Monday, October 19, 2009
Education / Woods Rezoning Plan Already Failing Pearl-Cohn Children
Posted by Jeff Woods on Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 7:41 AM
Comments (18)
Showing 1-18 of 18
Under the wonderful, old zoning plan, those kids would be back at Hillwood -- designated as a failing school -- instead of Pearl-Cohn, which is not a failing school.
I don't think kids are served well at EITHER of those schools. But that is not the issue Mr. Woods chooses to write about.
As has been the case with this entire zoning business, you have chosen to pick an easy and peripheral fight instead of attempting to examine the deeper and more complicated issues.
like
dislike
I'm all for examining the deeper and more complicated issues. I'd just rather not screw over the Pearl-Cohn kids while we're doing all this deep thinking.
BBB: the complicated issues are fairly straight forward. Poverty, without enrichment from where ever, repeats its cycle. Wake County, NC(Raleigh) has had a plan working for 40 years to give choice and maintain economic diversity: no court ordered busing or desegration plans nor "white" flight. As a result, businesses and families have flocked to the area. So what happened? The "neighborhood school" group just gained control of the School Board and there will be "rezoning" just like in MNPS. I suspect the influx of folks were from other areas of the country where smaller municipalities had their own school systems(i.e.homogeneous socio-economics) and did not have to deal with big time diversity. Smrekar and Goldring are national experts but MNPS hears its own drummer.
Some of the best teachers my kids ever had were brand spanking new. They still had belief of purpose, enthusiasm and a love for their job. Some of the worst teachers my kids ever had were long timers. Those teachers were lazy and coasting toward retirement. It's just so much deeper than new v. experienced. It's really about competence. If you are so concerned about the quality of teaching at Pearl Cohn - hey ANYWHERE in our district - why don't you take on tenure and how it is virtually impossible to fire the incompetent. Then we can have a conversation about truly qualified teachers, regardless of how many years experience.
New teachers need mentoring and guidance of experienced teachers and administrators. I agree completely with apokeintheye. My kids, too,had excellent and horrible teachers in MNPS, but usually the more seasoned 5-15 years knew more of "how" to teach and assess learning styles. They also had diverse classrooms and value that experience as much as the "book" learning.
Woods:
The solution you've presented all along for "not screwing over" the Pearl-Cohn kids affected by the rezoning is that they should simply be allowed to go back to Hillwood. You ignore (even though your readers have pointed it out for you time and again) that Hillwood is designated as a failing school, while Pearl-Cohn is not. Why is that? At the very least, your solution involves sending kids from a school that would rate a grade of poor but passing to one that gets an F. How does that help the kids? How does it show any concern for these kids?
If the thrust of your articles had been to focus on the overall poor quality of our schools, and the challenges faced by ANY school system when 65% of the kids are poor enough to qualify for government aid with school lunches, then I'd be there with you. If you were complaining about the failure of the Chamber of Commerce until recently to try to make the larger community aware of how the quality of our schools affects business and the local economy, more power to you. If you had been ripping on the decades-old lack of focus by the school board (they're actually doing more things now than ever before that are based on research and "best practices"), you'd be getting at something substantial.
If you put Nashville's situation within the context of other cities, you'd be doing your readers a service. For example, having the least experienced teachers in the most challenging schools has been a problem EVERYWHERE, not just in Nashville. The reasons for this are complicated and involve everything from teacher burnout to union issues to lack of funds for meaningful incentive pay.
Give your readers some insight into how Nashville's graduation rates compare with those of other major cities. We're worse than some, better than many. Columbus, Ohio, for example, is a place people often think of as a typical American city, not associated with places like Detroit or Cleveland that are coming apart at the seams. Columbus has some incorporated communities within its boundaries that have their own excellent public school systems. But the main public school system has a graduation rate of only around 40%, compared to closer to 70% for Nashville. Is it because Columbus is a more racist city than Nashville? Or take Philadelphia, where you'd expect the main public schools to be a disaster, and yet they have improved their graduation rates by 20 percentage points in the past decade. What's working there? These are some of the kinds of things you could be looking at if you want to give readers some depth.
Instead, you have consistently attempted to reduce the whole rezoning business in Nashville to a matter of racism -- making the schools in Hillwood and Bellevue whiter. And you do this in spite of the reality that, if we scotched the rezoning plan and went back to the old status quo, many of Nashville's high schools (such as Maplewood and White's Creek still would be heavily segregated, while Pearl-Cohn was almost 90% black enrollment even before the rezoning. Some of the elementary schools in the Pearl-Cohn cluster were virtually 100% black before the rezoning plan). So the new plan = segregation while the old one did not?
By addressing the questions of age vs. experience in teachers, and how difficult it is to get rid of incompetent tenured teachers (good op-ed piece in the NY Times last week on this subject), sueyyy and apokeintheeye have touched on more of the complexity involved here than you did in your screed that you're passing off as a story. Hell, the Tennessean story -- OMG, the Tennessean! -- linked to in your daily news round-up actually touched on more of the complexity than you did.
Please cut the simplistic, populist bullshit and do the kind of work you're capable of doing instead of taking wild shots from the hip.
Unfortunately, BBB all the cities are screwing around with their "graduation" rates. It's not whether the students graduated but are they educated well-enough to do a technical or college program. The sad truth is they are not and MNPS may have said they had such a graduation but you and I would not hire the majority of them to even enter basic data correctly. The argument about moving the North Nashville students from a failing school to a non-failing school is also smoke and mirrors. How many honors and AP courses are offered at PC compared to Hillwood? You can't even equate AP courses from school to school but you can equate their passing of the standardized test for credit.
Good points sueyyy but it's not just how many AP classes. It's the quality, too. Hillwood offers AP calculus, for example, but no student has passed the test for years to my knowledge. So just offering the classes, if they are not a quality experience, is also not helpful to the PC kids.
But even if the AP courses were all quality at Hillwood, that school has no where near the resources, not to mention sports, that PC does. Hillwood does not have the extra teachers, guidance, child care or social services that PC offers. It also has virtually no community support. Some choice.
Sueyyy:
I agree with you that college/work readiness is as much an issue as graduation rates. Nevertheless, grad rates remain an important indicator. For years, you're right that cities and states have fudged data on their grad rates, Nashville included. No Child Left Behind only exacerbated this tendency to make the data look better. Fortunately, in the final year of the Bush administration, the Dept. of Education announced that it was requiring a uniform method of calculation. To cite one example I'm familiar with, North Carolina previously calculated its dropout rate by dividing the number of students who started 12th grade against the number that actually graduated at the end of the year. The problem is that a high percentage of dropouts occur before 11th grade and thus weren't being counted by North Carolina. States will no longer be able to get by with this kind of Enron accounting.
OF COURSE the argument about moving kids from Pearl-Cohn to Hillwood is smoke and mirrors. That was my point; it's like complaining about the arrangement of deck chairs on the Titanic. This is why I object so strongly to the coverage of Woods and the complaints of those who say this plan is about "re-segregation" -- as if going to the old status quo was somehow acceptable. Why weren't these people complaining about the substandard education that North Nashville kids were receiving at Hillwood BEFORE the new plan? Why weren't they screaming about the high degree of segregation occurring at Pearl-Cohn and its cluster schools BEFORE the new plan? It looks to me like it's being used as a gambit to play cheap racial politics instead of actually improving outcomes for the kids.
Over the 25 years of navigating through the MNPS schools, 8 different schools for two kids, I've heard the constant comment why do our kids have to go to school with "those" kids. My experience is that it's race folks are talking about. And for many of our schools, it is rearranging the chairs on the deck. Because as you point out, if they are in a school with diversity, "those" kids often get the short end of the stick. But I would hate for the only vision they have of how the other lives is from the media.
Sueyyy:
I don't doubt there remains a good bit of racism among the parents you describe (I assume you were talking about parents). I wouldn't attempt to suggest that it remains a force, although it also gets wrapped into class distinctions. But that's a far cry from suggesting, as Woods does, that school officials are acting on racist motives.
Amid all this, of course, are some other questions that have been getting overlooked. We have a public school system in which around 70% of the kids are poor enough to qualify for free or reduced-cost lunches. No matter how you zone or assign the remaining 30% of the kids who come from higher income households, it's going to be very hard to create schools that don't contain a heavy component of poverty or near poverty.
There doesn't seem to be much disagreement that having a high concentration of poverty is a problem. So the question becomes: How does MNPS attract more students from higher income levels whose parents have either opted for the private system or chosen to locate in ring counties so they go to public schools that don't have so much poverty in them?
The Garcia administration's answer was basically to tell higher income families not to let the screen door hit them on the way out, and that seemed to be the attitude of several higher profile members of the board (I won't name names, but their initials are Ed Kindall and George Thompson).
Putting aside for a moment the question of race -- because I think that, for most families who don't want their kids to attend school with "those" kids, the biggest problem is about the culture of poverty rather than the color of skin alone -- there are only three ways for Nashville schools to create more socioeconomic diversity:
(1) If the city can raise thousands more families from the lower economic strata into the middle strata;
(2) If the city can attract more middle- and upper-class kids into Davidson County and into the public schools; and
(3) If MNPS can magically move about 20,000 of our lower-income kids into the public schools of Williamson, Wilson and Sumner Counties.
Strategy #2 looks like the best possibility.
Or 4. If the economy continues to tank, public school will be the choice since, not only can families not afford private schools, they can't afford to move. And the grandparents who were funding the escape are without funds themselves.
As for 2., more true choices may draw parents back but in Nashville, you have third generations of middle and working class families choosing private or home school.
4 is not a good ending and 2 will take a paradigm shift in educational leadership.
#1 would be the best ending, but helping families get out of poverty goes beyond what schools can do, obviously. That does raise an often overlooked issue: The largest number of factors that affect school achievement involve things outside of school (such as whether kids get read to at home during the pre-K years). We tend to put all the responsibility on the schools, when schools touch only a portion of children's lives.
If I could pick one high-impact strategy for low-income, at-risk kids, it would be to fund and staff about 12 more KIPP Academies in Nashville. The model works. Unfortunately, the leadership here for years has put obstacles in the way of schools that work on this model.
The Scene did a good story on KIPP several years ago. Maybe it's time for another one about why we haven't been able to see more of them here.
Well-run Charter schools work as long as they can keep recruiting bright, young folks who can work 14 hour days. Believe me, this is up close and personal. But, I do think the good ones are setting the paradigm for change that I mentioned earlier. Poorly run Charter schools are just like poorly run public or private schools. There is a passion and gift to teaching: we must reward the folks that have it and then let them mentor the next ones.
Here's what surprises me about the rezoning plan: that at least some in the African American community feel shafted, and that Jeff Woods has jumped on that bandwagon.
BBB is right that as long as 70% of kids in Nashville public schools qualify for free or reduced-cost lunches, all district schools will cope with problems related to poverty -- kids who come to school hungry or malnourished on a cheap diet, in need of medical or dental care, and whose homes may not be conducive to school work. These problems are going to effect kids no matter which school they attend.
As for the public schools becoming the "schools of choice" for more people due to economic difficulties, as another poster has suggested, the middle-class parents of all races who opt out of MNPS in favor of private school for their children in this day and time do so because they believe their child will receive a better education, not because of the racial make-up of the classroom, and because they have lost faith in MNPS's ability to delivery a solidly good education K-12.
These parents either return to MNPS by winning the magnet lottery, or - if they don't win a lottery slot - they opt out. I know, because I opted out of the public grade school my son was zoned for because of quality and class size issues. We opted back in during junior high only because my son "won the lottery." We WANTED a school with more racial and economic diversity than the private school he attended, but we were not willing to sacrifice the quality of the teaching, the small class size, or the rigor of the curriculum, which included memorizing the multiplication tables, math flash cards, and summer reading. At the high school level, I'd argue that the magnet schools and the IB programs at non-magnet high schools are the only MNPS options that offer rigor.
So let me state this very plainly: If MNPS wants to attract students from middle- and middle-upper-income families, THE QUALITY OF THE EDUCATION THEY RECEIVE MUST BE THE FIRST PRIORITY and neighborhood zoning the preferred option because that enables parents to participate in the life of the school as volunteers.
And the quality has to be more than a promise.
Rather than preaching that middle-class parents of all races have a civic duty to send their children who have one shot at a good education to a failing, overcrowded school with disspirited teachers and low parent involvement, where other parents aren't working hand in hand with the administration to address discipline and other issues, with the idea that these parents will bring "quality" with them, I challenge the members of the NAACP to spend their time and effort in neighborhood schools rather than in court. If you roll up your sleeves and start working with the he principals and teachers in your neighborhood schools to make them places all parents WANT to send their children, you'll be surprised at how many soon join you. On the other hand, if you do all your fighting in court, middle-class parents will make the best choice they can for their children, which will likely involve opting out of MNPS.
Starr, a voice of reason, and even better, a voice of reason with hands on practical experience to back it up. I too 'opted out' of public when it became clear my son's middle school was flailing and failing. At the time, my daughter was headed to what was then a good MNPS high school, she was very involved in athletics and school activites, and was taking honors/AP classes. Those options were not available to my son at his middle school, so I sucked it up, made financial sacrifices, and with very generous financial aid, sent him to private. After 3 years, he made it clear that while the quality of the education he was receiving at the private school was superb, he did not feel comfortable in the social or political environment. I allowed him to transfer back to public under the condition he enroll in the IB program, where he is indeed receiving a superb education, albeit in a system that requires continual battles for money and parental support. With 15 years of very engaged public school experience, as well as three very engaged private school experience, I echo everything Starr says, including her suggestion that the NAACP spend more time in schools than court. The notion that the lack of textbooks for the zoned school was racial is absurd. My kids have never had all their textbooks the first week or two of school and never will. I'm more concerned that they have a quality teacher.
I'm late to the game here due to fall break. Let me start by saying that I work at Pearl-Cohn, and that I have been a teacher in MNPS for 13 years. I taught at one of the academic magnet schools for a while. Listen carefully when I tell you this: the quality of teachers at Pearl-Cohn is far superior to the quality of teachers at that academic magnet. And I'm not even joking...
if you have ever talked to the Principal at Pearl-Cohn, Mrs. Woods, you would realize that she will interview 20 candidates before she hires someone. Oh, she's not going to just throw anyone into a job...she truly wants the best. 4 of the teachers there this year are Teach for America grades, a couple of whom are from ivy league schools. As some of the above posters pointed out, just because a teacher is new doesn't make them bad. If Mrs. Woods thinks the best candidate is someone fresh out of college, that is who she will hire.
It is true that the students in the AP classes at Pearl-Cohn usually don't pass the test. That is not because the teacher isn't doing her best to prepare them...The AP Junior English Comp test has a 2500 word short story due next week. Those kids grow so much in those classes. However, just because a student doesnt actually pass the AP test doesn't mean he didn't learn anything in class. These students are frequently behind from the start...the choice the teacher has is to make sure students understand the material before going on, or go on when they don't understand the material. What should an AP teacher do? What should any teacher do? Many of these students don't have the background knowledge that middle class students have....not an excuse, just a fact. Even the math test has heavy reading on it....
Before coming to Pearl-Cohn, I taught in the Hillwood cluster. I often heard teachers complain about the kids from N. Nashville that were there. I think that one of the reasons that Pearl-Cohn works is that Mrs. Woods can hire educators who want to work in an urban environment. There's no "Why don't you act like so-and-so?" When you look out at your students you know that it's pretty much amazing that all of these students are in school. Their stories will break your heart.
Pearl-Cohn is a nurturing environment. In my heart, I think that without the nurturing environment that is Pearl-Cohn, a lot more of those students would be on the street. I have never seen a more caring group of teachers. Are there nurturing teachers who love urban students over at Hillwood? Possibly, but in a way the fact that PC is all urban is an advantage....you can hire people who work best with urban students.
Anyone who thinks that Pearl-Cohn offers a 'substandard education' needs to actually come to Pearl-Cohn. Our students are respectful, wonderful, loving, and needy, oh so needy. I think that we do a pretty good job of giving our students everything we got. Sometimes, it still isn't enough. I guess what I'm saying is that I'm tired of people 'talking trash' about my school when they haven't even been there. It's a WONDERFUL safe school! I love it there and I encourage all of you to call and come in and do some mentoring. You too will see what Pearl-Cohn is really like.
