By Antonio D. French
Filed Wednesday, February 15 at 6:36 AM
Last night, the St. Louis Board of Education approved a plan by Superintendent Creg Williams to make some big changes in the City's public schools. The plan, which was kept secret until the night of the vote, includes the following changes:
1. Mandatory school uniforms at some schools
2. Separate 9th grade academies
3. Year-round school for 9th graders
4. Some all-boy and all-girl schools
5. smaller "learning academies"
Critics say that such sweeping changes should have included much more public input, which has been a constant criticism of the board majority backed by Mayor Francis Slay. They also say that this is another example of a grand experiment by a St. Louis superintendent who may not even be here to see the changes through.
Not long ago, at the suggestion of another superintendent, the district closed 14 schools (most in north St. Louis), which resulted in larger classes and some buildings filled over capacity. These new reforms will likely require some of those buildings to be re-opened. Williams is the 4th superintendent in two and a half years.
Supporters of the reforms say that the public school's drastic situation calls for a drastic solution. Last year, the district fell more than 20 points further away from full accreditation by the state.
Click here to download a PowerPoint presentation of Williams' Plan.
UPDATE: SLPS clarified today that the requirement for school uniforms will not affect all of the district's students.
1 Comments:
1. Mandatory school uniforms
Uh, if you say so. I can imagine this might reduce teasing and might restrict gang signifying I GUESS. Instructors and admins always seem to think that it will work. As someone who was in high school not too many years ago, and who had several friends in various private schools, I can tell ya, with uniforms kids always find a way to express their clique or gang, or to tease based on appearance anyway. Teens may have to follow your rules, but they ain't stupid. Uniforms tend to strike me as a measure that is more for show than for real change.
2. Seperate 9th grade academies
I've lost the article in our last two moves, but I read last year about an urban high school system where this actually increased violence. I'm not saying it happens every time, but it's possible. Personally, I would have been very unhappy with a set-up like this. When I was in 9th grade, most of my friends were older, and I needed to take a couple of classes above my grade. A set-up like this doesn't help out geeks like me who are looking for a challenge.
3. Year-round school for 9th graders
This just seems designed to encourage dropping out in 9th grade. Yikes. Have the people who came up with this ever ridden a packed school bus in July all through the city to school? They don't have air conditioning. Given what I heard from many of the SLPS high schoolers I worked with last year at the library, the schools aren't the best on climate control, either. And geez, give the kids a break. Having some time off in the summer to look forward to helps a lot of kids get through the year. Some families also need the extra income from their kid getting a summer job.
4. Some all-boy and all-girl schools
I actually think this might be good for some kids, but then again, I've never gone to an all-girl school, so I don't know what it's like firsthand. In some cases, this has been shown to increase performance for girls because they feel less pressured. Not sure how I feel about this one.
5. smaller "learning academies"
This could actually be good, too, but just like #4, it really depends on how it is executed. Smaller schools can be good for kids, since they provide more roles per kid. Like if you have a school with 200 kids versus a school with 1,000 kids.... At the school with 200 kids, each student has a better chance of being on the basketball team or the math team than at a larger school. More kids get to feel involved and special. Also, teachers get to know all the kids a little better in smaller settings. But, again, it depends on how it's executed. We'll see. I mean, updating the curriculum might have sounded like a good thing, but Open Court sure ain't working out that well across the board!
We'll see. Like you said, we'll see how long Creg Williams even lasts. He may end up as another sacrificial lamb to the PR gods--kicked out and treated as the source of the problem when public opinion of the schools and school board drops too low. If I may quote you: "Williams is the 4th superintendent in two and a half years."
"Supporters of the reforms say that the public school's drastic situation calls for a drastic solution."
That can be a really, really dangerous line of thought sometimes. Personally, I think a problem this bad calls for a careful and well thought out solution.
Not that I think throwing money at the schools would solve everything at this point, but so many of the problems with the schools were created by money being taken away from them over the years. Even just raising teacher salaries a decent amount would start to draw and retain more good people for taking care of the kids. Some of these solutions may help, some of them will not, but ultimately they seem like they come out of the "Let's drastically slash the budget and then blame the problems on the kids!" school of thought.
9:51 AM, February 15, 2006
Post a Comment
<< Home