I think John hay in Cleveland is similar in that you need to be achieving academically to get in.My question is doesn't it take a responsible parent concerned about their child's education to even inquire about their student getting into a school like that?

If you have a majority of parents instilling apathy about education in their kids it doesn't matter what resources are available to students if they're not going to be used. The issue isn't necessarily race or income related but simply do a child's parents encourage a student to excel academically? If not a student is more likely to fail, if so, a student is more likely to succeed and get a chance to attend schools like Walnut Hills.

 

I guess what I'm saying is any school could be like Walnut Hills, or any other high performing school in the nation if all the parents helped reinforce the importance of education and I think that's what's missing in today's large urban districts.

I agree with what's been said about the parents being a big part of the problem. There are bad parents everywhere, including quite a few who dropped out themselves and don't think school is important. Why bother doing well in school when you know your kid won't be able to afford to go to college, and who likely won't be eligible for any scholarships? Many people know very little about grants or what financial aid is available, especially if you've never been to college yourself. Seeing college as something that's completely out of reach as a concept, why push your kid to do well in middle or high school, as what does it matter?

 

I think maybe more should be done to talk about what a good education can bring to you - and how it can be accessible to more people, through grants, scholarships (and the full variety avaialble, not just academic or sports-related), financial aid, etc. If the picture was drawn for more parents that their kids COULD eventually go to college and could then end up doing better in life, I think there would be more incentive to push them to do well in school during the school years.

 

Neither of my parents went to college, nor did any of their brothers and sisters. My Dad didn't even graduate from high school as he got expelled in the 10th grade and never went back. But they both had some kind of broad concept of college giving you a chance at a better life and in the abstract, encouraged us to do the best we could in school so we could go to college. But when it came time to apply, it was my sister, who had been in college for 4 years, who helped me fill out applications, apply for grants and other aid and get loans, because my parents had no clue and no interest in figuring it out. Without her, I likely would never have gone and would have lived in my hometown forever, working for crap wages like my mom did. She supported me in high school on $6K a year waiting tables at the L&K. I can't imagine what those who have even less are facing. There needs to be some resources to educate the parents for their own lives, which are not over, and to help them to encourage their children and to demonstrate how you can get ahead in life with advanced education.

 

My particular degree has nothing to do with the jobs I've had. But i've been told twice now that jobs were between me and another candidate and we were on equal footing and the only reason they hired me was because I have a degree, even though it's completely unrelated to the positions I've held. I sure don't live high on the hog but I'm doing a lot better than my parents did, and I hope my son will make an even bigger jump forward when his time comes.

I think part of the problem is that we lack alternative institutional channels for reaching those who essentially tune out their school systems and the government writ large.  This is why I feel a little uneasy about comments like this:

 

I think maybe more should be done to talk about what a good education can bring to you - and how it can be accessible to more people, through grants, scholarships (and the full variety avaialble, not just academic or sports-related), financial aid, etc. If the picture was drawn for more parents that their kids COULD eventually go to college and could then end up doing better in life, I think there would be more incentive to push them to do well in school during the school years.

 

I think that there is already a tremendous amount being done to push this message.  Both high schools and colleges push this message via every channel available to them.  Lots of government and nonprofit effort goes into getting out this message as well.

I think it is worth noting that the highest ranking public high school in Ohio is Walnut Hills in Cincinnati. Yes, there is a test to get in, but it's just to make sure a student is functioning at grade level. It has a diverse student body, lots of lower income and minority students, and yet it rocks not only the wealthy suburban districts, but also Cleveland and Columbus schools which have a larger pool of students from which to pull good students, so it's not just a numbers game (an argument made by many a suburbanite in Enquirer comments sections).

 

Not that I think this model could be repeated for all inner city districts in the city or the state, but it is proof of principle for high functioning public schools which are not very selective.

 

I do really like the Walnut Hills model and I do think that large urban districts can and should try to have at least one or two schools that copy that model (Cleveland has had that with the aforementioned John Hay for about five years now).  That said, and I'm sure you would know better than I would, but I've always gotten the impression that Walnut Hills is pretty darn selective in who is admitted.  It also probably helps that the kids that aren't making it can be dismissed or will probably head back to their neighborhood schools by choice. 

 

Things like selectivity, attrition, and parental involvement/motivation can go a long way to making a school look very good, even if what's going on in the actual school is only average or even only slightly above average.  That's not to say that that's the entire picture at Walnut Hills, but I do think it's a factor, at least as far as the higher state/national rankings go.  Same goes with most honors and magnet schools and something that's true of many of the highest scoring charter schools.  But the point with schools like these is that in districts with large concentrations of kids and families that don't take education seriously, these schools give the students and families that do really care and/or are really talented a chance to learn in a safe and constructive environment.

Looks like they are going to put a levy on the November ballot.  This is probably the smartest thing the Cleveland schools have done since before the Battisti era.

 

Maple Heights (who used to always put their levies in special elections and hope for a very low turnout) put a building levy on the November, 2008 ballot.  Now they have all new schools.

 

Section 8 tenants pay rent based on their income.  The federal government picks up the rest, including any increases.  They have absolutely nothing to lose by voting for this levy.

 

This is going to pass by a healthy margin.

>This is going to pass by a healthy margin.

 

I'm not so sure about that.  Any numbers available on how many Section 8 tenants vote and what percentage of registered voters they represent?

 

As a homeowner with a child living in the city, I'm voting no.  The major reason is Cleveland is I believe 16th in per. capita student spending and the money is not achieving results.  It's a social problem not a spending problem.

Are they planning to put the money towards capital improvements or the operating budget?  Perhaps both? 

 

As far as the social problem vs. spending problem issue...... I would say that the social problems are certainly present and not going anywhere anytime soon.  They cost money to deal with to the extent a school district can.  Teachers in the CMSD should be making significantly more money than those who teach at Beachwood.  Their jobs are monumentally more difficult.  Building maintenance costs are high too.  You also don't have the outside fundraising resources that the exurbs have.  If the district can intelligibly explain what the money is needed for, I think it will pass.  There's no sense in throwing in the towel.  Everyone loses in that scenario.

Yeah, I think Erocc is massively over-estimating the size of the "Section 8" voter block as well as its likelihood to vote. Anyone remember off the top of their head how other recent Cleveland pubic schools levies have fared?

>This is going to pass by a healthy margin.

 

I'm not so sure about that.  Any numbers available on how many Section 8 tenants vote and what percentage of registered voters they represent?

 

As a homeowner with a child living in the city, I'm voting no.  The major reason is Cleveland is I believe 16th in per. capita student spending and the money is not achieving results.  It's a social problem not a spending problem.

 

I agree, the social/cultural problem is what needs to be fixed. To fix it I'm sure it will cost money. How much.. who knows, but I'm sure this levy isn't being presented to pay for that.

 

I personally think the district should get tough and close/consolidate more buildings so busing, teaching and maintenance staffs can be brought in line with demand and efficiencies can be reached. The district is shrinking and should be changing its business model to offer quality education in a declining enrollment setting. Instead it's trying to preserve (to an extent) the district as if it still has 120,000 students.

>This is going to pass by a healthy margin.

 

I'm not so sure about that.  Any numbers available on how many Section 8 tenants vote and what percentage of registered voters they represent?

 

As a homeowner with a child living in the city, I'm voting no.  The major reason is Cleveland is I believe 16th in per. capita student spending and the money is not achieving results.  It's a social problem not a spending problem.

 

I agree, the social/cultural problem is what needs to be fixed. To fix it I'm sure it will cost money. How much.. who knows, but I'm sure this levy isn't being presented to pay for that.

 

 

It will cost a lot of money because the answer is to keep them in school - or in school sponsered programs - for as much time as possible.  Those school sponsered programs cost money. 

 

The problem is not the school, but that the kids get sent home at the end of the day, and more importantly, sent home over the summer where learning generally stops (as opposed to their more middle class and affluent couter parts where learning continues outside of the school).

So this is the solution, and it costs tons of money:  http://www.hcz.org/about-us/the-hcz-project/

 

But the bottom line is, it works.

That school and their founder was featured in the Waiting for "Superman" documentary.

The problem is not the school, but that the kids get sent home at the end of the day

 

Boarding schools could be an amazing benefit to these kids.

Yeah, I think Erocc is massively over-estimating the size of the "Section 8" voter block as well as its likelihood to vote.

 

With Obama up for re-election?  That won't have an effect on low-income turnout?

 

It made a difference in Maple Heights, that's for sure.  There's also the people who will vote for it not realizing their rent could go up.  If I were a homeowner in Cleveland, I'd probably vote no too, for exactly the reason DeanSheen states.

I don't think, necessarily, that grade level in schools make much of a difference (K-8 vs K-4, 5-8).  I'm sure there are successful examples of both types of schools.  What interests me is the amount of neighborhood networking done by the school.

 

There is a concept of a youth development "pipeline" as a defined route for children from birth through their academic career, into post secondary education or job training, into finally a career path.  The better the local network that each school is engaged in (with other schools, out-of-school time programs, local businesses, etc..), the more that pipeline can be defined for each student. 

 

Also I think, especially, for high schools, the importance for job readiness, cannot be overstated.  It should be made explicit that the further you advance in your education, the more money you will likely make.  But that does not mean that everyone is made for college.  My example for this is the Christo Rey network of schools.  They are Catholic Schools in urban locations who arrange work study positions for all of their students.  The students work at the schools' corporate partners subsidized the school tuition.  This allows for a private education, for a fraction of the cost or no cost, and St. Martin de Porres, the Christo Rey HS in Cleveland, admits only lower income families.  The students work experience is worth more than gold for the student.  Close to 100% of St. Martin graduates go onto college.

 

We must begin to put the responsibility of not only holding jobs on our youth and young adults, but also creating jobs.  High Schoolers are not a helpless group of adolescents waiting for whatever the world has to offer them.  They are resources and leaders in our neighborhoods.  We must treat them as such.

 

Regarding parent participation, it's a hard nut to crack.  It is definitely a positive influence on children, having involved, caring guardians, but at the same time I know a number of high schoolers basically on their own, with more ambition than I could have even imagined at their age.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts and ideas, udfan12. 

 

One thing I like about the European secondary school system is that starting at about age 16, students are on a path towards college or a path towards vocational training.  We used to have something similar in this country, but we've moved away from it.  We need to be honest with ourselves as a society and be able to admit that college may not be for everyone.  And quite frankly, there are a number of careers out there that don't require a college degree that make more than some that do. 

 

The downside of this model is that it forces some kids into making a lifelong decision perhaps before they're ready.  Some kids are late bloomers and some don't know what they want to do by age 16, which is absolutely fine.  Another issue that sometimes students are unfairly pushed along a path that isn't right for them because of assumptions made about the student based on background.

 

I'd be curious to hear more about how high school kids can create jobs and take on leadership roles in their community.  Maybe even some examples?

I really like the John Hay Highschool system and am glad Cleveland has something like that. It at least gives a place for students who actually want to learn, a place to do so, without the distractions of the kids who dont care. Of course it cant be done large scale, but one or two high schools like it in the system helps tremendously. Does any middle school like that exist in the city? I think it would be a great way to attract families into the city as well by having top rated elementary, middle, and high schools within the system. Even though the other schools would still have bad ratings due to more complicated issues, they would atleast know their child would be able to get a high quality education. John Hay Highschool Ohio Report Card scores blow away every other school I have seen. The quality of education their seems incredible, especially for a school which I believe is almost all low income and minority.

 

 

For Urban Education as a whole, I think it has been interesting what they have been doing in Harlem with the Promise Academy(HCZ Project), which has seen amazing results, for an area that really need it.

 

http://www.hcz.org/our-results

Also some good news. The Campus International School has doubled in size to meet the demand for admission, and has moved into the Cole Center.

 

Also...

 

YMCA of Greater Cleveland, Old Stone Church partner to form new preschool in downtown Cleveland

CLEVELAND - The YMCA of Greater Cleveland and the Old Stone Church will partner to form a new preschool in downtown Cleveland. The preschool will be located in the Old Stone Center which is connected to the historic Old Stone Church.

 

Rev. Dr. Mark Giuliano, Senior Pastor of the Old Stone Church, said "part of the whole idea of having a preschool on Public Square was to encourage more people to live downtown or to stay downtown longer."

 

The school will serve 55 students Monday through Friday and is scheduled to open near the end of September.

 

Read more: http://www.newsnet5.com/dpp/news/local_news/cleveland_metro/ymca-of-greater-cleveland-old-stone-church-partner-to-form-new-preschool-in-downtown-Cleveland#ixzz24LBK9CW9

 

 

 

Clevelander,

 

Examples of youth creating jobs are definitely more rare than examples of youth in leadership roles, I must admit.  But a great example of youth leadership is the YOC or Youth of Coventry whose purpose is to change the image of teenagers in Cleveland Heights and to "give the youth a voice on social issues in our community," according to their facebook page. I believe they formed after the curfew was put in place, after the flash mob of young people at the Coventry Street Fair.

 

http://www.facebook.com/youthofcoventry

 

http://media.heightsobserver.org/issue_pdfs/TheHeightsObserver_Vol_04_Issue_08.pdf

I really like the John Hay Highschool system and am glad Cleveland has something like that. It at least gives a place for students who actually want to learn, a place to do so, without the distractions of the kids who dont care. Of course it cant be done large scale, but one or two high schools like it in the system helps tremendously. Does any middle school like that exist in the city? I think it would be a great way to attract families into the city as well by having top rated elementary, middle, and high schools within the system. Even though the other schools would still have bad ratings due to more complicated issues, they would atleast know their child would be able to get a high quality education. John Hay Highschool Ohio Report Card scores blow away every other school I have seen. The quality of education their seems incredible, especially for a school which I believe is almost all low income and minority.

 

I like the John Hay setup as well and I think that the district should open another 2-3 similar schools in other parts of town and maybe even expand it to make the schools grades 7-12.

 

You probably won't find a lot of honors-only schools around the country that cater to the elementary/primary grades, but you will find a number of "alternative" public schools (IB, Montessori, etc.) that run from PK-8.  CMSD might do itself a favor to open a few of these types of schools around the city as well.

 

I should point out that I'm familiar with some gifted programs for the middle grades at the comprehensive CMSD elementary schools.  For instance, at one eastside elementary school with which I've spent some time, there is a separate self-contained classroom for gifted students in grades 2-4 and 5-6.  The students are usually placed based on test scores (which may or may not be entirely fair) and the classrooms are usually a bit smaller than regular CMSD classrooms.  I don't know if such a thing would be enough to attract families to use CMSD, but I think the district deserves credit for doing this.  Incidentally I would suspect that these separate gifted classrooms feed students into John Hay.

 

For Urban Education as a whole, I think it has been interesting what they have been doing in Harlem with the Promise Academy(HCZ Project), which has seen amazing results, for an area that really need it.

 

http://www.hcz.org/our-results

 

It's unclear just how much the HCZ has improved educational outcomes and it may take decades to know.  It's also unclear if such an expensive program can be repeated elsewhere around the country.  The HCZ spends a lot of money per student and because of publicity has been able to attract some big-pocketed donors.  It's definitely a laudable program that helps give food and healthcare to kids that wouldn't otherwise have access to such things.  But I'm not sure the HCZ is the idea policy-makers can point to as the thing that's going to solve all of the problems facing urban education.

Clevelander,

 

Examples of youth creating jobs are definitely more rare than examples of youth in leadership roles, I must admit.  But a great example of youth leadership is the YOC or Youth of Coventry whose purpose is to change the image of teenagers in Cleveland Heights and to "give the youth a voice on social issues in our community," according to their facebook page. I believe they formed after the curfew was put in place, after the flash mob of young people at the Coventry Street Fair.

 

http://www.facebook.com/youthofcoventry

 

http://media.heightsobserver.org/issue_pdfs/TheHeightsObserver_Vol_04_Issue_08.pdf

 

Yeah I've heard about that.  I actually live near there and it would be great if that movement grew and became more than just a group that came together to deal with a one-time issue. 

 

By the way, you didn't go to the University of Dayton, did you?

Here's an interesting article about some of the issues surrounding school choice:

 

http://www.journalgazette.net/article/20120805/EDIT05/308059977/1021/EDIT

 

Essentially a very popular, but "failing" (per Indiana's ratings system based on testing) charter school in Indianapolis was closed down and parents there aren't happy.  It raises the question as to whether or not parents should be allowed to "choose" a certain school for their kids even if that school isn't meeting state indicators.  The article also discusses some interesting ideas regarding tax dollars and school choice as it pertains to other programs such as vouchers and even home-schooling.  It's not a terribly long article, but it does hit on a lot of double-standards of the school choice program in Indiana and really elsewhere around the country.

Regarding parent participation, it's a hard nut to crack.  It is definitely a positive influence on children, having involved, caring guardians, but at the same time I know a number of high schoolers basically on their own, with more ambition than I could have even imagined at their age.

 

I think parent involvement has far more implication when you're dealing with younger children. It's more than simply ignoring your kids education. Working in Slavic Village (poor section of CLE) my wife has been heartbroken, having to send students home or to children's services countless times because their hygiene wasn't taken care of.  And perhaps even worse than neglect are the parents who actively dissuade their children from learning because "my son's going to the NBA/NFL/etc. anyhow" or because "minorities can't get ahead even with an education." I've heard these things said and can't believe it. Then of course there are the kids who are outright abused at home. Unreal. The entire classroom is affected by these kinds of things.

http://www.cleveland.com/morris/index.ssf/2012/08/eugene_johnsons_first_day_of_k.html

 

Not sure if this was posted anywhere elsewhere on UO so far. The short story, child was directed by CMSD to go to Almira Elementary for his first day of kindergarten on the 22nd. He and his mother arrive at the Almira, to find a flat field which was the site of Almira elementary before it was demolished in 2010.

 

- Extremely disappointing and inexcusable. This is a huge PR blunder for CMSD and doesn't inspire confidence in public's eyes (or my eyes) that the administration is competent.

http://www.cleveland.com/morris/index.ssf/2012/08/eugene_johnsons_first_day_of_k.html

 

Not sure if this was posted anywhere elsewhere on UO so far. The short story, child was directed by CMSD to go to Almira Elementary for his first day of kindergarten on the 22nd. He and his mother arrive at the Almira, to find a flat field which was the site of Almira elementary before it was demolished in 2010.

 

- Extremely disappointing and inexcusable. This is a huge PR blunder for CMSD and doesn't inspire confidence in public's eyes (or my eyes) that the administration is competent.

 

Even worse, the Help Line the CMSD provided (say, just in case the school was instead actually a hole in the ground) was a non-working number.

That story is heartbreaking.  This is why I think the district needs to be divided up into three or four smaller districts (each of which would then be about the size of the largest suburban districts in the state). 

Um, Almira School was moved to Brookside last January. It's been in all the papers. I wrote about it in Sun, the PD covered it. And the last I saw, the vacated school was still standing. Not sure I understand what went wrong here.

That story is heartbreaking.  This is why I think the district needs to be divided up into three or four smaller districts (each of which would then be about the size of the largest suburban districts in the state). 

 

Heartbreaking?  Morris is certainly trying to make it into that.  But let's be honest, the kid is missing the first day of school, not being told that he'll have to work his life in a sweatshop instead of getting an education.

That story is heartbreaking.  This is why I think the district needs to be divided up into three or four smaller districts (each of which would then be about the size of the largest suburban districts in the state). 

 

So creating more bureaucracy is best?  Come on!

That story is heartbreaking.  This is why I think the district needs to be divided up into three or four smaller districts (each of which would then be about the size of the largest suburban districts in the state). 

 

So creating more bureaucracy is best?  Come on!

 

In a perfect world, these districts would be autonomous and as such it theoretically wouldn't be necessary to increase bureaucracy by making the districts a bit smaller.  In fact it could in theory make things small enough that the people in charge could decrease bureaucracy.  But we don't live in a perfect world; we live in Northeast Ohio. ;)

That story is heartbreaking.  This is why I think the district needs to be divided up into three or four smaller districts (each of which would then be about the size of the largest suburban districts in the state). 

 

Heartbreaking?  Morris is certainly trying to make it into that.  But let's be honest, the kid is missing the first day of school, not being told that he'll have to work his life in a sweatshop instead of getting an education.

 

Yeah you're right I took the bait. 

With the upcoming CMSD levy vote on Tuesday, there has been a flurry of discussion recently.  I liked this editorial by a teacher calling out district and union leadership and local politicians for ignoring the real issue and placing the blame in all the wrong places:

 

The real crisis in the Cleveland schools is being ignored by those who think the levy will help: Louis E. Filippelli

 

Once again the citizens of Cleveland are being hoodwinked about the crisis in the public school system. The deception is widespread and the list of culprits includes the governor, the mayor, elected state representatives, the business community, and even the teachers union. All have failed to educate themselves and the citizenry on the real issues regarding educational failure and all have abdicated their responsibility to consider and discuss social factors in public education. Financial problems, as severe as they are, have been permitted to overshadow the remedies for real reform.

 

The prevailing attitudes of these so called educational reformers pretty much assures us that education in this district will continue to be a failed endeavor. Teacher evaluations are highlighted while discipline solutions and parental and student accountability are virtually ignored. Irresponsible parents and the children they are failing to raise are the real culprits in this ongoing scholastic disaster.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2012/11/the_real_crisis_in_the_clevela.html

Cross-posted in the Urban Education thread:

 

With the upcoming CMSD levy vote on Tuesday, there has been a flurry of discussion recently.  I liked this editorial by a teacher calling out district and union leadership and local politicians for ignoring the real issue and placing the blame in all the wrong places:

 

The real crisis in the Cleveland schools is being ignored by those who think the levy will help: Louis E. Filippelli

 

Once again the citizens of Cleveland are being hoodwinked about the crisis in the public school system. The deception is widespread and the list of culprits includes the governor, the mayor, elected state representatives, the business community, and even the teachers union. All have failed to educate themselves and the citizenry on the real issues regarding educational failure and all have abdicated their responsibility to consider and discuss social factors in public education. Financial problems, as severe as they are, have been permitted to overshadow the remedies for real reform.

 

The prevailing attitudes of these so called educational reformers pretty much assures us that education in this district will continue to be a failed endeavor. Teacher evaluations are highlighted while discipline solutions and parental and student accountability are virtually ignored. Irresponsible parents and the children they are failing to raise are the real culprits in this ongoing scholastic disaster.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2012/11/the_real_crisis_in_the_clevela.html

Yeah I liked this as well.  It certainly gets down to the truth of the matter...  And yes it is the unpolitically correct realization.  This important understanding is one of the areas where the mayor fails, but needs to be able to connect with residents about (the whole ball of wax that leads to so many things that will always hold the city back.... Crime etc...) 

I don't think anyone is ignoring that plain truth.  I hate that strawman argument.  What can the CMSD do about it?  What realistic, plausible, and pragmatic reform can be put in place by the CMSD or the City which will make people better and more responsible parents?  The CMSD has to work with the hand they are dealt, and that includes heavy burdens that can only be managed through school reform, not fixed.

Its has to be more about having a zero tolerance attitude....  So that means much of it is about placing at least an equal amount of accountabilty on the parents and students as the article mentions.  Not sure how it would work out but all other examples need to be looked at.  I do think its very important to have an outspoken mayor that connects well with the residents and can instill that certain things wont be tolerated.

 

 

Realistically, the CSMD can't do anything other than push legislators to pass laws severely criminalizing bad parenting and being a disruptive student. And since that's never going to happen, all they can do is hope more stable people move to Cleveland and send the good kids to the schools.

^Correct

 

^^What do you do with the zero tolerance attitude?  What is the punishment?  Expulsion?  Do you think this City will be better off if all of the kids who are causing trouble and not paying attention in school are suddenly set free on the City streets during the day unsupervised or with their parents in jail on "bad parenting" charges?

 

My solution would be to build more John Hays and separate the good kids from the bad kids.  Maybe even separate the kids that truly excel from the rest.  Make them earn their spots in programs which can help them reach their potential.  It's really just a small but very noticeable minority that need to be dealt with differently.  It truly is sad that 20 kids in a classroom can't get a good education because the other 5 kids don't want one.

 

Of course, the district needs $$$$$$$ to do anything like that.  More money on a per capita basis than the schools which do have involved and interested parents.

 

I fully support the levy and would vote for it if I could

 

 

My solution would be to build more John Hays and separate the good kids from the bad kids.  Maybe even separate the kids that truly excel from the rest.  Make them earn their spots in programs which can help them reach their potential.  It's really just a small but very noticeable minority that need to be dealt with differently.  It truly is sad that 20 kids in a classroom can't get a good education because the other 5 kids don't want one.

 

Maybe even separate out the 5, but that can get political very fast.

 

Also, Filippelli worried about some things (dress code and language) that are rather irrelevant.  Focus on disruption of the classroom, and actual violent behavior in or out of same. 

 

Also hold them individually responsible for their behavior and achievement.  Don't worry about "self esteem".

My solution would be to build more John Hays and separate the good kids from the bad kids.  Maybe even separate the kids that truly excel from the rest.  Make them earn their spots in programs which can help them reach their potential.  It's really just a small but very noticeable minority that need to be dealt with differently.  It truly is sad that 20 kids in a classroom can't get a good education because the other 5 kids don't want one.

 

Maybe even separate out the 5, but that can get political very fast.

 

Also, Filippelli worried about some things (dress code and language) that are rather irrelevant.  Focus on disruption of the classroom, and actual violent behavior in or out of same. 

 

Also hold them individually responsible for their behavior and achievement.  Don't worry about "self esteem".

 

I'm on board with this view.  My mom teaches in a rough urban environment so I get to hear a lot about it.  A little disruption goes a long way toward runing everything for everyone.  Unacceptable behavior must be treated as unacceptable behavior.

 

The only thing the schools (taxpayers) can do directly is reduce class sizes.  The larger the group one teacher must control, the greater the chance of disruption.  And the lesser the chance of each student getting the attention they need.  Feeling like one little face in a boistrous crowd does not facilitate academic performance or good behavior.

Maybe even separate out the 5, but that can get political very fast.

 

That's exactly what I was suggesting.  When I went to Heights, we had Taylor Academy and it seemed to work well.  If you were a disruption, you were sent to a borderline juvy center for a semester or two until you showed improvement in behavoir and work ethic.  This was a step beyond sending the kids to the basement classes for 'special' students.

I don't think anyone is ignoring that plain truth.  I hate that strawman argument.  What can the CMSD do about it?  What realistic, plausible, and pragmatic reform can be put in place by the CMSD or the City which will make people better and more responsible parents?  The CMSD has to work with the hand they are dealt, and that includes heavy burdens that can only be managed through school reform, not fixed.

 

I believe that there are some things they can do, including actually allowing teachers to enforce the rules and follow through on disciplining the students that cause problems.  Beyond that, the district has to find ways to make students and parents accountable.  There are ways to do it, and I sincerely believe these things would improve overall student outcomes, but doing so would anger a lot of Jackson's constituency, so I guess we can't take about such solutions.

 

So instead their "innovative" plan is to place a larger burden on teachers, who can only do so much in such a tough environment--that's where the truth is being ignored or glossed over.  This part of the plan is going to backfire; it will hurt morale of currently employed teachers in the short-run, and in the long-run CMSD will be even less attractive to the best teaching candidates.  Who is going to want to work in a situation where they're being held accountable for things beyond their control, with their salary is riding on such factors, and where working conditions are almost always going to be worse than what you'll find in the suburbs because discipline is inconsistent?

 

I support this levy, the children need it, but I think the overall Transformation Plan is mostly pretty bad.  We can talk about it here in a few years when CEO Gordon is gone and someone has taken his place with the next big plan that's going to fix the schools.

^Correct

 

^^What do you do with the zero tolerance attitude?  What is the punishment?  Expulsion?  Do you think this City will be better off if all of the kids who are causing trouble and not paying attention in school are suddenly set free on the City streets during the day unsupervised or with their parents in jail on "bad parenting" charges?

 

My solution would be to build more John Hays and separate the good kids from the bad kids.  Maybe even separate the kids that truly excel from the rest.  Make them earn their spots in programs which can help them reach their potential.  It's really just a small but very noticeable minority that need to be dealt with differently.  It truly is sad that 20 kids in a classroom can't get a good education because the other 5 kids don't want one.

 

Of course, the district needs $$$$$$$ to do anything like that.  More money on a per capita basis than the schools which do have involved and interested parents.

 

I fully support the levy and would vote for it if I could

 

 

 

You have some good points here.  I'm a big fan of grouping students.  Along with more John Hay-type schools, perhaps with other focuses, CMSD also needs probably a good half-dozen schools that play the role that Taylor Academy played in CH-UH about 15-20 years ago.  The students that are truly want to learn--gifted or not--need to be given an environment to do so, away from the problem students.  There should probably be three or four tiers of schools.

 

By the way, a little off-topic, but what are you hearing about the SE-L levy?  Think it will pass?

I believe that there are some things they can do, including actually allowing teachers to enforce the rules and follow through on disciplining the students that cause problems. 

 

First of all, who is "they"?  And how are "they" somehow preventing teachers from enforcing the rules and following through on disciplining the students that cause problems?

 

Beyond that, the district has to find ways to make students and parents accountable.  There are ways to do it, and I sincerely believe these things would improve overall student outcomes, but doing so would anger a lot of Jackson's constituency, so I guess we can't take about such solutions.

 

Specifically, such as...... ?

I believe that there are some things they can do, including actually allowing teachers to enforce the rules and follow through on disciplining the students that cause problems. 

 

First of all, who is "they"?  And how are "they" somehow preventing teachers from enforcing the rules and following through on disciplining the students that cause problems?

 

 

Administrators often don't want kids removed from classes or suspended or expelled because they believe these actions reduce overall test scores.  Increasing competition from charter schools means that enrollment itself has become a competitive metric.  It is very difficult today to get a disruptive student removed from a class for any length of time.

I've never heard of that, but I'll take your word for it.  Is that somehow unique to CMSD?  Regardless, what do you do with the kids once you remove them from class?  This gets back to my original point and actually is supportive of the arguments in favor of the levy.  The district needs money, and lots of it, to deal with the problems it has..... problems which aren't going away no matter how you decide to deal with them

Definitely not unique to CMSD, my mom teaches in Warren.  In some cases, disruptive kids are sent to literally roam the hallways during class because there's nothing else to be done with them.  All of this, in my opinion, is evidence in favor of passing levies.  School staffs are overwhelmed and the students increasingly live in dire straits, which colors their view of the world.

First of all, who is "they"?  And how are "they" somehow preventing teachers from enforcing the rules and following through on disciplining the students that cause problems?

 

Sorry for not being clearer.  "They" would be district administrators and they have put an emphasis on teachers dealing with discipline "in-house."  In other words, things that in the past may have caused a reasonable teacher to send a kid down to the office are now being dealt with in the classroom.  And on some occasions when students are sent down to the office, they are not being disciplined as they should (i.e. receiving a suspension).  Some of this is left up to the discretion of individual principals, and as such varies by school, but the point is that there are enough problems in a lot of these schools that only the most extremely serious cases are dealt with by office staff and punished in a way that one might expect to be reasonable.

 

Specifically, such as...... ?

 

Well, just recently Chicago has considered implementing a "carrot" approach, that is, giving parents a $25 gift card to entice them to come to teacher meetings.  I think some combination of the carrot and stick approach is necessary, and I'm not sure if this makes a whole lot of sense, but at least it's an idea that accepts the reality of the situation (lack of parental involvement) and aims to do something about it.

That op-ed by Filippelli was quite good.  The teachers *are* being scapegoated and it has turned into a political football.  Recall the messaging that Kasich used when trying to bust the teachers' union in 2011.

Definitely not unique to CMSD, my mom teaches in Warren.  In some cases, disruptive kids are sent to literally roam the hallways during class because there's nothing else to be done with them.  All of this, in my opinion, is evidence in favor of passing levies.  School staffs are overwhelmed and the students increasingly live in dire straits, which colors their view of the world.

 

Not unique to Cleveland, but also less prevalent in the suburbs because of student body makeup and available resources.  The districts that have the most problems are also the ones that tend to have the least amount of resources to deal with the problems.  Though in CMSD's case, due to test scores and state ratings, as well as public perception, it's bad for business when you have to kick a kid out of school for five days (even if it is completely warranted).  It hurts the attendance number (which factors into the state rating), it causes that student to fall behind and miss out on learning time (jeopardizing test scores), and it goes on the books as a suspension (which is a problem when you want to cite these numbers as proof that discipline in the schools is improving).

 

In fairness, a lot of this is simply CMSD's response to outside pressures as dictated by failed state and Federal policies.