Recommended reading: Schrag, Fuller
Three, articles, two analyses and one opinion piece, are worth reading in case they escaped your notice:
Market fixes for California Schools: In a paradigm shift, Democratic leaders like Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has bit the hand that fed him – unions – and embraced charter schools and choice. UC-Berkeley education and public policy professor Bruce Fuller writes about the phenomenon in the San Francisco Chronicle.
California’s School Budget: The Race to Mediocrity: In the California Progress Report, columnist and former Sacramento Bee editorial page editor Peter Schrag lays into the claim, in the Race to the Top application, that the state stands behind public education. What the application “doesn’t tell the feds is that despite the scandalously low funding of its schools and colleges, California has resolutely refused to increase revenues, even in good times.”
What makes a great teacher? The Atlantic’s Amanda Ripley reports on Teach for America’s quest to define the qualities of teaching excellence in hopes of applying them prospectively in choosing the right candidates for the classroom. “The results are specific and surprising. Things that you might think would help a new teacher achieve success in a poor school—like prior experience working in a low-income neighborhood—don’t seem to matter. Other things that may sound trifling—like a teacher’s extracurricular accomplishments in college—tend to predict greatness.” As for what makes a great teacher? “First, great teachers tended to set big goals for their students. They were also perpetually looking for ways to improve their effectiveness.”






Bruce Fuller’s pair of commentaries in last Sunday’s Chronicle Insight section is fatally flawed by being wildly inaccurate and misleading the reader. He cites a mediocre San Francisco charter school, City Arts and Tech, as a model of success, claiming that it shows “remarkable results.” But that’s just plain not true.
While Ino one is blasting CAT as a failure, its achievement ranks 12th out of the 17 general- education (non-continuation) high schools in the San Francisco Unified School District. Below are the spring 2009 achievement results for San Francisco high schools based on API, ranked in descending performance order.
1. Lowell (academic magnet) 949
2. Washington 785
3. School of the Arts (arts magnet) 781
4. Galileo 757
5. Lincoln 751
6. Balboa 747
7. Raoul Wallenberg 744
8. Gateway Charter 743
9. Metropolitan Arts & Tech Charter 629
10. Leadership Charter 618
11. Phillip & Sala Burton 615
12. City Arts & Tech Charter 610
13. International Studies Academy 590
14. Thurgood Marshall 575
15. Mission 555
16. John O’Connell 550
17. June Jordan 504
Fuller’s commentaries notably omit any specifics about academic results, though they do imply that CAT serves an inordinately high number of low-income students. But in reality, CAT ranks 10th of SFUSD’s 17 general-ed high schools in the percentage of low-income students it serves, and it ranks 15th of SFUSD’s 17 general-ed high schools in the percentage of limited English speakers it serves. (And of course “education reform” advocates never let public schools get away with justifying low achievement based on demographics — that’s “excuse-making” — so CAT wouldn’t get to either, if it DID indeed serve a higher percentage of low-income students.)
Fuller’s articles also don’t mention the unusual policy at CAT and Envision’s other SFUSD charter school, Metro Arts & Tech, of giving no grades below a C in the course requirements for CSU/UC admissions (the A-G requirements). That would be called “grade inflation” or “lowered standards” at a public school, and means that all CAT alumni do graduate qualified ON PAPER for CSU/UC, giving graduates a nice boost at getting into colleges. Lots of kids at other fine SFUSD high schools sure wish their schools had such a policy.
Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity
And I have a direct question, John: What recourse is there when an academic and a major newspaper publish such inaccurate and misleading information? I blogged, and wrote a letter (which apparently is not being published), but that obviously isn’t enough. How can the public get correct information if an academic and the press get it so wrong — and you recommend the inaccurate report?
Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity
What Makes a Great Teacher – The Atlantic’s Amanda Ripley reports on Teach for America’s quest to define the qualities of teaching excellence is a must read. Teaching will always be both an art and science, but the more we understand the science of teaching the more effective we can be at ensuring teachers with these skills are in classrooms. It strikes me that the lessons here are also important for teachers in all classrooms; good teaching significantly transcends the color and economic background of the child. I am looking forward to active discussions among our principals and faculty regarding this article.
Report this comment for abusive language, hate speech and profanity