So a dear friend told me she got a call from her childrens' school asking her to be the parent representative for the school's Special Education Parent Advisory Council. I immediately rejoiced. Given the clanging sound produced by the stigma of 'special ed' and the incredible number of children (and adults, for that matter) who need services, it is critical that there be sensitive, thoughtful people available to provide information or just lend an ear.
There are tons of ways for children to develop cognitive or physical barriers to learning. Sadly, too many of them derive from poor judgment on someone else's part (i.e., drug, emotional or physical abuse). Without information, training and support in dealing with such students, today's teachers are in a tough situation, to say the least. Not enough can be said about the need for collaboration between the front office, parents, teachers and whatever specialists are on hand in a given school. I remember the struggles another friend of mine had as she tried to get help for her dyslexic son. It was amazing to see her stonewalled at every turn even though she provided documentation, her own research and a host of other information. I'm sure the schools played no small part in her decision to finally move away.
My parent rep friend, an aggressive researcher and self-taught expert on special needs (with which she has extensive personal experience) has told me at least a jillion things about the emotions, impulses and physical manifestations of children born to drug addicts. She is passionate about information as a means to eliminate discrimination and though she may not realize it , will be an amazing source for parents trying to understand what is happening with their children.
All children, regardless of birth history, deserve an opportunity to be educated in a manner respectful of them as human beings, and with the willingess of parents like my friend, it seems a little more possible.
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
To Fix or Not to Fix?
The other day I read a book whose author is of the opinion that schools in majority low-income areas just cannot be helped. Instead, he touts socioeconomic integration of student populations such that there is at least a 50 percent representation of middle class families in each school. His thinking is that a critical mass of middle class families will create an environment that will inspire parent participation, discourage negative attitudes towards schooling as a necessity, and generally create a more pleasant environment for teachers and students to do the school thing.
In case you are wondering, yes, you're right. That whole train of thought is based on the premise that the not-wealthy make life difficult. The book, All Together Now: Creating Middle-Class Schools through Public School Choice by Richard Kahlenberg, goes on to say things like:
"In low-income schools, the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching reports, parental involvement is often abysmally low: in one Los Angeles junior high school with an enrollment of eleven hundred, only a dozen parents showed up for a parent-teacher meeting; in New Orleans, where parents are required to pick up report cards, 70 percent remained unclaimed two months after parents were notified...in Montgomery County, Maryland, parents in wealthier schools demand additional conferences with teachers, whereas parents in poorer areas are often unwilling to attend conferences, so teachers must go to the children's homes if they wish to meet with parents."
Kahlenberg also talks about a 'hidden curriculum' in the classroom that exposes under-resourced children to vocabulary, cultures, destinations, and experiences they might not normally encounter. He is careful to stress that socioeconomic integration differs from racial integration (which, by the way was ruled unconstitutional by way of a June 2007 Supreme Court case in Kentucky) because under the racial plan, what often happened is that poor blacks and whites would wind up together, racially integrated but still in trouble.
'Tis no secret that the middle-class has been in flight from the disadvantaged for a long, long time, so what has convinced Mr. Kahlenberg that they will not fight vigorously to not have this kind of thing happen? Why testing, of course! He presents evidence indicating not only that scores of middle-income are unaffected, but that those of lower-income students increase. Then story could end there if testing were all that mattered, but let us not go there again.
IF this is really the remedy, what are the side effects? How would such mixings work in the trenches (i.e., the halls and bathrooms, where many an ego is often crushed within earshot of just the right audience)? If a school had a 50 percent middle class enrollment, what measures could be taken to ensure each class does as well? What about communities that have no middle class to put into the 50 percent slot?
While an interesting read, unfortunately All Together Now cannot be the last stop on this ride, for it would leave quite a bit more road to be traveled.
Stay tuned…
In case you are wondering, yes, you're right. That whole train of thought is based on the premise that the not-wealthy make life difficult. The book, All Together Now: Creating Middle-Class Schools through Public School Choice by Richard Kahlenberg, goes on to say things like:
"In low-income schools, the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching reports, parental involvement is often abysmally low: in one Los Angeles junior high school with an enrollment of eleven hundred, only a dozen parents showed up for a parent-teacher meeting; in New Orleans, where parents are required to pick up report cards, 70 percent remained unclaimed two months after parents were notified...in Montgomery County, Maryland, parents in wealthier schools demand additional conferences with teachers, whereas parents in poorer areas are often unwilling to attend conferences, so teachers must go to the children's homes if they wish to meet with parents."
Kahlenberg also talks about a 'hidden curriculum' in the classroom that exposes under-resourced children to vocabulary, cultures, destinations, and experiences they might not normally encounter. He is careful to stress that socioeconomic integration differs from racial integration (which, by the way was ruled unconstitutional by way of a June 2007 Supreme Court case in Kentucky) because under the racial plan, what often happened is that poor blacks and whites would wind up together, racially integrated but still in trouble.
'Tis no secret that the middle-class has been in flight from the disadvantaged for a long, long time, so what has convinced Mr. Kahlenberg that they will not fight vigorously to not have this kind of thing happen? Why testing, of course! He presents evidence indicating not only that scores of middle-income are unaffected, but that those of lower-income students increase. Then story could end there if testing were all that mattered, but let us not go there again.
IF this is really the remedy, what are the side effects? How would such mixings work in the trenches (i.e., the halls and bathrooms, where many an ego is often crushed within earshot of just the right audience)? If a school had a 50 percent middle class enrollment, what measures could be taken to ensure each class does as well? What about communities that have no middle class to put into the 50 percent slot?
While an interesting read, unfortunately All Together Now cannot be the last stop on this ride, for it would leave quite a bit more road to be traveled.
Stay tuned…
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Charting a New Course
By definition, charter schools are supposed to provide an alternative for families seeking a bit more for their young scholars, so it is no surprise that New Jersey's two largest cities have the greatest concentration of charter schools. Yet if creators of charter schools draw from the same pool of (human, fiscal and pedagogical) resources as our public schools, where is the benefit?
If we are going to raise the bar for Jersey City's students, we will have to employ completely different measures that place power in the hands of teachers as professionals and parents as guardians.
If we are going to raise the bar for Jersey City's students, we will have to employ completely different measures that place power in the hands of teachers as professionals and parents as guardians.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
C-R-E-A-T-E-ing a mess...
So...not too long ago the Prudential Business Ethics Center at Rutgers University commissioned a 10-month study which concluded that New Jersey governmental corruption thrives in part because of “an increasingly selfish culture…lack of consensus on the definition of public service, voter apathy and cynicism, [and] fragmented efforts by the legislature…” among other things.
They broke no news with that one, but what they did do is lend context for the climate in which quality-of-life decisions are made around this place. For instance, let's take a look at the scandal that's been gracing the cover of the Jersey Journal for the past couple of days. In short, City Councilman Steve Lipski was arrested last Friday night for urinating on people during a spate of drunken...ahem, wisdomlessness.
In today's paper he was photographed greeting students (with a somewhat contrite expression) in front of C.R.E.A.T.E. (Center for Responsible Economic and Technological Excellence) Charter High School, of which he is the executive director and principal. One of the many challenges communities like Jersey City faces is a culture of minimal accountability, wherein administrators come to depend on parents being either too distracted by responsibilities or disillusioned by the process to ask questions, much less expect a reasonable response. In that grand tradition, Lipsky made it clear to the press that he has no intention of stepping down as a councilman or "shirking" his duties at C.R.E.A.T.E. No, such shirking just wouldn't do.
Reports indicate that Councilman/Executive Director/Principal Lipsky might have had an epiphanous moment (to say the least) while in the crowded jail cell to which he had been escorted. Was that when he decided he wouldn't give up any of his gigs? The article also said that according to the good councilman, most parents and students of C.R.E.AT.E. are supportive. That's nice; support is good.
While it seems a virulent cry for this man to cease and desist would be in order, I'm frankly not sure what that would do if he were to comply. C.R.E.A.T.E. is one of nine charter schools in Jersey City, and the other two Hudson County charters are in Hoboken. Its test scores stink, but I'm not going to seize this moment to kick a councilman when he's down--after all, the test scores have been bad since the school's 2000 opening.
What I will do is use this moment to ask about the efficacy of charter schools at such a time as this. Since they are public schools they are beholden to the district, which is not really a good thing in the case of Jersey City. Rather than progressive environments in which educators can experiment and innovate, charters in this context are smaller scales on the same dragon.
Why can't you find a fearless sword-bearing prince when you need one?
They broke no news with that one, but what they did do is lend context for the climate in which quality-of-life decisions are made around this place. For instance, let's take a look at the scandal that's been gracing the cover of the Jersey Journal for the past couple of days. In short, City Councilman Steve Lipski was arrested last Friday night for urinating on people during a spate of drunken...ahem, wisdomlessness.
In today's paper he was photographed greeting students (with a somewhat contrite expression) in front of C.R.E.A.T.E. (Center for Responsible Economic and Technological Excellence) Charter High School, of which he is the executive director and principal. One of the many challenges communities like Jersey City faces is a culture of minimal accountability, wherein administrators come to depend on parents being either too distracted by responsibilities or disillusioned by the process to ask questions, much less expect a reasonable response. In that grand tradition, Lipsky made it clear to the press that he has no intention of stepping down as a councilman or "shirking" his duties at C.R.E.A.T.E. No, such shirking just wouldn't do.
Reports indicate that Councilman/Executive Director/Principal Lipsky might have had an epiphanous moment (to say the least) while in the crowded jail cell to which he had been escorted. Was that when he decided he wouldn't give up any of his gigs? The article also said that according to the good councilman, most parents and students of C.R.E.AT.E. are supportive. That's nice; support is good.
While it seems a virulent cry for this man to cease and desist would be in order, I'm frankly not sure what that would do if he were to comply. C.R.E.A.T.E. is one of nine charter schools in Jersey City, and the other two Hudson County charters are in Hoboken. Its test scores stink, but I'm not going to seize this moment to kick a councilman when he's down--after all, the test scores have been bad since the school's 2000 opening.
What I will do is use this moment to ask about the efficacy of charter schools at such a time as this. Since they are public schools they are beholden to the district, which is not really a good thing in the case of Jersey City. Rather than progressive environments in which educators can experiment and innovate, charters in this context are smaller scales on the same dragon.
Why can't you find a fearless sword-bearing prince when you need one?
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Taxes, Shmaxes
So I've been reading a lot of material the many factors contributing to a city's personality and its subsequent relationship to education--demography, taxation, who the major power players are, etc., and it's quite interesting. One thing that really stood out was a reading analyzing what many sociologists termed the 'Gray Peril,' or the significant presence of older residents who presumably do not favor spending on schools. In a book called Ten Thousand Democracies, the authors take a look at the Peril and discover that while older Americans tend to generally favor lower educational spending when compared to younger voters, they become more amenable to educational spending as they age. They suggest a few reasons, but the main one is the connection of 'good schools' to property values. The older voters would most likely own homes and would naturally be interested in them maintaining a high value.
Now, it is important to note that this factor is only relevant if a city uses property values to fund education. Such is not the case in Jersey City, which receives the lion's share of its funding from the state, thereby removing the direct impact of educational excellence from residential pockets. Add the fact that approximately 70 percent of the city's population do not own their homes and you begin to see how easy it is for school performance to matter only to those directly impacted (i.e., parents). Another side effect is educational administrators who respond to whomever butters their bread--and in this case, tells them that test scores are all that matter.
So even if there was strong parent participation in the form of individual school councils, attendance at Board meetings, fundraising, etc.,we still have the reality of a system that will not jump now matter how high we tell them to go. For an understanding of how this looks in real time, here's a first rate example: In the early days of Middle School 7's Parent Teacher Council, Superintendent Charles Epps visited a meeting to field parent questions. One query was about an instructional space in another school (P.S. 6) that teachers complained was filled floor to ceiling with boxes, making it unusable for teaching AND a fire hazard. When Epps was asked in front of a room of 200 parents when they would be removed and if they were a fire hazard, he unflinchingly side-stepped the question with "They're gonna be there for a while," even when the question was repeated. It was clear he felt no need to assure us that a blatant fire hazard in a building with 1,000 of our kids would receive his quick attention. That's what happens when there is no accountability.
So how do we flip the script so that school performance is tied more closely to student needs? That, dear friends, is the question of the day and my sign off for now...
Now, it is important to note that this factor is only relevant if a city uses property values to fund education. Such is not the case in Jersey City, which receives the lion's share of its funding from the state, thereby removing the direct impact of educational excellence from residential pockets. Add the fact that approximately 70 percent of the city's population do not own their homes and you begin to see how easy it is for school performance to matter only to those directly impacted (i.e., parents). Another side effect is educational administrators who respond to whomever butters their bread--and in this case, tells them that test scores are all that matter.
So even if there was strong parent participation in the form of individual school councils, attendance at Board meetings, fundraising, etc.,we still have the reality of a system that will not jump now matter how high we tell them to go. For an understanding of how this looks in real time, here's a first rate example: In the early days of Middle School 7's Parent Teacher Council, Superintendent Charles Epps visited a meeting to field parent questions. One query was about an instructional space in another school (P.S. 6) that teachers complained was filled floor to ceiling with boxes, making it unusable for teaching AND a fire hazard. When Epps was asked in front of a room of 200 parents when they would be removed and if they were a fire hazard, he unflinchingly side-stepped the question with "They're gonna be there for a while," even when the question was repeated. It was clear he felt no need to assure us that a blatant fire hazard in a building with 1,000 of our kids would receive his quick attention. That's what happens when there is no accountability.
So how do we flip the script so that school performance is tied more closely to student needs? That, dear friends, is the question of the day and my sign off for now...
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Move On.People
So as it turns out, close to 90 percent of JC residents decided they wanted to have a hand in who gets elected to the school board. Let us hope that level of response translates into actual turnout for school board elections! Time will tell.
On my way out of the polling station the other day, I ran into a parent who is heavily involved with the parent-teacher council at one school of about 1100 kids and she was telling me how attendance numbers at the parent meetings had been climbing--and now they were at 40!! I-n-c-r-e-d-i-b-l-e. I've been reading lots of books and articles lately on the state of education in the urban environment, and trust me, even the 'experts' don't have an answer. Some say there is too much political maneuvering, others say there is not enough, all say there isn't enough money, and of course in the meantime, Johnny can't read. One thing is for sure, though: Without parents and other responsible citizens getting waist-deep in the affairs of this city's educational decision-making, JC's school district may just wind up being a ward of the state yet again.
On my way out of the polling station the other day, I ran into a parent who is heavily involved with the parent-teacher council at one school of about 1100 kids and she was telling me how attendance numbers at the parent meetings had been climbing--and now they were at 40!! I-n-c-r-e-d-i-b-l-e. I've been reading lots of books and articles lately on the state of education in the urban environment, and trust me, even the 'experts' don't have an answer. Some say there is too much political maneuvering, others say there is not enough, all say there isn't enough money, and of course in the meantime, Johnny can't read. One thing is for sure, though: Without parents and other responsible citizens getting waist-deep in the affairs of this city's educational decision-making, JC's school district may just wind up being a ward of the state yet again.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Gobbsmacked...
A term introduced to me by my U.K. homies a few years ago that means stunned, jaw-dropped, just UNDONE. That would be me on this night as I watched the Electoral (also quite electric, some might say) Slide put a new man in the White House. Wow.
You know what else? I think I'm going to set about the business of finding out how to get on President-elect Obama's calendar. I have a few things to chat with him about concerning a school I want to build in Jersey City. Heck, if things go well, he'll lend me his strategists so we can set about doing some piecemeal fundraising, grassroots support-building and eventual takeover of the educational process in this place. Not an unattractive idea at all, really.
I'll keep you posted on that one.
You know what else? I think I'm going to set about the business of finding out how to get on President-elect Obama's calendar. I have a few things to chat with him about concerning a school I want to build in Jersey City. Heck, if things go well, he'll lend me his strategists so we can set about doing some piecemeal fundraising, grassroots support-building and eventual takeover of the educational process in this place. Not an unattractive idea at all, really.
I'll keep you posted on that one.
Monday, November 3, 2008
Ballot Dancing
Aside from that sort of major competition (election?) going down tomorrow, in one not-so-little corner of the world, voters will have the option to choose how they will choose the school board from now on. I know, I know--not sexy at all, but that sort of thinking is exactly what I am here to combat.
Now, pay attention.
As I mentioned earlier, JC's school district was under state control (from 1989 until April of this year) because of people behaving badly, to say the least. Now that it is back in the control of the local government, we have the option to decide whether we want school board members to be a) chosen by the mayor or b) chosen by you. Mayor Jerramiah Healy actually wants there to be a third option, described as a hybrid--consisting of 3 members chosen by the mayor, 3 elected by the people, and 3 deans of colleges. Here is what the Jersey Journal reported that former JC mayor Gerald McCann had to say about that: "St. Peter's College and Jersey City State (now New Jersey City University) supplied us with the teachers in the first place. I'm not buying they have all the answers." Interesting--and not a particularly favorable allusion to JC's teaching force, but I'll leave that be for now.
When you make your way to the polls tomorrow, Healy's three-way split will not be an option. He has to get legislation passed in order for it to be even presented to you. However, since the decisions made about the schools will now come across his desk, it is good to have some sense of what his thoughts are on the matter.
If you've never been to a Board meeting, I will not lie and tell you it rivals "24" or whatever TV show you favor, but it is in those meetings that decisions are made that directly affect your children. Truth be told, while the question of who runs the nation is certainly relevant, it is also important to pay attention to (dare I say, WATCH) the people who impact your quality of life.
OK, I'm finished soap-boxing for now. Tomorrow should be chock full o' drama, so put on your mud boots and prepare for a stroll...
Now, pay attention.
As I mentioned earlier, JC's school district was under state control (from 1989 until April of this year) because of people behaving badly, to say the least. Now that it is back in the control of the local government, we have the option to decide whether we want school board members to be a) chosen by the mayor or b) chosen by you. Mayor Jerramiah Healy actually wants there to be a third option, described as a hybrid--consisting of 3 members chosen by the mayor, 3 elected by the people, and 3 deans of colleges. Here is what the Jersey Journal reported that former JC mayor Gerald McCann had to say about that: "St. Peter's College and Jersey City State (now New Jersey City University) supplied us with the teachers in the first place. I'm not buying they have all the answers." Interesting--and not a particularly favorable allusion to JC's teaching force, but I'll leave that be for now.
When you make your way to the polls tomorrow, Healy's three-way split will not be an option. He has to get legislation passed in order for it to be even presented to you. However, since the decisions made about the schools will now come across his desk, it is good to have some sense of what his thoughts are on the matter.
If you've never been to a Board meeting, I will not lie and tell you it rivals "24" or whatever TV show you favor, but it is in those meetings that decisions are made that directly affect your children. Truth be told, while the question of who runs the nation is certainly relevant, it is also important to pay attention to (dare I say, WATCH) the people who impact your quality of life.
OK, I'm finished soap-boxing for now. Tomorrow should be chock full o' drama, so put on your mud boots and prepare for a stroll...
Baby Steps
So it's no secret that schools in urban areas are a bit challenged--just a bit--and Jersey City, NJ is no different. The city is the second largest in the state and for the last 19 years, its school district has had the distinction of coming under state control. According to the New Jersey Board of Education, that happens when a district displays an "unwillingness or inability to meet the state certification standards." From what I've experienced with the administration, my guess it was a healthy balance of both that brought the state to Jersey City.
Jersey City's school district is also an Abbott district, which is New Jersey-speak for a low-performing, financially-strapped school system. The combination means that students are made to take test after test to prove their proficiency at...test-taking. Teachers, principals, parents and students are understandably frustrated, and to add insult to injury, the tests have no connection whatsoever to promotion. Any child can score poorly (because they have test-phobia, were sick, or what have you) and still pass to the next grade. Students across the city are receiving extra instruction (Saturdays and after school) so they can score 'well,' but in truth their scores are connected to teacher performance, which is linked to principal performance, school ranking and ultimately, the district. NONE of it has to do with actual learning. When I first learned this a few years ago I was dumbfounded but still hopful that the tests had SOME use.
The next opportunity I got, I asked the district's director of curriculum and instruction if at the very least the tests prepared students for the SAT. As he pondered my question, his expression was a blend of wonder and confusion. Finally, he said, "You know what? I don't know."
That sealed the matter for me.
Anyways...I've dreamed for quite a while about starting a school--even before my own were school age and I much of the above. This morning, some exciting descriptors popped into my head that I had to put down somewhere. What if Jersey City had an independent school? What if it was (financially) accessible to all families? Independence would mean no reliance on the school district; accessibility would provide an options for people who can't afford private school fees.
How can this be? Well, that's the rub--and the beginning of what I know will be a long journey. I believe in good old-fashioned book learning, and I also think that progressive educational environments are not only for the wealthy. Hopefully there are some others who think so too and are willing to invest in such an idea.
More as it comes, but later for now...
Jersey City's school district is also an Abbott district, which is New Jersey-speak for a low-performing, financially-strapped school system. The combination means that students are made to take test after test to prove their proficiency at...test-taking. Teachers, principals, parents and students are understandably frustrated, and to add insult to injury, the tests have no connection whatsoever to promotion. Any child can score poorly (because they have test-phobia, were sick, or what have you) and still pass to the next grade. Students across the city are receiving extra instruction (Saturdays and after school) so they can score 'well,' but in truth their scores are connected to teacher performance, which is linked to principal performance, school ranking and ultimately, the district. NONE of it has to do with actual learning. When I first learned this a few years ago I was dumbfounded but still hopful that the tests had SOME use.
The next opportunity I got, I asked the district's director of curriculum and instruction if at the very least the tests prepared students for the SAT. As he pondered my question, his expression was a blend of wonder and confusion. Finally, he said, "You know what? I don't know."
That sealed the matter for me.
Anyways...I've dreamed for quite a while about starting a school--even before my own were school age and I much of the above. This morning, some exciting descriptors popped into my head that I had to put down somewhere. What if Jersey City had an independent school? What if it was (financially) accessible to all families? Independence would mean no reliance on the school district; accessibility would provide an options for people who can't afford private school fees.
How can this be? Well, that's the rub--and the beginning of what I know will be a long journey. I believe in good old-fashioned book learning, and I also think that progressive educational environments are not only for the wealthy. Hopefully there are some others who think so too and are willing to invest in such an idea.
More as it comes, but later for now...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)