Brian Hicks's column Friday outlines the basic problems at CCSD's North Charleston High School. Never mind that merely 88 of a potential 251 graduates made it to a diploma: the school's problems have been exacerbated by district leadership over the last decade.
First of all, any parent of a student reading at or above grade level has wisely chosen to enroll that student (if at all possible) at one of the many magnet schools that are in--wait for it--North Charleston. Total enrollment at NCHS has dropped by half in the last few years.
Second, in her wisdom, the superintendent has been unable to keep her hands off the principals she has appointed. Grimm is new to the job this year--why? Because McGinley took a principal who had good rapport with the NCHS community and appointed her to oversee Head Start. Go figure.
Third, the district claims that the percentage of non-readers (i.e., reading below the fourth grade level) has dropped from 20 to 12 percent. Wouldn't you like to see the actual numbers of students involved? Not many. We should be asking what percentage read below the sixth grade level (the lowest level for which high school materials are published).
If it weren't for NCLB, district administration wouldn't even bat an eyelash at the dropout rate at NCHS. The statistics keep the superintendent honest. We wouldn't be hearing about the school from Hicks except that under NCLB rules, after all else has failed, the school faces a potential state takeover.
Here's the reality. Following the same model of schooling used for other high schools does not work in a dire situation. It's time for the superintendent and the state superintendent to "think outside of the box." Keep a section of students reading more or less on grade level, say sixth and above, to follow the traditional curriculum. Make sections of the rest based on reading ability and teach them to read. They may take five years to graduate or more. Maybe once they can read, they can catch up with on-line courses in the summer. Maybe someone else has a better solution. I would suggest to start by asking the teachers at NCHS what would work.
Chances are that they know and would love to do what ever it takes.
Friday, June 01, 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
Babbie, you really do care. Rather than spin, you have offered suggestions. The Post et Cetera should be so bold. Here's a fact we can't seem to get around. Something has to be done to teach these kids to read because the statistics are cold. It’s a fact that the percentage of students expected to graduate who read at or below the 4th grade level when they enter high school is zero.
Putting positive spin on the school's report card by just finding and "graduating" the "lost" numbers who just moved on to other schools ignores the real challenge of fixing what went wrong for those who were left behind.
McGinley is starting her 9th year at CCSD. She arrived in 2004. North Charleston High was a Palmetto Silver Award winning school as recently as 2001. You can draw your own conclusions.
I say the problem is with the leadership which doesn't give a farthing for these kids. Until fundamental changes take place within how CCSD evaluates itself the kids and the schools they attend will suffer.
Back in 2006-2007(?), NCHS was, to our knowledge, the first school in the district to attempt to initiate a full literacy initiative directed at all rising 9th graders. The Principal told us the reading scores from the feeder schools (Brentwood and Morningside?) were as low as second rgrade level. The reading program was READ 180. Four new teachers were hired and READ 180 labs were configured in four classrooms with Title 1 funding. Teachers were trained that summer in READ 180. Even the classrooms were configured to insure fidelity with the READ 180 specifications. Every 9th grader took an Essentials of Reading class first semester. And the reinforcement of reading via READ 180 continued in our English 1 classes the second semester, along with the standard course of studies for English 1. Reading across the curriculum, even in Math (word problems), also was emphasized. At the end of that school year, EOC scores in English 1 rose by approximately 35% and Algebra 1 EOC scores rose by over 250%. While I taught at NCHS during those two years I never once saw the Chief Academic Officer (Dr. McGinley) visit any of our READ 180 labs. I do remember the Principal, however, checking on Lexile scores weekly. While our READ 180 program was in its early stages, at least it was a start. And our MAP scores as well as our EOC scores were moving in the right direction. I do not know what occurred after I left. I departed the same year the Principal left.
The previous post confirms other stories about how Nancy McGinley fails to stick with anything long enough to test the results. Her record is full of examples of starting new programs on top of others.
The latest is her request that the board approve the hiring of 72 new "associate teachers" to help in the latest literacy program. These are uncertified teachers who would be hired for less money but who have little or no credentials, much less a documented track record, as reading teachers.
This is the first I've heard of the Read 180 program. From what the Anonymous 9:03 said, it was producing results for as long as it was being sustained. Like so many other things involving Nancy McGinley's leadership, it looks like a one-eighty was done on it before it could be properly evaluated.
As for cohort graduation rates, if some of those incoming Freshmen never actually enrolled at NCHS, they should not count towards that school's denominator. They must have enrolled at that school in order to count in the cohort's denominator. The Principal should have researched the official Cohort Graduation Rate (CGR)denominators for the upcoming grades 9-12 cohorts, examined the status of kids remaining in the appropriate numerators, developed a plan to move the "bubble kids" with summer school, credit recovery, modified schedules, etc. and forecast best-case scenarios before agreeing to take this job. Any prudent incoming Principal would have done this. He should never have trusted McGinley or any of those morons with her. Certainly someone there knows how to forecast high school graduation rates, especially in at-risk schools. Then again, maybe not. Grimm should have known better than to trust McGinley. So sad. He seems like a decent man trying to do the best he can.
To anon 9:51: Would the new Principal at NCHS have known how to do this? If not, should he have known? Doesn't the school have a "Program Specialist" (or something like that) who has been at the school for many years who should have advised him? What are all of those subordinates at NCHS doing anyway? Assistant Principals, specialists of one kind or another, High Schools That Work consultants (if they are still active at NCHS), etc. Shouldn't someone have been aware of this data and, more importantly, what to do with it?
Post a Comment