A Quick Fix for America's Worst Schools--Privatization!

Well an interesting article from Time Magazine, here is a tidbit:

"Ba-Boom!" Leroy Hayes describes sitting in his seventh-grade English class at Philadelphia's Shoemaker Middle School when he heard the explosion. It was startling but not necessarily surprising, he says. Crazy stuff happened all the time at Shoemaker. Once, he recalls, a student urinated into a soda bottle during class and threw it in a math instructor's face. Crazy stuff. After hearing the big explosion, Hayes and his friends rushed out of the room and discovered that someone had set off fireworks in the corridor. "The school was in chaos," the 11th-grader remembers of the 2005 incident. "People were laughing and screaming and saying, 'Do another one, do another!' It was out of hand. But," he adds, in a succinct assessment of the crisis in U.S. public education today, "it's not like we were learning anything in class anyway."

In 2006, Shoemaker was considered one of Philadelphia's most troubled schools. Fewer than a third of its eighth-graders exhibited proficiency on the state math exam. Fewer than half were proficient in reading. Violence was common, and students had full run of the hallways. Most of the bulletin boards had been torched, and the principal's office had metal bars on the windows. One teacher says even the UPS guy was hesitant to go inside.

Three years later, students walk through Shoemaker's halls quietly in single-file lines, the school's walls are graffiti-free, test scores have increased dramatically, and packages are presumably being delivered on time. If this sounds like an entirely different school, that's because it basically is. In fall 2006, the School District of Philadelphia gave the building over to Mastery, a local operator of charter schools--that is, ones that are publicly funded but privately managed. The adults left, the kids remained, and the once failing school has been turned around.

*Emphasis added by me.

Rest of the article here.

So how often does rapid transformation work? In 2008, the Institute of Education Sciences, the Education Department's research arm, published a guide to turning around low-performing schools that noted that "the research base on effective strategies ... is sparse." In other words, taxpayers are betting billions of dollars on what essentially remains a crapshoot.

Keep the Kids; Bring In New Adults

Now, being Canadian, our public school system is also riddled with problems, mostly in early education in my opinion. I home school till they are ready for high school and then let them choose whether to go private or public.

I'm not sure if the taxpayers want to take this risk, mind you this is important, it's the education of the future generation.

I have to admit I do like this man's line of thinking.

Duncan is undaunted. He often speaks of transforming the Education Department from the current lumbering bureaucracy that it is into an "engine of innovation" with the ability to try new things if there's a chance they will work. The system can't get any worse, he reckons, so why not reinvent? And as any scientist knows, it often takes many failed experiments to figure out what's going wrong, let alone find a solution for it.

This is a stark truth, how much worse could the school system become? If America wants to lead the future, it will need students that are educated enough to do so. That will require a total revamp of the current system.

Trial and error seem appropriate.

The last paragraph really struck a cord with me and rings true.

"There is an opportunity here to fix schools that haven't worked for a long, long time," says Ben Rayer, the chief charter-school liaison for the School District of Philadelphia and former COO of Mastery. "The money and the desire to do so are there now." It's easy to be paralyzed by the enormousness of the task, he adds. "But man, you just gotta start."

Without a start, there can be no finish.

Thoughts ATS?

~Keeper

reply to post by tothetenthpower


My view on such matters is tainted.

I'm the product of Private schools. I've been to public schools for two years. Kindergarten and 12th grade. My parents didn't want me to attend public school from the 1rst grade onwards. Then in the 11th grade my Dad was transferred [Work Related] so we moved to a location that didn't have any private schools. So, I was put into the local Public high school for my last year.


I've never really fully recovered from the ordeal.
College however was fun...

Plenty to learn. Plenty to Drink and plenty of very pretty young ladies to chase. I caught one or two of them [maybe more] I'm not telling



[edit on 14-2-2010 by SLAYER69]

reply to post by tothetenthpower


Those are not private schools, but chartered schools. As it says in your quote, they are publicly-funded, yet privately operated.

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by tothetenthpower

 

My view on such matters is tainted.

I'm the product of Private schools. I've been to public schools for two years. Kindergarten and 12th grade. My parents didn't want me to attend public school from the 1rst grade onwards. Then in the 11th grade my Dad was transferred [Work Related] so we moved to a location that didn't have any private schools. So, I was put into the local Public high school for my last year.


I've never really fully recovered from the ordeal.
College however was fun...

Plenty to learn. Plenty to Drink and plenty of very pretty young ladies to chase. I caught one or two of them [maybe more] I'm not telling

[edit on 14-2-2010 by SLAYER69]

Yeah, I'm also a product of the private system , never spent a day in public school.

My youngest daughter opted when she was 14 to go to public school, she graduated at the top of her class and is now in University, to me it hasn't been a detriment to her education, but I think that's more because she demanded a great education and worked hard to get one.

So I'm sure that a combination of both publicly funded and privately run, would be a good idea, so long as it becomes transparent.

PS. I don't think you got any girls. Perhaps that's how you gained the name "Slayer69" haha.

~Keeper

Originally posted by davesidious
reply to post by tothetenthpower

 

Those are not private schools, but chartered schools. As it says in your quote, they are publicly-funded, yet privately operated.

Technically it's the same thing.

Privately run means they get to make the rules and the taxpayer just foots the bill as far as I am concerned.

I mean obviously there are some checks and balances that would need to be in place. But I am sure they have a more "private" feeling to them.

~Keeper

Infamous double post...

~Keeper

[edit on 2/14/2010 by tothetenthpower]

Tripple Post...

[edit on 2/14/2010 by tothetenthpower]

reply to post by tothetenthpower
Yeah...'quick fix' and 'privatization' are always the best strategy.

Aren't the worst schools in America the worst because they're situated in very low income neighborhoods? By making them private and thereby require tuition to attend, aren't you just making it impossible for the poorest kids to attend school where they live? The school's test scores may go up, but only for this reason..

Isn't the point of the education system that everyone becomes educated? I only see this as putting limitations on that goal - only those who can afford to be educated, will be. Although that does sound a lot like the American way.

Originally posted by ZombieOctopus
Aren't the worst schools in America the worst because they're situated in very low income neighborhoods? By making them private and thereby require tuition to attend, aren't you just making it impossible for the poorest kids to attend school where they live? The school's test scores may go up, but only for this reason..

Isn't the point of the education system that everyone becomes educated? I only see this as putting limitations on that goal - only those who can afford to be educated, will be. Although that does sound a lot like the American way.

They aren't privately funded, they are privately operated. Kids still get to go for free, there are probably a few fees involved like uniforms and that sort of thing.

This article is really about finding a better way to run our schools.

~Keeper

Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by tothetenthpower

 

Yeah...'quick fix' and 'privatization' are always the best strategy.

I see where your coming from and I agree that in most cases these two things would be ridiculous to utter in the same sentence.

But look at the results and as stated above, how much worse can it get?

~Keeper

"Education," or the use of propaganda in an educational setting to change the minds of citizens, is only as effective as the ability of those citizens to realize its truth. Since most do not recognize reality as it is and will prefer not to for their own short-sighted reasoning based in immediate material benefit, education is of limited use.

Even further, we must ask how effective education has been? Massive campaigns against smoking, driving drunk and taking drugs have been minimally effective and these problems remain even when they are not actively increasing (according to surveys which are legendarily inaccurate). Education does not cause a population to change quickly, nor does it cause them to change.

Those who uphold "education" as an option to authority (authority = strong leadership toward effective self-beneficial goals; control = use of others toward a goal that benefits controllers and is rarely shared with those controlled) are most commonly using it as an excuse to avoid direct action, much as others use conspiracy thinking or a belief in their own inefficacy as a means to shrug off responsibility. Responsibility comes from the awareness that we can make things better, and many prefer to use such run-arounds to avoid feeling obligations or a sense of a better future, because that requires work and risk and to the underconfident, nothing is more fearful

reply to post by tothetenthpower


Part of the reason why private schools get better scores is the simple fact that the parents are paying out of pocket. Even if you're paying in a round-about way through taxation, you feel it more if you're writing a cheque. If you're paying good money for your kid to go to whatever school, he damn well better do well or there's going to be trouble.

Private schools are also generally situated in higher income neighborhoods and have a reputation of hosting those sorts of kids.

It's like you see this huge crowd of fat women waddling out of a weight watchers center and wonder to yourself what they must be feeding them in there.

I think it's the environment the kids are being raised in at home that is dictating their success and very very little of it is actually the school, contrary to what the school would surely like you to believe in the brochure.

If you took a private school out of the Hamptons and put it in the middle of Compton, I predict scores would not change over public schools.

reply to post by tothetenthpower

But look at the results and as stated above, how much worse can it get?

I usually avoid this section because it's a subject close to my heart. A good education system can lift society and values the minds and futures of the young. It's a cliche...children matter.

Privately owned independent schools can be successful. There are many examples that support the idea. Such schools need to fall in line with the National Curriculum and be held to account by the State. Otherwise they'd fall to the corruption and profiteering we find in the privatized prison system.

At the heart of the argument in your OP is a school with poor leadership and the knock-on effects of poor discipline. These aren't necessarily solved by privatization. A failing school should have the senior management team removed and new leadership put in its place.

Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by tothetenthpower

 

But look at the results and as stated above, how much worse can it get?

I usually avoid this section because it's a subject close to my heart. A good education system can lift society and values the minds and futures of the young. It's a cliche...children matter.

Privately owned independent schools can be successful. There are many examples that support the idea. Such schools need to fall in line with the National Curriculum and be held to account by the State. Otherwise they'd fall to the corruption and profiteering we find in the privatized prison system.

At the heart of the argument in your OP is a school with poor leadership and the knock-on effects of poor discipline. These aren't necessarily solved by privatization. A failing school should have the senior management team removed and new leadership put in its place.

I agree with everything you've said, and that's what most of these new charter schools are doing according to what I have been reading in the past few months.

Getting companies who specialize in this sort of thing is a good idea, so long as I said, there are checks and balances in place to make sure our tax money is going to help and not create more of the same problem.

~Keeper

Originally posted by ZombieOctopus
Aren't the worst schools in America the worst because they're situated in very low income neighborhoods? By making them private and thereby require tuition to attend, aren't you just making it impossible for the poorest kids to attend school where they live? The school's test scores may go up, but only for this reason..

Isn't the point of the education system that everyone becomes educated? I only see this as putting limitations on that goal - only those who can afford to be educated, will be. Although that does sound a lot like the American way.

It don't matter where the schools are located they get equal funding. In my town they built new and better schools in the inner cities than the suburbs to try and entice suburbanites to those schools. The suburbanites didn't come but the funding and all the bells and whistles remained. Twenty years and countless billions of dollars later the public schools failed to deliver a good education.

That money could be funneled to private schools, but then why should we give intercity children advantages!

well what of us poor people that cant afford private schooling so i had no choice but to go to public and oh the area i went to school in they didn't allow home schooling unless u paid for this expensive home school package so yeah going to home school or private school isn't a option for some people

Honestly It only takes a really good principal who works with law enforcement and the district to find out what the issues are and then lay down the law at the school. Back in the early 90's when I started high school my school was filled with hooligans, pushers, dope, guns, and the women would rather knife you then look at you. It was a bad school. Till he showed up.

Cut to the next year. During the summer we had a principal change. Our previous one had retired after 2 kids stole his car keys and car, drove to his house and robbed him while he was at school. (all done during school hours.)

Now the new guy came in, the first week he called all the neighbors of the school to a meeting. asking them what the issues where. (crime, smoking in front of the school, certain hooligans graffitiying their property and lowering their value, and drugs) so he brought with him to the meeting the chief of the police who at first was going to offer more cars on patrol. However the principal said no. So he called all the parents of students in to a meeting and told them he was enforcing a uniform and stricter code of conduct. Any student found with a weapon or drugs was out, any student with out the proper uniform was being sent home, any fights would be punished with the first 2 being suspended for 1 week then 3 weeks, 3rd time your out.

Some parents complained about the uniforms, (Poor neighborhood) and he was ready for that and explained he had found a place that sold cheap uniforms and the parents agreed.

So the who plan was a go. The students came back to school (those that put up with the uniform) those pushers and too cool for it students left for good. he started a teacher monitor brigade, each week 6 teachers (we had 3 floors) would split into teams of 2 and patrol the halls with walkies talkies and radio in any trouble makers and send them to the principal.

he wasn't afraid to suspend people for a few days and most parents couldn't complain as they accepted the rules to allow order to be returned in the school. Also they saw the good that it did their child to learn a hard lesson. So within the first 2 months he had the bad kids out on their ears.

the troubled teens got help from the physiologist he had hired to help them out, and by the end of the year the teachers didn't even have to be paired up or carry the walkies talkies anymore.

after that each new year brought new students who had to go through a minor interview to weed out the potential pushers. and those that made it through were gone by Christmas. Either sent to juvenile detention or just kicked out for various offenses.

Our education improved and even now when I look back I can see my life ending up very different if nothing had changed.

there was no privatization of the school or any bars or metal detectors. It came down to one man having the guts to say, why should all the students suffer for these few criminals. Lets fight back and so he did. He also won the hearts and minds of his students. Giving them the education they all wanted and deserved.

*edit this is only an example of what can happen when teachers and faculty are only in it for the money. Some places however end up having professionals only looking out for their pocket book and not the education they pass on to the youths. Most problem schools are not having issues with just the students but with the educators as well. people who do not have the will to enhance the school. Our school never received a funding increase, the school just changed due to the actions of the principal.

[edit on 14-2-2010 by anubis9311]

I see two natural solutions to this problem:

1) Partial Privatization: The schools themselves would be private, all of them, but the funds would be public.

The money would not be attached to the schools, but rather to the child so that child could be free to attend the school of their choosing. Vocational school, religious school, etc.

This would create a natural competitiveness so the poorly performing schools would close if they were not effective. This would also create a higher degree of interest and involvement with the parents.

2) Complete Privatization: The schools and the funding would be entirely private, thus ending property taxes.

This would open up competition to a much higher degree, reducing prices and allowing for a larger variety of schools to choose from.

It would greatly increase parental involvement since the parent would have to write a check every month.

I have yet to decide which idea I prefer.

I see 2 issues with your second choice KrazyJethro,

1st is the fact that not all families living in lets say a higher paying area could afford the checks each month. therefore more bankruptcy and foreclosure on houses or they have to move.

2nd is the fact what changes for those who live in the worst parts of town where the money is a thing that most people dont have? the school itself would suffer and students would be in the same if not worse mess in those areas.

"No way would they be able to have the means to get to go to that fancy school 10 blocks over cause that is the rich area and they charge 100$ a month. My mom and dad (or just mom or dad) cant even put a full meal on my plate half the time. Besides i ain't seen my mom or dad since they took that second job to support all of us kids."

The idea that each kid no mater where they are from gets to have a $value assigned to them is a good idea on paper. However what about the school that has 400 students they get 40000$ a month lets say. Well what if the school only has 150 students, well they don't have any money to buy books after paying every other expense. Leaving the education back where it started. Almost non existent or way to outdated. I don't know about you but I want my child to know about WW2 and not just learn about WW1for the sole reason that the book is so outdated it was printed in 1920.