Comments (12)

Comment RSS
Deputy Director of the Learning First Alliance

Patrick - I think you missed

Was this helpful?
0

Patrick - I think you missed the point of this post, or perhaps it wasn't clear enough. As currently defined in federal legislation, a school "turnaround" involves replacing a school principal and at least half the staff. However, the school improvement model that I highlight here uses EXISTING school staff to improve struggling schools. My aim with the post was to call attention to the fact that such efforts can have great results, even in the schools serving low-income students you mention. My hope is that calling attention to models like this will convince policymakers that we need to move beyond the four turnaround models currently validated in federal legislation.

Professor of Education Emeritus, San Diego State University

Was this helpful?
0

I was disappointed to findd that the "school turnarounds" posed here emphasize the need to fire a much greater number of teachers. I assume that the author of this proposal knows that teachers who work with children from upper-income families only rarely lose their jobs.
By contrast, instructors who work with youngsters who live in low-income families suffer greatly in that regard. Almost never are such teachets allowed to change jobs with the ones otherwise lucky enough to surround themselves with boys and girls whose parents earn or inherit relatively speaking high amounts of income. Superintendents of public schools almost univerally express much satisfaction with this arrangement, and thus inforce it strongly. Teacher unions simply avoid the issue. In short, I suggest that Ms. OBrien expand the number of issue that she has raised.

see more see less