September 8, 2008
by Peter Campbell
Portland Public Schools Superintendent Carole Smith’s vision, articulated in her Friday address to the City Club (57KB PDF), focuses on academic skills in early elementary, then continues to focus on academic achievement vis a vis test scores as a measure of whether kids are likely to graduate. Two examples from her speech:
Are [students] ready to read by the time they enter first grade?
As they leave third grade, are they reading fluently enough to understand the
information and ideas presented — do they have strong foundation for the rest of their schooling?
But what’s missing from these recommendations are the voices of the students who chose to drop out of school. If they had had a mentor who monitored their academic progress, would they have stayed in school? Smith thinks so, and cites the examples of two students — six-year-old Charles at Rosa Parks and 9th-grader Eric at Cleveland High. While these stories are moving and powerful, they are — of course — success stories, stories about the ones that made it.
But what about the ones that didn’t make it?
We don’t know. But it would probably be a good idea if we found out. After all, in the day and age of high-quality customer service, it might make sense to ask the customer why they no longer patronize your business.
Here’s what I see:
- the new OR exit exam will increase drop-outs, as is the case in most states that have adopted high-stakes exit exams
- an intense emphasis on “how am I doing?” undermines “what am I learning?’ and, more importantly, “what do I care about?”
Smith calls for partnerships with local businesses and organizations to give students real-world learning opportunities similar to what The Met School does for its students. That’s great. But let’s not kid ourselves: focusing on academic achievement alone is not going to save kids from dropping out. But making schools exciting, relevant, fun places to be will.
Peter Campbell is a parent, educator, and activist, who served in a volunteer role for four years as the Missouri State Coordinator for FairTest before moving to Portland. He has taught multiple subjects and grade levels for over 20 years. He blogs at Transform Education.
12 Comments
September 5, 2008
by Steve Rawley
In an e-mail sent to staff and some community members, Carole Smith expresses great enthusiasm and joy in her work on the first day of school. As a parent, I find this encouraging.
What I find discouraging is how she frames the issue of equity.
“…[W]ith every decision,” writes Smith, “we must ask ourselves about equity. All too often, a student’s family income and ethnicity predict his or her eventual success in school.”
This is true, sad, and terribly unjust.
But this defines equity exclusively in terms of outcomes. It omits two critical facts. The first is that as a school district, we control only a small portion of the inputs that lead to unequal outcomes.
Secondly, by focusing on outcomes, we conveniently avoid the inconvenient fact that a student’s race and income are also extremely accurate predictors of the wealth of curriculum and the level of teacher experience on offer at that student’s school.
The problem with striving for equity in outcomes is not that it’s a bad goal. It’s imperative that we improve things for our poorest students. The problem is that it is impossible for any school district to do this alone. We need a concerted federal, state and local anti-poverty program to make a serious dent in this problem.
“Closing the achievement gap” is a logical fallacy, in fact, and it’s perpetuated by the a breed of “reformers” we’re all familiar with: the Gates and Broad foundations, and our old friend Vicki Phillips. As they have pursued this false, unattainable goal, they have driven public investment out of Portland’s poor and minority neighborhoods and have set up schools for failure. This has led to increased out-transfers and decreased opportunity, and is a logical path to school closures. There can be no question that as a national movement, this is opening the door for more charter schools, and from there it’s just a small step to vouchers.
I don’t believe Carole Smith wants to convert our schools to charters or give out vouchers for private Christian schools. But I do believe her concept of equity is unduly influenced by those who are doing active harm to the institution of the common school.
It is a fundamental truth that we as a school district can never attain equity in terms of “success in school.”
Success, or “achievement,” are terms that boil down to extremely crude metrics (standardized tests and graduation rates), and they invariably have led to a narrower, shallower curriculum with a focus on “core” academics (numeracy and literacy) in Portland schools that serve disproportionate numbers of poor and minority students.
I’ve documented repeatedly how secondary students in the Jefferson, Madison, Marshall and Roosevelt clusters have been systematically robbed of comprehensive high schools (0 remain) and middle schools (3 remain). The predominately white, middle class students in the Cleveland, Grant, Lincoln and Wilson clusters have preserved their comprehensive high schools (all 4 remain) and middle schools (6 remain, including two each in the Wilson and Cleveland clusters).
It’s not hard to see how this reduction in the breadth and depth of curriculum would actually be detrimental to “achievement.”
Instead of tilting at windmills trying to shape outcomes while controlling only a small portion of the inputs that contribute to a student’s success or failure, Portland Public Schools needs to focus on the inputs it does control: equity of opportunity. This we can achieve, with existing funding, city-wide, today. We can end the equity “debate,” and I’ll gladly shut down this blog tomorrow, and start hammering on the state for better funding.
Let’s talk about equity in terms of not being able to tell the wealth of a neighborhood by the wealth of course offerings at the local high school.
Until we first see it in this light, and as a greater societal issue of poverty, it’s hard to take seriously the conflation of “equity” with the the logically false goal of “closing the achievment gap.”
Don’t get me wrong. I like Carole Smith, especially her energy, enthusiasm, and her desire to work with stakeholders to find solutions. She ends her e-mail with a quote from Ron Heifetz: “Solutions are achieved when ‘the people with the problem’ go through a process together to become ‘the people with the solution.'”
It is my goal to help our superintendent recognize the problem of approximately half of Portland as one of dramatically unequal opportunity. If you stand on the eastern boundary of PPS and look west, it’s hard to miss that students on the fringes of PPS (and of society) have been getting a progressively worse and worse deal as we strive to “close the achievement gap,” a process which has systematically widened the “opportunity gap.”
Instead of focusing on crudely measured outcomes, largely determined by inputs we have no control over, we need to focus on the inputs over which we have total control.
I firmly believe that if we first address the opportunity gap, gains in closing the achievement gap will follow.
Steve Rawley published PPS Equity from 2008 to 2010, when he moved his family out of the district.
18 Comments
September 2, 2008
by Steve Rawley
Tomorrow marks a significant milestone for Portland Public Schools, as Carole Smith begins her second school year at PPS, the first with her own budget. It’s not clear yet how she (and the board’s budget committee) did.
Fortunately, Smith gave us some key points on which to gauge progress.
On the day her hire was announced Smith said “Jefferson’s going to be great.” Her staff solicited “proof points” from the community last fall to be implemented this fall.
I suggested a dramatic increase in funding to immediately beef up schools like Jefferson (similar to Steve Buel’s suggestion here).
I have not yet heard whether this one-time arts magnet school has a music teacher this year, or a world language other than Spanish. There was also talk of adding AP classes. (Any reports from the Jefferson community would be appreciated.)
I do know the middle and high schoolers at Jefferson’s Young Women’s Academy still do not have a staffed library. Likewise the students of the academies at the Marshall High School campus, whose principal does not think students need library staff in the Internet age (librarians, please don’t throw things at your computer while reading this).
Speaking of libraries, another huge challenge to Smith was getting the K-8 transition out of crisis mode. By early summer, many parent concerns had been addressed, and the focus of concern came down to libraries. At the district’s last accounting, nearly a third of K-8 schools completely lack library staff. I know at least one of them has hired some part-time non-certified staff, but what about the others?
Carole Smith did not explicitly set out to reform the small schools at Madison, but the issue came up and forced her hand. Were this fall’s Madison students allowed to fill out their schedules with classes across the small schools walls?
David Colton’s involuntary transfer was — kind of — rescinded, but even he calls it a “Pyrrhic victory at best.” Whether or not students are still constrained to academic silos will be the true test of what kind of victory this is for them.
And while we’re on the topic of Madison, middle grades and libraries, 88 eighth graders start at Madison High tomorrow, and the school has lost its library assistant. They’re holding a fundraiser to get the position back. Also, word is that the Madison eighth grade academy has a severe shortage of clerical staff to register new eighth grade students who start school tomorrow, many without schedules.
On the eve of the 2008-09 school year, the jury is still out on whether we’re starting with a bang or a fizzle, but some preliminary signs look troubling. Please post your experiences here, or e-mail them privately if you prefer (steve at ppsequity dot org).
Steve Rawley published PPS Equity from 2008 to 2010, when he moved his family out of the district.
Comments Off on PPS starting the school year off with a…
August 29, 2008
by Peter Campbell
Washington state Superintendent of Public Instruction Terry Bergeson issued an extremely sharp criticism of the federal No Child Left Behind Act on Thursday.
It’s time for the Portland Public Schools board and senior administrators to do the same thing.
Bergeson wants to replace AYP, reduce state testing to only 3 grades, and focus more on improvement — all good steps. She would also stop funding after-school tutoring under NCLB (called “supplemental educational services”) and transfers out of Title I dollars and equalize the per-student funding sent to each state (which now varies widely with, in general, poorer states getting less).
Monty Neill, Deputy Director for FairTest, offered this analysis:
The steps she proposes — mostly consistent with the Joint Statement on NCLB — would greatly reduce the damage while opening up space for real improvement. Regretfully, she fails to call for development of better assessment (she’s been a staunch defender of the state’s WASL test, including its graduation requirements) though she talks about “screening and diagnostic testing” (not sure what that really means). Her improvement proposals are pretty thin in many ways (see Forum on Educational Accountability documents for far better, stronger ideas). And her suggestions for English Language Learners and students with disabilities may raise concerns and are too slim to be sure what she means – lots of details to figure out there.
See this 3-page memo (32KB PDF) from Bergeson for more details.
Peter Campbell is a parent, educator, and activist, who served in a volunteer role for four years as the Missouri State Coordinator for FairTest before moving to Portland. He has taught multiple subjects and grade levels for over 20 years. He blogs at Transform Education.
21 Comments
August 29, 2008
by Steve Rawley
The Portland Public Schools board of education’s appointment last night of Martín González was certainly no surprise. Two of the five candidates — Blanton and Stephan — were unqualified, and two of the remaining three — Buel and Moore — were openly critical, one even sarcastic, about the board’s student transfer and school funding policies which have created a second tier of neighborhood schools in our poor and minority areas.
Evidently these two didn’t get the memo that the student transfer policy is the Thing That Shan’t be Mentioned in Public. After all, it solves such a Very Important Problem.
González got this memo, and also the one about keeping all dissent under wraps. As he pointed out in the candidate forum Tuesday, he worked for many years in an organization that makes all decisions by consensus. He as much as said he’s a go-with-the-flow kind of guy. He appears completely unlikely to rock the boat on any significant issues (e.g. the student transfer policy).
For at least five years, this school board has ruled by inertia. It is extremely rare, if not unheard of in recent history, for any significant policy to originate with the board. Instead, they abdicate their policy-making role to staff, discuss it in private and rubber stamp it in public.
When they do have to make a decision — hiring a superintendent, approving or denying a charter school, appointing board leadership — the decisions are made behind closed doors with no public deliberation, and are almost always unanimous (or nearly unanimous). By the time they go before the public, it is a done deal, and any board discussion (not to mention citizen comment) is moot.
If there is dissent, or even difficult considerations arriving at consensus, these are rarely articulated publicly.
The appointment of González shows us two such examples. First, when approving the process for appointing a new member on July 7, the vote was 5-1. Sonja Henning voted “no,” but during board discussion of the issue, she deferred. “I don’t need to say it here,” she said.
After the meeting adjourned and the cameras and microphones were turned off, two of her board colleagues joined her for a discussion that greatly exceeded the length of the official board meeting.
Doesn’t the public have a right to know why she voted “no”? Isn’t public deliberation a fundamental piece of the democratic process?
In last night’s pre-ordained appointment of González, board “discussion” focussed solely on kudos to González and how excellent “all five” candidates were.
Surely, in private, the board had discussed the other four candidates in some detail. Surely they spoke of the fact that two were not truly qualified, that Steve Buel, while arguably the most qualified candidate, spent too much time directly criticizing the board’s failure to act on equity, and that Rita Moore seemed too willing to challenge them on their student transfer and school funding policies. Surely they talked about how much easier it will be to work with somebody who supports the current transfer policy and whose style is non-confrontational.
Yes, it might be uncomfortable to come right out and say these things on the public record, but we all know they’re being said, and we all know important decisions are being made in private.
I’m not suggesting this board is breaking Oregon’s public meeting law. Legally, they can meet privately in non-majority groups, and they can play phone tree, deliberating and reaching consensus out of the public eye.
But even if they’re hewing to the letter of the law, they habitually violate the spirit of open, democratic process.
Steve Rawley published PPS Equity from 2008 to 2010, when he moved his family out of the district.
2 Comments
August 27, 2008
by Steve Rawley
The school board office has issued a revised agenda for tomorrow’s special board meeting, with the start time changed to 5 pm. The meeting, previously scheduled to start at 7, is still scheduled for an hour, and still has the single agenda item of appointing a zone 4 director.
Steve Rawley published PPS Equity from 2008 to 2010, when he moved his family out of the district.
4 Comments
August 27, 2008
by Steve Rawley
When David Wynde, wearing a Hawaiian shirt, used his single question last night to ask prospective board members to name a positive thing the district has done during his five years on the board, you can’t help but think of all the irrelevant — often disrespectful — questions asked during the presidential primary debates.
It is not the role of school board members to give warm fuzzies. Their role is to make policy.
I haven’t watched the forum yet, but Beth Slovic has a write-up online in which she takes the analogy to Democratic presidential candidates a step further.
Any reports from those who saw the forum are appreciated here.
Steve Rawley published PPS Equity from 2008 to 2010, when he moved his family out of the district.
6 Comments
August 25, 2008
by Steve Rawley
In a broadly expected move, and for the expected reasons, the Oregonian has endorsed Martin Gonzalez for school board zone 4.
Citing his familiarity with Portland Public Schools, his life experience and (most importantly) his support for the district’s student transfer policy, the editorial board of the O show that they want the same thing that the school board wants: an ethnic minority who won’t challenge the one policy they most fear being challenged.
It is a demonstrable, shameful fact that neighborhood-to-neighborhood student transfers have increased ethnic and socio-economic segregation in our city’s schools, and, in combination with the funding formula and teacher transfer policy, have left disproportionate numbers of poor and minority students in second-tier schools. This policy also shifts tens of millions of dollars in public investment out of poor and minority neighborhoods every year (261 KB PDF).
I can understand the transfer policy being viewed as an way for disadvantaged students to escape sub-par schools. I’ve even suggested a modification to the transfer policy to allow poor students to transfer out of poor schools. But this can only be a short-term solution until a comprehensive policy to reinvest in our poorest neighborhoods is implemented.
Otherwise it’s nothing but a fig leaf for an effectively classist and racist policy of public divestment from neighorhoods that most need public investment.
Steve Rawley published PPS Equity from 2008 to 2010, when he moved his family out of the district.
6 Comments
August 23, 2008
by Steve Rawley
David Colton’s involuntary transfer has been more or less rescinded, according to Steve Duin’s column in the Oregonian. Duin also reports the outfit that channeled Gates Foundation money to fund the “small schools” implementation has withdrawn Madison’s 2008-09 grant.
Portland Public Schools spokesperson Matt Shelby told Duin that because Madison is “not going down that road toward small, fully autonomous high schools, the money is no longer there.”
Whether this means students will now be allowed to cross over and take classes not offered in the academies they signed up for as freshmen remains unclear. This was the flash point that led to Colton’s involuntary transfer in the first place, and it would defy all logic to continue to prohibit this.
The ability to admit mistakes and take corrective action is a sign of strength and integrity, and was never seen with Carole Smith’s predecessor. Getting it right at Madison would be a very hopeful sign for PPS.
Steve Rawley published PPS Equity from 2008 to 2010, when he moved his family out of the district.
Comments Off on Backpedaling on Colton, Small Schools
August 21, 2008
by Steve Rawley
The Portland Public Schools Board of Education office has released notice and agendas for two meetings next week, including a Thursday meeting with one item on the agenda: “Resolution to Appoint Zone 4 Board Director.”
The process, approved earlier this summer, was intentionally left open-ended. But this agenda would appear to indicate the board is ready to appoint one of the five applicants.
With equity as the defining crisis of the current board, an idealist would hope they will appoint the only candidate with direct experience, not to mention the courage and conviction to actually come to the table with practical, immediate solutions: Steve Buel.
No, Buel wouldn’t make the existing board’s life any easier. In fact, you can bet he would make them pretty uncomfortable at times. But they weren’t elected to a social club. The gross inequities in our district simply aren’t being solved by the board’s tack of politely ignoring them, or of speaking in generalities and proposing only baby steps.
Current board members seem mortified of anybody who speaks boldly of the elephant in the room, so you can pretty well rule out Buel.
Safer money is on the appointment of Martin Gonzalez, who is believed to favor “school choice” as an escape valve for poor and minority students. (Never mind that the district’s transfer and school funding policies have actually trapped disproportionate numbers of poor and minority students in second-tier schools with dramatically less opportunity and “choice” than white, middle class students get in their neighborhoods.)
Gonzalez may challenge the board on their policies regarding English language learners, but he does not appear likely to rock their boat with regard to the transfer policy. Plus, he satisfies their rumored desire for a “black or Hispanic male.”
The Oregonian interviewed the candidates this week, and will likely run an endorsement soon. They have been historically hostile to Buel, so it will be interesting to see who they go with (I’m betting on Gonzalez, for the same reasons listed above).
Of course, I’m happy to be proven wrong. Maybe — just maybe — there are four board members who are ready to actually do something bold, and can see the wisdom of appointing a passionate firebrand like Buel to help them really address the equity crisis.
Or maybe they’ll just keep kicking this problem down the road.
Steve Rawley published PPS Equity from 2008 to 2010, when he moved his family out of the district.
Comments Off on On the fast track
« Previous Entries Next Entries »
