung, headmaster at Charlestown High School. "If you allow us to get rid of 25 percent of our kids, I can assure you I'd do a much better job than I am."
Superintendent Michael G. Contompasis said he is concerned about the perception that pilot schools are picking the best students and ordered them in recent years to stop reviewing transcripts and to phase out other requirements. Some headmasters continue to resist, insisting that they use the information to better understand students' needs and that they do not screen for the highest achievers.
State education officials, who last year proposed modeling four failing schools around the state after Boston's high-scoring pilot schools, said they were unaware of the pilots' admissions requirements and would ban the four schools from using them.
"Pilot and charter schools are doing a really good job with urban kids, but we shouldn't be comparing them to regular schools because they're educating kids who aren't exactly the same," said Ellen Guiney , executive director of Boston Plan for Excellence. "The kids farthest behind are not in the pilot schools."
The majority of Boston's pilot high schools enroll far fewer failing students than regular schools, according to a new study by Boston Plan for Excellence, a nonprofit that works with the city to improve schools.(partial excerpt)
Make the best impression possible'— Caroline
July 8, 2007
Below is a sampling of the steps parents and children must take to apply to some charter schools and Boston's pilot schools. School officials say they often make exceptions for those who cannot complete the steps.
River Valley Charter School in Newburyport
Parents: Complete an application, attend a school information meeting, tour the school, and sign an agreement stating that they understand that the school expects each family to volunteer 40 hours a year at the school and contribute to the annual fund.
Sturgis Charter Public School in Hyannis
Students: Fill out an application listing favorite subjects, favorite book read since sixth grade, and extracurricular activities. Submit two typewritten essays on why they are choosing Sturgis and on their favorite teacher. The essays "should be an example of your best writing" and should be edited "to make the best impression possible," according to
the application.
(partial excerpt)
Labels: Charters
2 Comments:
caroline,let's put this in context, ok?
your child attends SOTA in the city. this is an alternative public school in s.f that requires rather stringent application procedures, interviews, and auditioning.
the rigorous application process to that public school is no different than some of the charter school application requirements. as a matter of fact; the audition process does seem rather elitist; even if it is demonstrating a mastery of some art. it seems as if it would be difficult to be in a lower socioeconomic bracket and shuttle your child to dance, theatre,music or drawing classes...
you have found a school that suites your child... why are you so hostile toward families that have chosen alternatives within the public school system in a charter school?
actually, no need to answer.. i have read enough of your venomous charter school diatribes to know your answer!!
aptos middle school and SOTA are fine schools.. and obviously work for your children.don't begrudge the rest of us the choices that WE make.
I'm fine with putting this in context. I think it's acceptable for public schools to OPENLY set admission requirements (such as artistic or academic criteria), as part of the school's design. They point is OPENLY. Some people do object to that, and that's a matter of debate. It's quite well accepted through our communities that some public schools are openly designed with admission criteria, so it's not a radical notion.
What I object to with charter schools is the SECRET, COVERT picking, choosing and dumping of students. Many charters cherry-pick or design admissions processes that self-select aggressively for students who are likely to be successful. Then, pretending that they don't do that, they bash traditional public schools -- the ones that accept their rejects and dumpees -- and hold themselves up as superior. Even if the schoolsn don't do that themselves, the charter lobby's mightily funded PR operation is doing it busily. That does damage to public schools. Again, it's the charter schools' secret, covert and dishonest picking, choosing and dumping that I object to.
I'm not hostile toward the FAMILIES who choose charter schools. But I know that charter schools are harmful to public schools -- and deliberately so, as they're a weapon in the right-wing arsenal aimed at privatizing public education. So I speak out about them, a small voice trying to counter the massive pro-charter lobby and PR campaign.
I can enumerate again the many ways charter schools harm public education, but clearly you're aware that I've written extensively about the problems. I would assume you're not actually reading what I've written -- which is substantive rather than venomous -- because if you have, you would realize that my issue was the secret picking-choosing-dumping done by charters, and that I am not bashing their families, students or teachers.
Post a Comment
<< Home