By even this biased account, as the lead states, "Dozens of Charleston County students are reading better as a result of the school district's newest literacy initiatives, and hundreds more will be given the same chance next year." Let's hope that "dozens" means at least seven or eight dozen (84 or 96) and not two or three dozen (24 or 36) after all this time and effort!
See, here's the administrative attitude that's led to the present state of affairs: "Students who needed the extra help this year could refuse it without consequence, but next school year those who turn it down will not be allowed to go on to the next grade." Why were they allowed to "refuse it without consequence"? This practice equates to telling a child to go to bed and then ignoring his or her staying up all night. Neither scenario promises the student will be in good shape to learn in school.
Amazingly enough, for once I find myself in agreement with Gregg Meyers's statements about continuing the third-grade academies:
". . .board member Gregg Meyers told the superintendent at a recent board meeting that the board couldn't have made it any more clear that making sure every child can read is its highest priority. If the third-grade academies are needed and working, he said the superintendent should make sure that program happens, as well as the one for first-graders.
"This is the most important thing we do," he said. "Let's make sure we do it. … If we get nothing else right, we want to get this right. I think we need to stay aggressive about this."
Gepford said officials have been working since then to find money so the third-grade academies can continue.
I vote for furloughing two of Superintendent McGinley's associate superintendents and gutting her transportation allowance. That should help considerably.
What's that, you say? How can reading scores go backwards? Actually what's not clear is why CCSD chose to place students who were "higher performing" "better readers" into a remedial program with the district's worst readers. Why not have an even smaller academy instead? Were the parents of these students even aware of what was happening? Were those parents so desperate to get them out of another school that they presumed anything else would be better?
Is there some reason that the reporter couldn't ask these questions?
Finally, for all of you who have struggled through algebra out there, I have a great quote:
"Gepford said math is easier to teach than reading because it's more concrete and easier to understand. Learning to read is a more complex process that involves multiple skills, he said."What Gepford means is that math is more objective, not more concrete, at least not once you leave the realm of 2 plus 2! However, perhaps he misspoke and meant that math is easier to learn? Or easier for the teacher to understand how to teach?
Ask anyone who's tried to raise SAT scores whether it's easier to raise the verbal or math components, and you will get the same response as the Sixth-Grade Academy's results.
Math tests measure skills; reading tests measure skills and common knowledge. If CCSD seriously wants to raise reading scores, it must teach both.
Posts
2 comments:
I also must admit, "Amazingly...I find myself in agreement with Gregg Meyers".
Why cut into programs that are working in order to save or initiate others? Or is this only about putting out fires that put the administration in a bad light? The administration seems to have trouble doing more than one thing at a time. CCSD and McGinley should focus on both repair AND prevention when it comes to literacy. Without approaching this most basic educational brick in the academic foundation (reading skills) we can't expect our public educational system to withstand even the smallest challenge. The same would apply to the students CCSD is purportedly educating.
As it now stands, the students trapped within CCSD, continue to be at risk. Too many are being pushed through the K-12 system without mastering basic skills or learning how to acquire core knowledge throughout life. If Bill Lewis claims their is a 2% chance of an earthquake in the next 50 years (assuming he also means building failures and injury to students) then what is the risk rate for failure and serious injury to CCSD students over the next fifty years of their lives who aren't now being properly educated by the system? I'm sure the risk for individual failure and serious injury to the quality of the lives of those former students and their families are many times more than 2 percent. Many won't survive. And what about the many others in those classrooms today who are unable to move forward as the system continues to dumb down to the lowest common denominator?
Yep, I vote for smaller classrooms, extra emphasis on reading readiness at the pre-K thru 2nd grade levels, and remedial reading throughout the system until every child (or at least 98%) in every CCSD classroom is reading at grade level or above.
CCSD can cut the administrative budget to pay for it, too. Eliminate the waste in McGinley's office, cut the PR staff, furlough the associate superintendents and cut the outrageous transportation perks...for both McGinley and the magnet schools. On the last one, why issue the superintendent a CARTA pass? Or would that be asking too much? What's wrong with mingling with the masses or would using the public transportation system require her to become "one of those who ride the bus" which she may secretly abhor?
Until she walks (or rides) with those she serves, and not just reacts to each perceived crisis of the moment, she will never understand what will make Charleston's public educational system work. The system's success should be measured in the success of every student long after they complete what CCSD has to offer them. Those with no vision are content with measuring success in the short term or by individual school statistics.
Greg Meyers is right about one thing. The foundation of sustainable success within our schools is in our not leaving any student out of this chance to correct one of CCSD's biggest and most tragic mistakes. It has been a "Sophie's Choice" of which child to save and which child to abandon.
McGinley should take heed and lead with more vision for how success is measured for the rest of us, including all 41,000 students currently in the system. This is not just about school report cards and justifying an ever expanding administrative staff as classrooms continue to be cut.
As with all Superintendents who are reliant on public perception for their jobs, Dr. McGinley is a creature of perception and public waves.
Post a Comment