The front page of this week’s Education Week has a major article on the attempt to turn The Academy as Shawnee, a high school in Louisville, into something better than one of the state’s 10 lowest performing schools.
With an extra half a million dollars to spend each year for the next three years, you would think something positive would come from all the effort and attention being focused on this chronically low-performing school.
But, maybe not.
I couldn’t help getting a bit concerned when I read this very revealing comment in the EdWeek article:
“The school this year also is emphasizing literacy across the building, with students reading novels in chemistry classes and grammar tips appearing on the walls even in algebra classrooms.”
Clearly, if kids can’t read well, nothing else really will matter.
But, if the school has to cut down on math and chemistry instruction to increase literacy, the kids in this school might learn to read better, but they still will be shortchanged on the education they need to survive in the new economy.
If Shawnee were a charter school, the school day could be extended so kids could get more instructional time to adequately cover all the material they need.
But, Kentucky won’t allow charters. And, the teachers union won’t allow regular schools the flexibility they need to really help these kids, either.
So, it looks like kids in Shawnee are sacrificing math and science instruction just to get adequate reading skills. It’s an either-or price they shouldn’t have to pay just so adults in the school system can continue on having a cushy ride.
Friday, October 29, 2010
Will Kentucky’s ‘Persistently Low-Achieving Schools’ get turned around?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
The "either/or" choice seems to be a false one.
Aren't there schools that are able to balance math, science, reading, etc... and perform well.
Why can't Shawnee look to those schools as an example?
Why does our Governor refuse to acknowledge the success of charter schools? They would do a world of good in a state that has increasingly low performance standards and results.
It seems that after years and years of decline that the system would be open to trying something new.
Charter schools would be at least worth trying, right?
RE: Anonymous November 1, 2010 10:00 AM
The facts are that students who have been chronically underserved in school simply need much more time than the standard, union-enforced, school day will allow.
Charter schools don't have to follow those restrictions, and many offer students extended hours where they can catch up on all the areas where they are behind.
Regular schools usually cannot match that flexibility. So regular schools wind up seriously under-serving students, at best, only partly meeting the needs.
Certainly, other regular schools do a better job with challenged students than Shawnee -- in fact virtually every school in Kentucky does.
But, to really fix the problems the Shawnee students face, it will take more than a standard school can deliver.
Post a Comment