c;( Across country, Edison under fire

6

Facts about Edison Schools

11

.... ~ What's the right : t:!3D: reading program?

I, 12

"Turning the page

for change."

o WINTER 2001-02

I Vol. 9, No.2

PHI LAD E L PHI A PUB Lie · S C H 0 -0 L

,NOTEBOOK Takeover transfers powers

Insuring school quality: who will be responsible? by Amy Rhodes

A transfer of authority from the current schooL board to a new system of control is likely to shake up the SchooL District in the near future.

While negotiating this new power structure with Mayor Street, Pennsylvania Governor Mark Schweiker has called for strong measures to hold Philadelphia schools and the central administration accountable.

The School Reform Commission would hire the CEO and

conduct independent audits of the District.

According to Charles Zogby, state secretary of education, "The governor wants the Philadelphia School District to be the most accountable and transparent school district in America."

A close look at the governor's proposal reveals a multi-layered accountability system that builds on current strategies in the District. But the proposed system also poses potential problems for both school accountability and District accountability to the public.

Test score goals Philadel phia 's low test scores are one rea­

son a state takeover is on the agenda. Every school under the governor 's plan would be assigned specific goals for student performance on the state test. the PSSA, based on their grade level and thei.r categorization as a.low-, mid­or high- performing school. Fqr example, low­performing schools would be required to have a 25-point gain in the PSSAs over five years.

Under the plan, principals would be held directly accountable for their students ' perfor­mance on the PSSA, and would receive salary bonuses if their students performed weLL While the idea of bonuses for principals is not new to the District, this plan does up the ante. Principals who achieve their schools' performance targets could receive bonuses up to 30% of their salaries.

See "School quality" on p. 4

10 60 schools targeted for takeover

14 Anti-privatization movement grows

16 Labor fights a state takeover

School takeover fight heats up by Paul Socolar

Amidst controversy and frequent public protests this fall, the very future of the Philadelphia School District is being negotiated and fought over.

The main stage is the ongoing negotiation between

Mayor John Street and Governor Mark Schweiker over a school takeover proposal developed by the governor and the for-profit company Edison Schools, Inc. But banles are also being fought in schools, in the courts, in the streets, and in the media.

And those banles show no sign of receding any time soon, despite a December 21 deadline for an agreement between the mayor and governor. The city and state have agreed that if.no resolution is achieved by that date.on a joint plan for running the District, the state will step in to run the school system on its own.

Students, parents, and school employees who oppose the governor's takeover and privatization plans have vowed to continue resisting both in the streets and through law: suits. These protesters are also demancling that the mayor and governor give the public meaningful chances for input on the proposed changes.

On one point, there is widespread agreement. The School District faces both a fmancial crisis and an academic crisis. With the School District's deficit exceeding $200 million this year (and projected to surpass $1 billion in five years), the mayor says he was forced to turn to the state to avoid a shutdown of the system. Meanwhile, almost half of those who enter Philadelphia schools still fail to graduate, with even higher dropout rates among African American and Latino students.

The governor's plan includes proposals for both an acad­emic overhaul of the District and a resolution of the financial crisis. But his plan, released October 31, has been controver­sial from the start. Even after Governor Schweiker withdrew

M~l f\\()NSi ~0r

Photo; Harvey Finkle

a proposal to have Edison, a private company, take over all Governor Schweiker's school takeover plan has been controversial here.

the top jobs in the District, the controversy continued. Proposals to privatize many support jobs and to have Edison and

other private companies manage schools have been denounced in numer­ous street protests in Philadelphia and a rally in Harrisburg. Parent and community groups have held educational forums at schools. and press conferences have declared some schools to be ''Edison-free'' zones.

But the governor 's plan also has suppOlters in Philadelphia, includ­ing several community organizations and elected officials who are named as possible "community partners" that would collaborate with private companies to manage schools.

The mayor and governor, while they continue to negotiate and express a commitment to partnership, are staking out positions that are far apart on both the fmancial and academic parts of the plan. The mayor also objects to the lack of a voice for the city in governance of the system after the proposed takeover.

School District CEO Phil Goldsmith and other local school offi­cials have been blunt in their criticism of the governor's plan. "The

only rationale I hear for this plan is this : things in Philadelphia are so bad. how can this plan be worse than what's there? So much for high expectations," Goldsmith said.

Some opponents of the governor 's plan say there are proven ways to improve schools that just haven 't been possible in Philadelphia because of inadequate funding.

'What we want is reduced class sizes, more certified teachers, and a new school-funding formula that does not punish people for living in a poor area," said Eric Braxton of the Philadelphia Student Uruon . "What we don ' t want is Edison Schools in Philadelphia."

But Edison, the nation's largest for-profit manager of public schools. still plays a big part in the governor's plan. The company has been a lightning rod for criticism since former Governor Tom Ridge hired them and brought them to Philadelphia in August to prepare an analy­sis and recommendations for reforming the school system. The contract

See "Takeover" on p. 10

De costa a costa, Edison esta bajo ataque • Renuneias de maestros, bajo rendimiento aeademieo y gastos exeesivos incillln oposicwn para fa eompaiifa con fines de luero.

por Ros Purnell

A traves del pais, un ntimero de comparuas ahora buscan firmar contratos con los distritos escolares, alegando que pueden aportar el rigor caracterfstico del sector privado a las operaciones de las escuelas publicas que estlin fracasando.

Edison Schools, Inc. es la compafifa mas grande de administraci6n de escuelas con fines de lucro, y ha encontrado muchos que Ie

aceptan la oferta. La compaiHa comenzo a administrar sus prinneras cuatro escuelas en Texas, Kansas, Massachusetts, y Michigan en 1995. Edison ahora ha ganado contratos para administrar 136 escuelas que son en su mayona de bajo rendirniento academico y representan aproximadamente 75,000 estudiantes, tambien en su mayorfa de bajos ingresos y de minorfas. Ha logrado esto, pero no sin que las comunidades se opongan.

Un argurnento de la oposicion ha sido que a las compafifas privadas con fines de lucro no les toea administrar las escuelas publicas. Edison ha sido tarnbien blanco de cnticas por

su historial. Las quejas mas comunes son: alta incidencia de renuncia de maestros, falta de servicios adecuados para los estudiantes de educacion especial, desempeiio academico pobre de los estudiantes, y costos mas altos que los que se anticipaban.

Chris Whittle, CEO de Edison, admite que algunos de los planteles son problematicos, pero Ie dijo a la revista Newsweek (2 de julio), "E~ terminos generales estarnos haciendo un excelente trabajo". Ademas, clijo Whinle, "Si no administramos escuelas fenomenales, nos quedamos sin negoeio".

"De costa" continua en la p. 8

, Who ya gonna call?, p. 2 • Eye on Special Ed, p. 3 " . Espanol, p. 8, 9 .. ' Opinion, p. 18, 19

2

NorEEBUoCOK Turning the page for change

Volume 9, Number 2

A ll independent quarterly newspaper - a voice for parents, students, classroom teachers, and others who are working for quality and equality in our schools.

Advisorv Board Eileen Abrams, Commu~ity College of Phila. Kira Baker Diane Bridges, parent Jane Century. Century Communications Cindy Engst, teacher

Helen Gym, Asian Americans United Keitb Harewood Jane Hileman, 100 Book Challenge Eric Joselyn, leacher Kevin Muszynski , Local Task Force for a Right

to Education Rochelle Nichols Solomon, Philadelphia

Education Fund Johannes Pansen, educational consultant Len Rieser, Education Law Center Linda Talben, Young Voices in Print Debbie Wei, Asian Americans United Debra Weiner, Philadelphia Futures Organiwrions for identification purposes only.

Executive Committee: Myrtle L. Naylor, Ros Purnell, Sharon Tucker, Ron Whitehorne

Editorial Board for this issue: Raymond Gunn, Myrtle L. Naylor, Melania Page-Gaither, Aldustus Jordan, Ros Purnell, Amy Rhodes, Amy Stuart, Sharon Tucker, Debra Weiner, Ron Whitehorne

Editor: Paul Socolar Design: Patricia Ludwig Art: Eric Joselyn Editorial assistance: Len !lieser, Sandy Socolar

Distribution: Irvin B. Shannon, Tom Brouillette, Donald Davis

Philadelphia Public School Notebook is a project of the New Beginnings program of Resources For Hwnan Development. We publish four times a year. Send inquiries to:

Philadelphia Public School Notebook 3721 Midvale Ave., Phila., PA 19129

Phone: (215) 951-0330, ext. 107 Fax: (215) 951-0342

E-mail: psnotebook@aoLcom

Special thanks to ... Eva Travers and our subscribers, adverti sers,

and volunteers who distribute the Notebook. Funding in pan from Bread and Roses

Community Fund, the Allen HiBes Fund, the Samuel S. Fels Fund, the Knight Fund of the Philadelphia Foundation, PNC Bank and the WiUiam Penn Foundation.

SUBSCRIBE NOW! Be part of the educational dialogue, Your support helps put this paper in the hands of people working for positive change,

NAME

ADDRESS

CiTY / STATE! ZIP

PHONE / EMAIL

o Standard subscription: $15/4 issues o Special rate - parents / students: $9 o Contributing subscriber: $35/4 issues o Institutional/organizational: $35

Enclosed is a tax deductible contribution: $500 $250 $100 $50 other

Make checks payable to:

Public School Notebook 3721 Midvale Avenue

Philadelphia, PA 19129 Phone: (215) 951-0330, Ext. 107

PUBLIC SCHOOL NOTEBOO~ __ -------W- INTER 2001-02

Who~ gonna Call?

NOTEBOOK EDITORIAL

Flawed process, flawed plan Philadelphia badly needs a school reform

plan that we can believe in. For us to make schools work for out kids,

educators, and communities need to come together to implement pro~s that they have confidence in and that are supported by ade­quate resources from the government. We've had reform plans before, but these have never had the necessary combination of communi­ty support and adequate resources to carry them out.

Sadly, talks between the mayor and gov­ernor are unlikely to produce a reform plan we can believe in. It's been a rushed, secre­tive, and politicized process with no mecha­nism for input from the parents, students, and teachers who know the system best. Has there been any careful evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of the system? Has there been any thoughtful discussion of the appropriate­ness of different remedies?

One of the prerequisites for reform - ade­quate funding to bring Philadelphia's spend­ing to the level of successful school districts in the state - is not even under discussion. They're still talking about using little Band­Aids to try to patch up gaping wounds in our system caused by inadequate funding: the crumbling buildings, the lack of books and libraries , the overcrowded classrooms, the steady flow of top staff to suburban districts.

A growing chorus of voices has been (rit­ical of the talks and of proposals to privatize parts of the system. These protestors have in turn been accused of not paying attention to the needs of the children, and attacked for "demonizing" Edison Schools, Inc., the for­profit company that wrote the reconunenda­tions on which Governor Schweiker 's pian is based.

But these protestors are absolutely right to raise their voices about a flawed process and a flawed plan. We applaud the many students among them who have taken the lead in saying that the schools' greatest need is more funding - we don't need public funds divert­ed to corporate shareholders. We urge people who have not yet spoken out to join them.

Union members, many of whom are par­ents, have every right to speak out against pro­posals that threaten to tum living wage jobs into low wage jobs without benefits. The core problems with our system have nothing to do with the people who are our maintenance staff, bus drivers, cafeteria workers, and other non­teaching personnel. Pri vatizing these jobs will be a blow to many families that are already struggling.

And we think Edison Schools' brief histo­ry in Philadelphia is enough to run them out of town - not to mention their track record around the country. The company should never have taken a $2.7 million contract from the governor to come up with recommenda­tions about Philadelphia if they knew that they wanted to be one of the beneficiaries of his plan. Edison came here because they want (and in fact desperately need) to expand their so-far unprofitable business of managing schools, and they should have been upfront about that.

Edison's report was riddled with errors and distortions that misstate the district's finan­cial situation and make it appear that acade­mic failure in Philadelphia is far worse than other failing urban districts. This makes us doubt we can trust any data coming out of this company. The fact that Governor Schweiker had to have his staff redo Edison's financial analysis suggests that this is a company that is also apt to take on tasks that it is not capa­ble of. And Edison wants to run 45 schools in Philadelphia, when it has no track record of s~ccessfu lly running more than a few in any City.

As School District CEO Phil Goldsmith pointed out, "The graveyard of American busi­ness is filled with companies that have bit off more than they can chew."

But the problem here is bigger than Edison. Other educational management companies from all over the country have heard that Philadelphia is open for business and want a piece of the pie. The names of these compa­rues are ?ot even familiar to us yet, but the govemor s plan would have them running 15 of our schools next fall.

This whole process represents a danger­ous reversal of a trend toward participation of local commuDitles in school decisions Schools have not been offered a say i~ whether they are privatized. Our school board IS faced With replacement by a COmmission mostly chosen in Harnsburg. And we are look­mg at the prospect of a new chain of COmmand m the schOols. To go to the top now, we know t~ go to 21st Street. In a privatiZed school the c ;~ of .~omrnand may lead to Wall Str~et . Ie Sl ver lilling in this crisis has been the lOVO vement of Philadelphians in de so many Concerned be heard and th mandlng that Our VOices in the s~rugg l e e temergence of new leaders Whatever de . , 0 Improve Our schools. December t~~SlOens the POlitiCians make in determined to p!v~~le will persist and are

City of Philadelphia Mayor John Street (D): 215-686-2181

City Council Members-At-Large (elected citywide) David Cohen (D): 215-686-3446 W. Wilson Goode, Jr. (D): 215-686-3414 James F. Kenney (D): 215-686-3450 W. Thacher Longstreth (R): 215-686-3452 Angel L. Ortiz (D): 215-686-3420 Blondell Reynolds-Brown (D): 215-686-3438 Frank Rizzo (R): 215-686-3440

District City Council Members Frank DiCicco (D): 215-686-3458 Anna Verna (D): 215-686-3412 Jannie L. Blackwell (D): 215-686-3418 Michael A. Nutter (D): 215.686-3416 Darrell L. Clarke (D): 215-686-3442 Joan L. Krajewski (D): 215-686-3444 Richard Mariano (D): 215-686-344!i Donna Reed Miller (D): 215-686-3424 Marian B. Tasco (D): 215-686-3454 Brian 1. O'Neill (R): 215-686-3422

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Governor Mark Schweiker (R) : 717-787-2500

State Senators Vincent 1. Furno (D): 215-468-3866 Christine Tartaglione (D): 215-533-0440 Shirley M. Kitchen (D): 215-457-9033 Allyson Y. Schwartz (D): 215-242-9710 Michael 1. Stack (D): 215-612-0063 Vincent Hughes (D): 215-471-0490 Anthony Hardy Williams (D): 215-748-7811

State Representatives Louise Williams Bishop (D): 215-879-6625 Alan L. Butkovitz (D): 215-335-2521 Mark B. Cohen (D): 215-924-0895 Angel Cruz (D): 215-291-5643 Robert C. Donatucci (D): 215-468-1515 Dwight Evans (D): 215-549:0220 Michael Horsey (D): 215-747-0757 Harold James (D): 215-462-3308 Babette Josepbs (D): 215-893-1515

. WilliamF Keller (D): 215-271-9190 George T. Kenney, Jr. (R): 215-934-5144 Marie A. Lederer (D): 215-426-6604 Kathy Manderino (D): 215-482-8726 Michael P. McGeehan (D): 215-333-9760 John Myers (D): 215-849-6896 Dennis M. O'Brien (R): 215-632-5150 Frank L. Oliver (D): 215-684-3738 John M. Perzel (R): 215-33 1-2600 William W. Rieger (D): 215-223-1501 James R. Roebuck (D): 215-724-2227 John 1. Taylor (R): 215-425-0901 W. Curtis Thomas (D): 215-232-1210 LeAnna Washington (D): 215-242-0472 Ronald G, Waters (D): 215-748-6712 Jewell Williams (D): 215-763-2559 Chris R. Wogan (R): 215-342-1700 Rosita C. Youngblood (D): 215-849-6426

D = Democrat, R = Republican

For the record .! Contrary to a statement in the

Notebook 's Fall 2001 issue on racial eqUI­ty, the state of Pennsy I van'ia has begune~ provide some data on student achievem b broken down by race . An analySIS t'~ Standard & Poor's of each school distrlC performance, including a racial breakdown, is available online at www.ses.stan­dardandpoors.com. The Notebook had quot­ed education advocates as expressing con­cern that a state takeover would result !O

less attention to racial equity in ~

In the Fall issue, Whittier School :~ Omitted from the map of Area Acade Offices. It is in the Central North area.

WINTER 2'

Edi nee nee by lonathl

In perh closelyexar at Philadelj ever, has to high perfon

But Edi ~

ing claims Pbiladelphi

If Edisc contracts , 1

special edu

Edison, ser of Phi Delt, in apattem with more (

ZollersJ withseriom of these stu dents with,

To the fl can't or w( liabilities,"

Zollers worst offe Edison sch other for-p necessary ~

with behal and emplo: disciplina violating Disabilitie~

The turned a Ij education support f according 1

At our ( already ruu special edu September 515 teache dents're percent did cent did nl percentha(

Edison contract ow,

consultant. Edison, wi als and Sj especiall)\ spokesrnar still have n stayed in

Abellw School P~ services al be schoole contract h~

who migtl into the h' with no ba

Accord Warkoms three mon~ was finall]

all?

!14

3452

B438

.8

40 3 10

7811

625

15

44

'2

126

in the hlequi­egun to vement ,sis by [strict'S kdown, ,s .stan­ldquot-ng con-lsultin

10015.

)01 was ldemic

rea.

WINTER 2001 -02

Edison to special needs kids: You need not apply by Jonathan M. Stein

In perhaps no area should Edison Schools, Inc., be more closely examined than in special education. Ellison, which stands at Philadelphia's door, anticipating its most lucrative contract ever, has touted market-based competition, inclusiveness, and high performance for all.

But Edison's record in special education belies its market­ing claims and bodes poorly for its running any schools in Philadelphia.

If Ed ison gets ri foothold in Philadelphia, performance contracts, requiring full compl iance with federal and state special education requirements, should be written as for a past

violator. The state should pay for independent pol icing of Edison's compliance with special ed requirements (by an orga­nization like the Education Law Center), and contracts should be revoked imme­diately for non-compli­ance. Here's why.

In Boston, researchers led by Nancy ZoUers, assis­

tant professor of education at Boston College, looked at how the state's five oldest for-profit charter schools, including two run by Ellison, served ilisabled children. Zollers, in the Dec. 1998 issue of Phi Delta Kappan, found that the for-profit charters "engaged in a pattern of ilisregard and often blatant hostility toward students with more complicated behavioral and cognitive ilisabilities."

Zollers found that for-profit charters served far fewer students with serious disabilities than ilid public schools and returned many of these students to public schools. The "counseling out" of stu­dents with ilisabilities began in the enrollment phase.

To the for-profits, "students with disabilities, most of whom can't or won't perform well on standardized assessments, are liabilities," Zollers wrote.

Zollers determined that "the worst offenders are the two Eilison schools." Edison and other for-profits also denied necessary services for those with behavioral disabilities and employed inappropriate discip linary procedures violating the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).

The Massachusetts state government turned a blind eye to these schools' special education failings because of its ideological support for these free-market innovators, according to Zollers.

At our doorstep in Delaware County, Edison is already running nine Chester-Upland schools. Here special education ilid not get off to a good start. In a September "School Status Survey" of most of their 515 teachers, 56 percent said they ilid not have all stu-dents ' required Individualized Education Plans (IEPs); 34 percent did not have their special ed students identified; 45 per­cent did not have proper supplies to implement IEPs; and 86 percent had no knowledge of the District's Mental Health Team.

Edison says they got a late start in Chester because their contract wasn't signed till August. Edison's special education consultant, Nancy Opalack, wrote me in November to say that Eilison, while having problems getting new special ed materi­als and supplies in some schools, had made progress -especially in staffing and training Mental Health Teams. A spokesman for the teachers, though, asserts that most teachers still have no knowledge of these teams, and that the teams have stayed in their offices and not come to the schools.

A bellwether in Chester-Upland is the unusual Pulaski Middle School Project, where a contract for intensive mental health services allowed students with severe emotional disabi li ties to be schooLed at Pulaski. But with Edison managing Pulaski, the contract has been cancelled. A c1assro~m of special ed children, who might otherwise have been institutionalized, was tossed into the hands of one overburdened special education teacher with no backup.

Accoriling.to state Bureau of Special Education rurector, Fran Warkomski, Edison was to take on this responsibility. Almost three months into the year, Edison informed me that the teacher was final ly partnered with a back-up teacher.

continued on p. 4

PUBLIC SCHOOL NOTEBOOK 3

\\ ~ 9URC~III--DKEN

o~~ A R S ~\::.)"\ ro \t vt; -oALt?-o

Photo: Harvey Finkle

A recent Philadelphia protest against Edison: Many here don't want for-profit companies to run schools.

'Show me the money' • Stock priceS, not refonn, are at the heart of the for-profit education movement. by Barbara Miner

In September 1990, "Good Morning America" was broadcast from South Pointe Elementary Schoo) in Dade County, Fla. The news peg? It was the first day of school at what was to be a new and glorious era in public schools: for-profit management.

I N'EWS ANALYSIS I

South Pointe was run by Education Alternatives, Inc. (EAl), a for-profit company, which at the time was the darling of the privatization movement. Promising to bring business know-how to the country's failing urban schools, by 1922 EAl had a five­year contract to run as many as 11 schools in Baltimore. In October 1994 it was hired to run all the schools in Hartford, CT.

John Golle, head of EAl, boasted that his company could run public schools for the same amount of money, improve achievement, and still make a profit. ''There's so much fat in the schools that even a blind man without his cane would find the way." he told Forbes m.agazine in 1992. . .

The rhetoric never matched the record, however. EAl was run out of both Baltimore and Hartford when it failed to deliver on its promises. EAI then got in ihe charter and private school business, but prospects ilid not improve.

By the spring of 2000, EAl was in the midst of a cbrporate and educational meltdown. The company, which has changed its name to Tesseract Group Inc., was millions in debt, kicked off Nasdaq when its stock price tumbled to pennies a share, and couldn't even affond the postage to mail report cards home to parents at the its remaining charter schools in Arizona.

The tale ofEAl is more than historical anecdote, however. It provides interesting parallels to the problems facing Ellison Schools Inc. as it seeks to take on its biggest challenge yet: running as many as 45 public schools in Philadelphia.

One cannot exactly compare Ellison and EAl. Ellison, for one, has a longer track recond and now runs more schools than EAI ever ran. But tllere are also clear similarities.

Both started out saying they would build profitable private sCQools but qwckly turned their sights on public schools when they realized it was easier to raid the public coffers than charge tuition. Both were founded by marketers turned educational experts. Both had impeccable political connections. Both wowed (he media, playing on assumptions that public is bad and private is good. Both have been (or, in the case of the now-defunct EAl, were) plagued by accusations of inflated test scores and reduced services for special education students.

Like-EAl, the biggest challenge facing Edison is turning a profit. Regardless of what one may think about the compa­ny's educational philosophy, its fate ultimately rests with the overriding concern of Wall Street. Will the company make money for its shareholders?

Edison, originally called the Ellison Project, was unveiled at a Feb. 27, 1992 news conference. Some 10 years and 136 schools later - and more than $200 million in private invest­ment on top ofthe per-pupil reimbursements for running schools - Ellison has yet to make even a ilime of profit.

The problem facing Eilison is the same that faced EAl.

Despite perceptions, there is little ''fat'' in urban public school budgets . Nor are there any "silver bullets" that will magically improve schools.

Because education is a labor-intensive industry, there are only two ways to make money: cut wages or cut services. (A variation on "cut wages" is hiring younger, lower-paid staff. A variation on "cut services" is controlling student admissions so that more-ilifficult-to-educate students are iliscouraged.)

When Edison announced this fall that its plan for Philadelphia included cutting the costs of support staff, it was following a pattern established by EAl. When EAI went into Baltimore, one of the first things it ilid was replace $10-an­hour, unionized paraprofessional workers with $7-an-hour "interns" who ilid not have beneflts.

That doesn'tmean, however, that some people ilidn 't make a lot of money off of EAI. (Likewise, some people are in line to make millions off of Ellison.)

The problem facing Edison is that despite perceptions, there is little fat in urban

public school budgets.

For example, EAl founder and CEO Golle, ever the shrewd businessman, knew when to make his move. In the fal l of 1993, over a two-month period when EAl stock was riding high, Golle took advantage of stock options to make a net gain of approximately $1.75 million on sales of 50,000 shares of EAl common stock.

Edison founder Chris Whittle has likewise been smart enough to play the stock option game. On one day alone last March, some 650,000 shares held inilirectly by Whittle were sold fOf more than $15 million. According to a proxy statement filed this fall, Whittle still owns 3.7 million shares of Ellison 's publicly traded stock, and he and his associates have options on an adilitional4.4 million shares of Edison's publicly traded stock.

Whittle is not the only one with a financial stake in Ellison. To cite one other example: Howard Fuller, privatization proponent and founder of the Black Alliance for Educational Options, happens to be married to Edison vice-president Deborah McGriff. Last June 12, McGriff sold 15,325 shares of the roughly 200,000 stock options she held when the com­pany first went public - for a gain of $348,184. Not a bad day's work. (If you want to check out Ellison insiders and their stock sales, go to the fmance section of yahoo.com, look up Ellison with the key word EDSN, and click on the "insider" link.)

Edison is not synonymous with EAI, and the country's privatization movement is far stronger than it was a decade ago. But in the end, money - who gets more and who gets less - remains at the heart. of the privatization struggle. Educational improvement is a sideshow.

As the saying goes, "Show me the money."

Barbara Miner is /1U1naging editor of Rethinking Schools (wwlV.rethillkillgschools.org), an education reform journal based in Milwaukee, WI.

4

School quality: Who will be responsible? continued from p. 1

As defined in the state's takeover law known as Act 46 and in the governor 's proposal, the School Refornl Commission (SRC) would be the primary oversight group responsible for holding Philadelphia schools accountable for their student achievement goals.

The SRC, which wo~d replace the current school board, would hire the CEO and conduct independent audits of the District's academic and fInancial status. [t would' also be the over­sight body for 60 "partnership schools" that are to be run by community groups and private partners, such as Edison Schools, [nco

Community partnerships In these 60 schools, a community parmer

would select a private management company. The private provider would be held account­able for the school's academic and fIscal per­formance, based on the same standards as other schools in the District. The cOlrununity partner would monitor the private provider and be accountable for parent outreach and special stu­dent services.

Critics say the partnership schools outlined in Schweiker's plan not only add complexity to the accountability system, but also create a series of potential problems.

Deboral1 Kal1n, the city secretary of education, observed that if there are problems at a school, there is "a potential for all kinds of finger-pointing between the private manager and the community partner." She added that some community partners are likely to "want a more active role in manag­ing schools, and [don't think this arrangement will permit them to do that."

Zogby does not identify a potential for con­flict. He asserts that in the governor's plan, community partners and private providers will

have coll aborative relationships and "will unde!stand that they are partners."

Governor controls commission Community activists have also expressed

deep concerns aboui the role of the School Reform Commission.

As currently proposed, the SRC would have five members, four of whom would be appoint­ed by the governor, with two serving seven­year terms, one a fIve-year term and the other three years. The mayor would appoint the other member, who would serve a three-year term SRC appointments would be permanent and serve far into the next governor's term.

Governor Schweiker, who amended Act 46 shortly before delivering his proposal to ensure the inlplementation of this structure. contends that the Di;trict needs leadership that is insu­lated from political change.

The composition and long tenure of the SRC raises wotries for some community members who fear that the SRC would have unchecked author­ity. Community members have also expressed concern about a governance body that is primar' ily appointed witilOut the control of Philadelphians.

This system "destroys what reform advocates have been working towards for decades - local decision-making," said Helen Gym of Philadelphians United to Support Public Schools.

Kalm was also critical, arguing, "At the end of the day, this is a public system and it needs to be accountable to public officials."

In a November 2001 letter to School District parents and staff, the school board condemned the SRC structure, contending that it would be "accountable only to itself' and "never answer­able to the City."

State Senator Allyson Schwartz has pro­posed an amendment to Act 46 that would

Talk to your kids about attending school every day, If you suspect that your child is missing school, call the Truancy Preve~tion Hqtline.

\215} IN-CROWD

Sponsored by the Department of Human Services. in collaboration wit~ ~ Philadelphia family Court and the School District of Phil adelphi a.~

Photo: Harvey Finkle

State Senator Allyson Schwa rtz, shown here at an ~nti-privatization ~ally, has proPosed to monitor the new reform commission through an mdependent overSight group.

address the SRC's lack of accountability by monitoring its performance through an inde­pendent oversight group. Schwartz calls for a Performance Accountability Board to both monitor the District's spending and evaluate student progress. It would be composed of the city controller, state auditor general, and local university presidents.

According to Zogby, elements of Schwartz's proposal mirror the governor's existing plan. He said the governor proposed to have an entity inde­pendent of the SRC conduct financial and acad­emic audits of the District. The audit would , involve "a broad array" of community members.

Other politicians and community organiza­tions are arguing that the SRC should not exist at all or that it should playa purely fInancial role -leaving the monitoring of the academic

Eye on special ed continued from p. 3

The practice of curting back special edu­cation services was documented in San Francisco, where Edison took over one school. According to Jill Wynns, president of the San Francisco Board of Education. who recently spoke in Philadelphia. the Edison Charter Academy school between 1998 and 2001 cut its special ed student enrollment by over one-

I third, while enrollment of special ed children I in a neighboring predominantly African I American school nearly doub led. African­

American boys bore the brunt of Edison's culling practices, according to Wynns.

After reducing numbers of special ed stu­dents, as well as of low-income students aet­ting free school lunches, the resultina "testina advantage" tended to inflate Edison's ~t score:.

If you are curious as to whether this "test­ing advantage" did Edison much good, a recent raung of all San Francisco elementary

E. R. MOORE CAPS, GOWNS

AND ' ACCESSORIES

Call Sean O'Donnell

at 610-696-2186

or E-mail to

sodinc@prodigy,net

progress to a local school board. Members of City Council and a variety of

community organizations are currently prepar­ing a federal lawsuit against the state that chal. lenges the constitutionality of the SRC.

The lawsuit contends that the imposition of the SRC through state legislation violates Philadelphians' right to vote about how the School District should be organized. The plaintiffs argue that any change to the School Board must be approved through a referendum to alter the city 's Home Rule Charter and cannot be overruled by state legislation.

Although the District's future remains uncertain, community leaders have expressed their demands for a system that makes its performance in both schools and the central administration a public matter.

schools under California's Academic Performance Index found the Edison school ranked 70th out of the 70 schools rated.

Edison has held out its "Collegiate Academy" high school in the District of Columbia as a model for all to visit. However, visitors bused there will not be able to inter­view Barbara Parks Lee, a distinguished English teacher and CUlTent Carnegie Fellow. After 33 years of teaching, Ms. Lee was enticed out of retirement for the opportunity to teach in this new school. She told her story of shocking disappointment in an Inquirer op· ed on November 19, 2001. She told me of Edison's failures to identify and serve special education students and of .their being in non· compliance with federal IDEA requirements.

Ms. Parks has said goodbye to .Edison, ard she now warns us to keep them out of Philadelphia.

l onathan M. Stein is General Counsel at Community Legal Services, Inc.

WINTER;

Reac,

Ed by Susan I

The Edi~ Chester-UJ' glimpseint' effects. Edi and consiste Chester has the compan

Th. evel pO

stude mate

lions in Ii

Because over its nine training peri with Chest stressed dis,

Observe reported thai of conduct, "learning pI at their des~ that teacher

Edison a and ethics" ( values: justi

-:-Ir -:-1

S(

-:- C A

-:- PI th al th th

-:- E: e

-:- E: ar

-:- c Nalhani Cynthia Sabriya Char/otl Alwinal

~:f~;~ j Allan Jo Bernie}

lroposed l.

arietyof lyprepar_ . tllatchal_ RC. )Ositionof 1 violates t how the ized. The he School !ferendum larter and jon. : remains expressed makes its ~e cehtral

lcademic on school ·ated.

:ollegiate istrict of However, e to inter­nguished ieFellow. Lee was

'portunlty

hersto'!' 7/1irerop­Id me of

ve special Lg in non· irements. lison, and n out of

o/lnse/ af

WINTER 2001-02 PUBLIC SCHOOL NOTEBOOK 5

Reactions are mixed as company puts its rules in place

Edison in Chester, PA: strong focus on order by Susan Ansell and Nicholas Goodness

The Ed ison Schools, Inc., takeover of nine Chester-Upland schools this fall provides a glimpse into the privatization process and its effects. Edison 's effort to bring greater order and consistency to schools in the nearby city of Chester has won some fans, but others criticize the company for a heavy-handed approach.

There are rules for everything from the position in which

students must sit to the materials and decora­

tions teachers must use in their classrooms.

Because Edison was not granted control over its nine schools until late summer, its usual training period was compressed. Conversations with Chester teachers suggest that training stressed disciplinary policies.

Observers at Edison's schools this fall reported that the company imposes a strict code of conduct, with rules for everything from the "learning position" in which students must sit at their desks to the materials and decorations that teachers must use in their classrooms.

Edison also trains teachers in its "character and ethics" curriculum, which teaches eight core values: justice, courage, respect, wisdom, corn

passion, hope, responsibility, and integrity. These words are placed on walls throughout the school building as a reminder to students.

Some said the emphasis on rules is neces­sary, but one elementary school teacher in the district complained that she felt as though her role had been reduced to that of a "discipli­narian" and that her main responsibility was to force students to memorize the Edison code of conduct.

Rules posted on classroom walls in Chester 's elementary schools call for "hands at sides, all eyes forward, lips closed, low speed." These rules speU out HALL. Other sets of rules-for bathroom behavior, morning entry, and cafeteria conduct - are posted throughout the school and often have similar acronyms.

Observers at these schools reported that children must maintain strict patterns of direc­tion when walking in the halls, while teachers stand at attention with their hands clasped behind their backs.

The "Edison walk" is part of the company's emphasis on positive attitude.

Some said restrictions placed on teachers are equally constraining.

One teacher testified that Edison forbade teachers to bring in their own materials. All teaching tools, and even classroom decora­tions, had to be provided by the company. When a delivery of Edison-ordered books was delayed for a month, teachers were prevented from supplementing the classroom materials with their own books and i nstead were dlfected to have students speod more tIme memorizing the code of conduct.

Stri"ing Towards Excellence in Mathematics, Science

and Technology

T he Philadelphia Urban Systerrlic Program is a bold five-year plan

(2000-2005) for moving the fifth largest urban public school district in the nation toward full-scale imple­mentation of comprehensive reform in PreK-12 mathematics and science education.

PROGRAM GOALS .:. Improve student test scores in mathematics and science

.:. Increase enrollment/completion rates in college prep mathematics and

science courses .:. C lose the achi evement gap for historically underserved African

American and Hispanic populations .:. Prov ide intensive and comprehensive professional development

through the cadre of one hundred "Mathematics/Science Fellows" and approximately 77S " P reK-12 Teacher Leaders" in an effort to intensify the implementation of mathematics and science reforms in schools

throughout the c ity .:. Enhance the use of technology to support mathematics/science

education .:. Expand family/community involvement in supporting mathematics

and science education • :. Collaborate with colleges/universities to improve teacher education

Nathania T. Johnson, Director Cynthia Powell, Administrative Assistant Sabriya Dempsey, Science Collaborating Teacher Char/olle Foreman , Mathematics Collaborating Teacher A/wino Green, Mathematics Collaborating Teacher Ambra Hook, Science Collaborating Teacher Vivian Loewenstern, MaLhem3lics Collaborating Teacher Allan Johnson, Data Architect Bernie Rischow. Administrative Technician

WOlklng+-lardef for Children & Families

Urban Systemic Program 2120 Winter Street Room 513 Phi ladelphia, PA 19103 2 15.299.7730 Office; 215.299.3564 Fax

Chester-Upland School District and Edison Basic facts • Student popUlation: about 5.850 students in public schools and 1,575 in three charter

schools. • Number of non-charter schools: 10 • Number of schools managed by Edison Schools, Inc.: 9 • Student demographics: 89% African American, 6% Latino, 5% white; 70% qualify

for subsidized lunch.

Recent history • In the 2000-01 school year, 68 percent of Chester-Upland students scored in the bottom

quarter of all students on the Pennsylvania System of Schoot Assessment (PSSA) test.

• The state had been managing the district's finances since 1994. Due to increased expenses (including higher enrollment and full-day kindergarten), which had not been met with increased funding by the city or state, the d istrict had become financially insolvent.

• In the fall of 2000, the state took over control of the district through the Educational Empowerment Act of 2000. Under the Empowerment Act, low-performing districts are threatened with state takeover if they fail to raise test scores within a specified amount of time.

• Last wi nter, the state-appointed control board that runs the Chester-Upland district took bids from six companies interested in managing the Chester schools. Three com­panies were chosen: Edison (to run six schools), LearnNow (three schools) and Mosaica (one school). The control board hoped that competition among the three companies would lead to improvements in student achievement.

• During the summer of 2001, Mosaica withdrew and Edison bought out LearnNow, leaving Edison in control of nine schools, with the tenth being run by the local district. Edison agreed to maintain the original differences between the Edison and LearnNow programs. LearnNow is distinguished by its emphasis on partnerships with community­based organizations and its "focus on teaching students how to learn."

• Chester-Upland teachers are still hired by the district office, and their union contract remains effective until 2003. Principa ls, however, are hired by Edison.

Teachers reported that they are forbidden to decorate their classrooms with holiday

themes such as Halloween and Thanksgiving. Students also complained that they were not allowed to dress up in costumes and parade througb the school as in years past.

Some criticized these restrictions, saying that they eliminate opportunities for creative expression, and maintaining that Edison has offered no evidence that the restrictions provide any educational benefits.

Edison's Success for All reading program lS similarly restrictive, some teachers said.

, Teachers are presented with scripts, which dictate what they must say and what responses they may accept from students. They are not supposed to slow down or deviate from the script, even for students who do not understand. Students are reassessed every eight weeks and regrouped according to their evaluations.

Butch Slaughter, a Chester activist and editor of a community newsletter, worries about Edison's one-size-fits-all approach and

Gay Lesbian & Feminist

Books Magazines CDs & Tapes Jewelry Videos

Store & Mail Order

SUN ITOl SAT 10 ro 10

FI?/ 1130 TO 10 WED 1I.3OT07

MON TUES. THUR5 /I -30 TO 9

345 SOUTH 12TH STREET PH ILADELPHIA, PA 19107 CALL FOR CATALOGS (215)923-2960

fears that the vocational training Chester relies on will be hurt by Edison's uniform standards.

"Different people learn in different ways," Slaughter said. "Will the traditional educational track prepare students for the opportunities offered them ?'"

In spite of the criticisms. Edison does have support in the district. A parent " Iiaison" at Wetherill Elementary School said that in the two months that Edison had been managing the school. she could see improvement ill her son's reading. Students there told school visitors that they were learning more this year than last year and that they liked the improved hall manners.

Juan Baughn, director of Edison!LeamNow in Chester, is confident and enthusiastic about Edison's future. "Every aspect of the Chester school district was failing, and the advantage of a for-profit company is that there is more incentive for accountability. Edison will make a difference:' he said.

He defended Edison against claims that its curriculum is too prescripti ve and accusations of extreme disciplinary policies by saying that, "when 79 percent of a school's population is faili ng, you don' t do things you'd do with kjds that are making As and Bs." (The state puts Chester 's failure rate at 68%. Edison's con­tract calls for reducing that figure to 49% in five years.)

Baughn said students "need discipline and order in their lives. They don't have the right to do what they want."

He also stressed that it is the larger system that is fai ling Chester's students and that Edison is attempting to rectify the problems that it is able to address .

On a recent visit to Chester, Philadelphia par­ents got to hear Edison children recite the School Promise: "As I greet this wonderful brand new day, I promise: To read, write and listen in a bet­ter way. To obey and respect what teachers must say. To work hard and improve upon my tests. To make our great school one of the best!"

It remains to be seen whether Edison will deliver on its promises.

Susan Ansell and Nicholas Goodness are studellls at Swarthmore College and imerns at the Notebook Additional research by Raymond Glllm alld Amy Stuart.

~6 ____________________________________ ~P~U~B~L1~C~S~CH~O~O~L~N~O~~~E~BO~O~K~ ____ ------~------~------_W~IN~T_E~

From coast to coast, Edison under fire , 'tion to the for-profit company

Teacher turnover, low perfonnance, and cost overruns sUr OppOSl -- The schools' low performance placed them i,n majority of school board members said the

the end of the school year, ending the compa- a special category known as the Chancellor s are concerned about sub-par Stude~ ny 's presence there. Edison pulled out of DI.strl.ct, and all had a problem wIth hIgh performance, plummetmg enrollment and hi I

Across the cOlmtry, a number of educational Sherman, TX, when renewal of its contract turllover of personnel. The mayor an. d the teacher turnover at Ingalls and Isely, two ~lf by RosPumell

management companies are now seeking con- seemed in doubt. In San Francisco, Edison 's schools chief supported bringing in Edison. the four EdIson schools in Wichita. tracts with school districts, claiming that they school lost its charter with the school district, For Edl.son to win a contract, state law "The data is th.ere to show that [these can bring private sector rigor to the operations though it was able to get a new one from the required that parents of more than half the schools] have not unproved at a rate that is of failing public schools. state. And Edison won't soon forget the loss students at each school had to vote III favor of equal to most.~f the other elementary schOols

~:~r~~:p~;~~~!;d~~·~~~~~;2:~~;: ~~:;~C~~~l~~~~~~~~:~~t~t to run five ;~~~~r:~;o~~ p~:~rits:~~~ b:~t:ro;:~~cce~ III ~~~~~~~~:::~~!~~: ;::: ;:%~ managing its first four schools in Texas, Kansas, Edison launched a million-dollar adverusmg ''Edison came in, and therr big boast has alway; Massachusetts, and Michigan in 1995. Edison campaign, with door-to-door canvassing, flashy been that they can do better with less. I don't

has now won contracts to manage 136 mostly Edison has won handouts, and promises of computers and a think they've done that. r think they've done low-performing schools, serving about 75,000 better education. mediocre, at best, WIth more." mainly low-income, non-white students _ but contracts to manage But opponents in the COlIrrnun ity joined The company is paid the average amount not without community opposition. 136 mostl" low- forces with many teachers to fight the change. the district spends on each student for school

One argument of opponents has been that 'J The community group ACORN and the newly operatIons. But the contract mcludes only ele-

private, for-profit companies have no business performing schools - formed People's Coalition to Take Back Our mentary and middle schools, the least expen-running public schools. Edison has also been but not without Schools phone-banked, door-knocked and sive to run; as a result, the district says it now dogged by criticism of its track record. The leafleted, arguing that there were better spends at least one-third more per student on most common complaints are of high teacher community opposition. alternatives than bringing Edison in. While the Edison schools than it does on its regular turnover, failure to serve special education most parents ended up not voting, 80 percent schools, the magazine Mother Jones reported. students adequately, poor student perfOIIDance, of those who did voted to reject Edison, "It's our own fault," Superintendent Brooks and h.igher than expected costs. keeping them out of all five schools. said in an interview with Mother Jones. "We

Edison CEO Chris Whittle admits that some As it faces renewal of many of its initial came up with the dollar figure. We haven't

of his school sites are problematic, but told contracts, Edison has been under frre in other Wichita, KS: Board gotten it straightened out yet." Newsweek (July 2), "Overall we are doing an districts, including Las Vegas, Dallas, Macon, excellent job." Furthermore, Whittle said, GA, and Pontiac, MI. The company is dissatisfied with Edison "If we don't run great schools, we ' re out of fighting several lawsuits as well. At Edison-Ingalls Academy and business." From coast to coast, here are examples of Isely-Edison Elementary-magnet schools

Whittle down plays the opposition, communities where Edison has faced located within a mile of each other in a maintaining that 62 of Edison's 65 contracts significant opposition. predominantly black, low-income area of are still in place. northeast Wichita-the picture is grim, school

But Edison watchers reject those numbers. New York: Parents reject officials told the Wichita Eagle in July. Since Press accounts indicate that contracts have been 'J opening as Edison schools in 1997, Ingalls and severed in Colorado Springs, CO; San Antonio privatization of five schools Isely have had among the lowest test scores of TX; Goldsboro, NC; and Lansing, MI. Edison claimed it could inlprove five strug- all the district's elementaries. Edison 's one Minneapolis school will close at gling schools scattered across New York City. Superintendent Winston Brooks and a

CHIP FREE or Low Cost* Health Insurance *S30monthlyper(hiiddeterminedbYinCOmele1Vlve~/. _______ ----__ ::-::~~----~

,-~ .. -.... , c;;;7:-ou,,&/q/lH! -* ·

/CHIlO ltEN f 0 It

• Doctor off\ce V\S\ts

• \mmun\zat\ons . • Hear\ng

• Denta\ • \/\S\on • Emergency Care • Prescr\pt\on Drugs

• Menta\ Hea\th

• Hosp\taHzat\on

• Substance Abuse

• Durab\e med\ca\

equ\pment

All enrolled children receive add·t· I . I lOna services through our Healthy Futures SM Program.

For an application call:

1-800-464-KIDS (5437) or visit our website at· www . . .canngfoundation.com

Sherman, TX: Edison's "promises broken"

In 1995, Sherman, a Texas manufacturing town near the Oklahoma state line, greeted the first school Edison ever opened. Six years later, Edison is gone.

Educators and former school officials charge that in Edison's first three years in Sherman, the district spent $2.6 million more

continued on p. 7

8ENNSYLVANIA'S

Children's , Health ~ Insurance

Program Tom Ridge, Governor

WINTER 21

than it wou Edison's vi, Manuel Rive per that the I

because it profitable in

In the sp former assis McConkey, dent for f termination I

to Superintel "The his

Sherman is performance the letter. Th local Edison

The lett Edison, as it public offer~ Jones reportf Sherman ofl five-year complaints al Edison agre $500,000 ani $500,000 0"-

An anony Mother Jone enabled the, Novembers, Edison pull, after the IPO

SanFr(l battles 1

After takl Francisco in

lid they Student ndhigh two of

[these ~ that is schools 1 Eagle. ! added : alway; I don't ~e done

amount . school

nlyele­expen­

Sltnow denton regular

!pOrted. Brooks es. "We haven't

'on's

lcturing eted the IrS later,

,fficials

'ears in mmore

s l'S

:e

WINTER 2001-02 PUBLIC SCHOOL NOTEBOOK 7

Edison under fire continued from p. 6

than it would have without the company. Edison's vice president for development, Manuel Rivera, told Sherman's local newspa­per that the company pulled out voluntarily because it had despaired of ever being profItable in the town.

In the spring of 1999, Ph.illip Garrett, the fo rmer assistant superintendent and David McConkey, Sherman's assistant superinten­dent for finance and operations, urged termination of the Edison contract in a letter to Superintendent Bob Denton.

"The history of the Edison Project in Sherman is one of promises broken, poor performance, and agreements violated," said the letter. The letter noted that test scores at a local Edison school were "an embarrassment."

The letter was written at a bad time for Edison, as it was preparing to launch its initial public offering (IPO) on Wall Street. Mother Jones reported that Whittle personally lobbied Sherman officials to renew the company 's five -year deal. When confronted with complaints about overhead costs, Garrett says, Edison agreed to pay the city more than $500,000 and forgo the collection of another $500,000 owed by the district.

An anonymous former Edison official told Mother Jones that the agreement effectively enabled the company to go into its IPO that November saying it had never lost a contract. Edison pulled out of Sherman a few weeks after the IPO.

San Francisco, CA: Edison battles Board

After taking over its first school in San Francisco in 1998 and renaming it Edison

Charter Academy, Edison spent $1.8 million on the school. Colorful iMacs were installed and hallways were brightened up with paint and motivational posters. Edison promised indi­vidualized instruction, long-term relationships with teachers, improved student achievement, and community involvement.

Indeed, the community was involved, but not all in support of Edison. Community groups like Coleman Advocates for Children and Youth and Parents Advocating School Accountability (pAS A) and parents uke K. C. Jones were vocal in their opposition to the Edison takeover.

According to Caroline Grannan of PASA, Jones and others were "a major force in get­ting the word out and uniting Edison chal­lengers" by creating an online e-group to address San Francisco schools issues.

But when it received complaints from other parents that Edison was weeding out poor per­formers III order to boost test scores, the San Francisco Board of Education launched an investigation last year. The board found that 14 of 15 students suspended or "counseled out" were African American boys. While stopping short of accusing Edi~on of racism, the board found evidence that it was in violation of its charter to educate all students "without regard" to "behavior. .. or academic achievement."

The board also discovered extremely high teacher turnover - exceeding 70 percent for two years running. Teachers said that perks like stock options and a slightly higher pay did not compensate for the grueling workload. "It was exhausting for the kids and for the teachers," fIrst-grade teacher Anastasia Crocker told the Bay Guardian.

Fourth grade teacher Rebecca Aviel reported to the Guardian that when she

Last spring, teachers at P.S . 66 in the Bronx expressed their feelings about a proposed takeover of their school by Edison. Edison was voted down by parents.

expr~sed her concerns about Edison, she was given what appears to be the standard r~ponse to detractors: maybe our d~ign is not for you. Leaving the school mid-year, Aviel cited her inability to "work in a system that has no need for new ideas and does not allow teachers to participate in making decisions that so funda­mentally affect their lives."

The Edison Charter Academy received inter­national attention last spring when the school board fInally revoked its charter, citing lack of accountability, poor academic performance, high costs, and other problems. However, the com­pany fought back and, WIth support from some parents at the school, secured a compromise last summer. The deal severed ties between Edison

Schools, Inc., and the San Francisco school dis­trict but allowed Edison to secure a charter for its academy from the state Board of Education.

Today, Edison lists the school in the "positive" (or improving) column in its ratings of school performance based on test scores. However, the school also ranks at the very bottom among San Francisco elementary schools rated on California's 2001 Academic Performance Index.

For more in/ormation, see "Reading, Writing, and Revenue," by Chuck Sudetic, in Mother Jones, May/June 2001, and additional lIews articles on the web site www.researchforaction.org/edison.hHnl.

The Successful Urban Middle School:

Thursday - Saturday March 7 -9, 2002

achi~venrt,;tit gap

on Middle Level Initiatives Teachers - Principals - Counselors - Policy MaRers

Mentors - Curriculum Coordinators Professors - Central Office Personnel

Pittsburgh Hilton and Towers Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

For more information: www.nmsa.org or call 800-528-NMSA (6672), 614-895-4730

8 PUBLIC SCHOOL NOTEBOOK WINTER 2001-02

De costa a costa, Edison esta bajo ataque continua de fa p. 1

Whittle no Ie da mucho credito a la oposici6n, sosteniendo que' 62 de los 65 con­tratos de Edison todavia son vigentes.

Pero los que vigilan de cerca el paso de Edison rechazan esos numeros. Los informes de prensa indican que se han anulado contratos en Colorado Springs, CO; San Antonio, TX; Goldsboro, NC;' y Lansing, MI. La unica escuela Edison en Minneapolis cerraro al final del ano escolar, y con esto se terminan las opemciones de la compaiiia alli. Edison se retir6 de Sherman, TX, cuando la renovaci6n de su contrato estuvo en duda. En San Fmncisco, la escuela Edison perdi6 su licencia del distrito escolar, aunque pudo restablecerla con el estado. Edison tanlpOCO olvidara 10 aconteci­do el pasado abril, cuando perdi6 un jugoso contrato pam administrar cinco escuelas en mal estado de la ciudad de Nueva York.

Ahora que se aproxima la reanudaci6n de muchos de sus contratos iniciales, Edison ha estado bajo ataque en muchos otros distritos, incluyendo Las Vegas, Dallas, Macon, GA y Pontiac , MI.. La compania esta tambien litigando varias demandas en corte.

De costa a costa, he aqui ejemplos de comunidades en las que Edison ha enfrentado una oposici6n significativa.

Nueva York: Padres rechazan privatizaci6n de cinco escuelas

Edison asegur6 que podia mejorar la situaci6n de cinco escuelas ubicadas por toda la ciudad de Nueva York. EI bajo renilirniento academico de las escuelas las habia colocado en una categoria especial conocida como el Distrito del Canciller, y todas tenian el problemas de alta incidencia de renuncia de maestros . El alcalde y el jefe de escuelas apoyaron la iniciativa de traer a Edison.

Para Edison ganar el contrato, la ley del estado requiri6 que los padres de mas de la mitad de los estudiantes en cada escuela votaran a favor de convertir la escuela en una tipo charIer. Para convencer a los padres de las escuelas publicas de que ellos eran la mejor alternativa. Edison lanz6 una campana millonaria con visi tas de puerta en puerta, volantes llamativos y pro mesas de computadoras y una mejor educaci6n.

Pero los opositores en la comunidad unieron sus fuerzas con muchos de los maestros pam resistir el cambio. EI grupo de la comunidad ACORN y el recien entonces fundado grupo Peop[e's Coalition to Take Back Our Schools hicieron llamadas telef6nicas, visitaron los hogares de la comunidad y repartieron folletos, argurnentando que habia mejores opciones que Edison. Aunque la

HOUSE OF OUR OWN

Specializing in Contemporary, Cultural, Social and Political Issues

• Social Sciences • Cu ltural Studies • Multicultural • History • Politics • Literature • Arts • Global • Environmental

New and used books Small press/Univ. pub.

Mon-Thurs.: 10 to 6:30 Fri.-Sal.: 10 to 6:00

mayoria de los padres no votaron, el 80% de los que sf 10 hicieron rechazaron a Edison, manteniendola asf [uem de las cinco escuelas.

Wichita, KS: Consejo insatisfe­cho con Edison

En la Academia Edison-Ingalls y la Escuela Elemental Isely-Edison (escuelas magnel separadas pol' una milia de distancia, en un area cuyos residentes son predominantemente de la raza negra y bajos ingresos, en el noreste de Wichita) la si tuaci6n es desalentadora, dijeron oficiales escoJares al peri6ilico Wichita Eagle en julio. Desde que abrieron sus pllertas en 1997 como escuelas Edison, las puntuaciones de examenes en Ingalls y en Isel y han side entre las mas bajas de todas las escuelas elementales del distrito.

EI superintendente Winston Brooks y la mayoria de los miembros del consejo escolar dijeron que les- preocupa el rendimiento academico deficiente de los estudiantes, la baja en matricllia y la alta incidencia de renuncia de maestros en Ingalls e Isely, dos de las cuatro escuelas Edison en Wichita.

"Los datos eWln aln para demostrar que [estaS escuelas) no hanmejomdo a unritmo igual que la mayoria de las otras escuelas elementales en el distrito", dijo Brooks al. Wichita Eagle.

Chip Gramke, miembro del consejo escoJar, anadi6, "Edison vino aqui, y su gran promesa siempre ha side que pueden "hacer mas con menos". Yo no pienso que 10 han hecho. Yo creo que su desempeno ha sido mediocre, como mucho, y "con mas".

A la compania se Ie paga la cantidad promedio de dinero que el distrito gasta en cada estudiante por operar la escuela. Sin embargo, el contrato solamente incluye las

Edison ha firmmlo con­tratos para administrar

136 escueias, en su mayo­ria de bajo rendimiento academico - pero no sin

que las comunidades seopongan.

escuelas elementales e intermedias, que son las menos costosas. La revista Mother Jones report6 que como resultado, el distrito dice que ahom gasta al menos una tercem parte mas por estudiante en las escuelas Edison que 10 que gasta en sus escuelas regulares.

"Es culpa nuestra", dijo el superintendente Brooks en una entrevista con Mother Jones. "Nosotros fuimos los que calculamos la can tid ad de d6lares. No 10 hemos resuelto todavia".

Sherman, TX.: "Promesas rotas" de Edison

En 1995, la ciudad de Sherman, TX (una comunidad con grandes indus trias de manufactura cerca a la frontera con el estado de Oklal1oma), Ie dio la bienvenida a la primera escuela que Edison abri6. Hoy, seis an os despues, Edison ya no esta.

Los educadores y antiguos oficiales escolares afirman que durante los prinleros tres an os de Edison en Sheflllan, el distrito gast6 $2.6 millones mas que 10 que hubiese gastado sin la compaiiia. EI vicepresidente de desarrollo de Edison, Manuel Rivera, Ie dijo aI peri6ilico local de Sheflllan que la compaiiia se habia retirado voluntariamente porque perdi6 las esperanzas de algun 'dia hacer ganancias en la ciudad.

En la prinlavera de 1999, Phillip Garrett, antiguo asistente al superintendente y David McConkey, asistente al superintendente en

Un argumento de la oposicion ha sido que a las compai'iias privadas con fines de lucro no les toea administrar las escuelas publicas.

finanzas y operaciones, Ie enviaron una carta al superintendente Bob Denton pidiendole encarecidamente que terrninara el contrato con Edison.

"La historia del Proyecto Edison en Sherman esta plagada de promesas rotas, bajo rendimiento academico y acuerdos no cnmpli­dos", decia la carta. La carta tambien notaba que las puntuaciones de examenes en una escuela local Edison eran "vergonzosas" .

Fue escrita en un mal momenta para Edison, queestaba preparandose para lanzar su oferta publica inicial (!PO) en Wall Street. Mother Jones report6 que Whittle personalmente cabilde6 con los oficiales de Sheflllan para que renovaran el contrato de cinco aRos con la compaiiia. AI ser confrontada con las quejas sobre los costos indirectos, dice Garrett, Edison acord6 pagar a la cilldad mas de $500,000 y desistir el cobro de otros $500,000 que el distrito Ie debra.

Un ex oficial de Edison, dijo an6nirnamente a Mother Jones que el acuerdo efectivamente Ie permiti6 a la compania hacer su IPO ese noviembre diciendo que nunca habia perdido un contrato. Edison se retir6 de Sherman unas cuantas semanas despues del IPO.

San Francisco, CA: Edison ;e enfrenta al Consejo

Despues de tomar el mando de su prinlera escuela en San Francisco en 1998 y cambiar­Ie el nombre a Edison Charter Academy, Edison gast6 $1.8 millones en la escuela. Se instalaron coloridas iMacs y los pasillos se reno varon con pintura nueva y afiches alentadores . Edison prometi6 instrucci6n individualizada, relaciones a larg.o plazo con los maestros, mejores logros acad~nucos para los estudiantes, y la partici­paciOn de la comunidad.

De hecho, la comunidad particip6, pero no toda a favor de Edison. Grupos comunitarios como Coleman Advocates for Children and Youth y Parents Advocating School Accountability (pASA) asi como padres como K. C. Jones, hicieron oir su oposici6n a la toma del mando por parte de Edison. De acuerdo a Carolme Grannan de PASA, Jones y otros fu~ron "el motor que ayud6 a regar la voz y urur a los opositores de Edison" al crear un foro en mternet para discutir los asuntos de las escuelas en San Francisco.

. . E~ Con~ejo de Educaci6n de San Francisco ltllC10 ~I. ~no pasado una investigaci6n cuan­do reClblO quejas de otros padres que decian que Edison estaba eliminando a los estudiantes de bajo rendrnuento academico para mejorar

sus puntuaciones. EI consejo encontr6 que 14 de 15 estudiantes suspendidos 0 a los que "se les aconsej6 irse", eran varones afroamericanos. EI consejo no lleg6 a acusar a Edison de racismo, pero sf encontr6 evidencia de que esto era una violaci6n a sus estatutos, en los que se promete educar a todos los estudiantes "sin importar" su "compor­tamiento 0 desempeno academico".

EI consejo descubli6 ademas que habfa una extrema incidencia de renuncia de maestros (habia excedido el 70% en dos aRos conidos). Los maestros dijeron que los incenti\(os como acciones y mayor sueldo no com pen saban el excesivo volumen de trabajo. ''Era extenuante para los ninos y los maestros", dijo al Bay Guardian Anastasia Crocker, maestra de prinler grado.

Rebecca Aviel, maestra de cuatto grado, report6 al Guardian que cuando ella eXllres6 sus inquietudes sobre Edison, recibi6 10 que parece haber side la respuesta esrandar a los detractores: quizas nuestro diseno no es para usted . Aviel dej6 su puesto a mit ad de ano escolar, y cit6 que no era capaz de "trabajar en un sistema que no necesita nuevas ideas y que no perrnite que los maestros participen en la toma de las decisiones que afectan tan fundamentalmente sus vidas".

La Edison Charter Academy recibi6 atenci6n intemacional durante la pas ada . primavera cuando el consejo escolar revoc6 su

. licencia, citando falta de responsabilidad, rendimiento academico deficiente, altos costos y otros problemas. Sin embargo, la compaiiia resisti6 el ern bate y asegur6 un compromiso el pasado verano. Esto cort6 las relaciones entre Edison Schools, Inc. y el dis­trito escolar de San Francisco pero permiti6 que Edison asegumra la licencia para su acade­mia por parte del Consejo Escolar del estado.

Hoy en dia, Edison incluye la escuela en la columna "positiva" (0 mejorando) al clasifi­carla en sus evaluaciones de escuelas segun las puntuaciones en examenes. Por otro lado, la escuela tambien es ultima entre las .escue­las elementales de San Francisco evaluadas en · el Indice de Rendimiento Acactemico de Califomia en 2001.

Para mas informacion, vea el artiCulo "Reading, Writing, and Revenue", pOI' Chuck Sudetic, en Mother Jones, edici6n de mayo/junio 2001, y OIlDS art[culos de l10tiCias en [a pagina de internet ww>v.researchforac-tion.orgledison.html. .

Traduccion.por Mildred S. MartineZ

WINTER

D PorPaul

Edison privada 0

escuelas 11 estudiante grado. Edi escolares charIer s administJ2 pago por e

Ristor como u "historiall tres anos mercadeo primeras entonces, escuelas n 136escuel do crecim sobre nu operacion comunidac TX, se h, contratosc de 2001 LearnNol\ !raci6n esc Ja "marca escuelas ( escolares <

Filosol ofrece a Ie "estimul a: orientada esquema actual". Ei grande del las escuel beneficio~

inversion ~

Estral indica que cacionales estudiant, escolar n escllelas enriquec~

decamem~ del tiemp< paci6n de enfasis en

Escuel escuelaser escuelas, ( son escuel

101-02

le

arveyFinkle

lucro no

·0 que 14 sque"se varones a acusar

!ncontro i6n asus Ira todos compor-

labia una maestros :orridos). (OS como lsaban el :tenuante o al Bay .estra de

:0 grado, t eXllreso iolo que dar a los o es para d de ana "trabajar ~ ideasy icipenen :ctan tan

recibi6 t pasada . -evocosu abilidad, ie, altos Jargo, la !guro un cort61as . yel dis­peflnitio su acade-~I estado. lela en la t.l clasifi­as segun ltro lado, lsesCue­luadas en · mico de

artiCulo or Chuck cion de ~ noticias rchlorac-

L

WINTER 2001-02 PUBLIC SCHOOL NOTEBOOK 9

Datos sobre Edison Schools, Inc. Por Paul Socowr

Edison Schools, In c_ es la compania pri vada con fines de Illcro operadora . de escuelas publicas mas grande del pafs, yeduca estudiantes desde Kinder hasta el duodecimo grado. Edison hace contratos con los distritos escolares locales y con las juntas directivas de charter schools publicas para asumir la administracion de las escuelas a cambio de un

son escuelas intermedias, 5% son escuelas supe­riares, y 5% son de otro tipo. Aproximadamente una tercera parte de las escuelas de Edison son tipo charier. Las 136 escuelas de Edison tienen solamente 108 principales - la compania cuenta un plantel que tenga grados de escuela elemental y de intermedia (0 una que tenga grados de intermedia y de superior) como si fuese dos escuelas separadas.

los padres son muy altos. Sin embargo, segtln dos estudios independientes los resultados de Edison han palidecido en com­paracion con orras escue­las. Un estudio de la Federacion Americana de Maestros declara,

pago por estudiante. "Los estudiantes en las Contratos con los distritos escolares: EI escuelas Edison en su

Historia: Edison se describe a si misma como una "compailia joven" con un "historial illnitado de operaciones". Despues de tres anos de investigacion, desarrollo y mercadeo, Edison se incorporo y abrio sus primeras cuatro escuelas en 1995. Desde entonces, la compania ha anadido bastantes escuelas nuevas cada ano. ActuaJrnente opera 136 escuelas. La compania senala que este TIipi­do crecimiento "ha ejercido mucha presion sobre nuestros r~cursos administrativos, operacionales y demas". En 12 escuelas en comunidades desde Lansing, !vII hasta Shemlan, TX, se han teflrUnado 0 no reanudado los contratos de administracion de Edison. En julio de 2001 Edison adquirio la compafila LearnNow, una compania privada de adminis­tracion escolar, y 11 de sus escuelas operan bajo la "marca LearnNow". Edison tam bien opero escuelas de verano este ano en 37 planteles escolares que no estan bajo contrato.

Filosofia de la compafiia: Edison dice que ofrece a los distritos escolares la habilidad de "estimular la reforma escolar positiva, orientada al mercado y completa dentro del esquema del sistema escolar publico local actual". Edison sostiene que ser una compania grande del sector privado Ie penrtlte brindar a las escuelas consistencia en el liderato, los beneficios de una escala de salarios, y una inversion substancial a largo plaza.

Estrategia de reforma escolar: Edison indica que utiliza una variedad de enfoques edu­cacionales para mejorar el rendirniento de los estudiantes, que incluye: un ano y dia escolar mas largos, organizacion de las escltelas en comunidades mas pequefias, enriquecirniento del curricula, oportunidades de carrera, desarrollo profesional y planificacion del tiempo para los maestros, mayor partici­pacion de los padres y la comunidad, y mayor enfasis en la tecnologia.

Escuelas: Edison informa que opera 136 escuelas en 50 ciudades de 22 estados. De estas escuelas, 61 % son escuelas elementales, 17% son escuelas de Kinder a octavo grado, 13%

grupo mas grande de escuelas Edison en un dist:rito escolar es de nueve y esta ubicado· en q

Chester, PA. Antes del contrato de este ana can Chester, el contrato mas grande de Edison era de siete escuelas en DaUas, TX. Edison administra un distrito escolar completo de 1500 estudiantes en Inkster, Michigan. Los gastos excesivos han sido una queja frecuente de los distritos escolares - como Dallas; Las Vegas, Wichita y el Con dado de Wayne en Carolina del Norte - pues dicen que Edison les costa al distrito escolar mas dinero que el que se anticipaba.

Estudiantes: Las escuelas Edison Ie sirven a una poblacion total de estudiantes de 75,000. Edison dice que esta poblacion es ·80% minorias y 70% de bajos ingresos. Los criticos senalan un numero de escuelas Edison en las que la proporcion de estudiantes de bajos ingresos disminuyo drasticamente despues de que Edison tomara el mando.

La compaiiia ha aiiadido bastantes

escuelas nuevas cada aiio. Actualmente

opera 136 escuelas.

Puntos sobresalientes del curriculo: EI curriculo de la escuela elemental Edison se basa en program as bastante utilizados y estudiados como el programa de lectura "Success for All" y los materiales de matem;iticas de la Universidad de Chicago. AI nivel de escuela superior, Edison admite que su curriculo y diseno de escuela "todavia no han sido probados por completo".

Des~mpeflo: Edison alega que ha logrado mejoras anuales sigrtlficativas en sus escuelas en los examenes tanto objetivos como subjetivos y que los niveles de satisfacci6n de

School-District of Philadelphia

Office of Language Equity Issues

ESOL & BILINGUAL PROGRAMS

21 st and the Parkway • Room 302 Philadclphia,,PA 19103

'" ~ (215) 299-7791 • Fax: 299-7792

mayoria se desempenan igual a pear que los estuc

diantes en escuelas com­parables, y ocasional­mente se desempefian mejor". Los investi­gadores de la Universi­dad del Oeste de Michigan encontraron que las escuelas Edison se desempefian de ma­nera similar a las escue­las que les rodean y que no han logrado las mejo­ras educativas que la compania alega. Por tener poco tiempo y con­centrarse en los grados elementales, todavia no se ha graduado ningun estudiante de una escuela superior Edison.

Finanzas: EI valor en el mercado de la com-

Foto: Harvey Finkle

Edison Schools, Inc., hace contratos con los distritos escolares locales para asumir la administracion de las escuelas. Edison espera tener ganancias al expandir la matricula de estudiantes y a la vez controlar los gastos centrales.

pania en noviembre era de un poco menos de $1,000 rnil1ones. Las ganancias anuales en el ana pasado fueron $375.8 millones. La compania nunca ha tenido ganancias. Sus perdidas fueron de mas de 10% el ano pasado, y en su corta historia la compania ha acumulado pendidas de mas de $215 millones - un deficit similar en tamano al que tiene el Distrito Escolar. La compania espera tener ganancias al expandir la matricula de estudiantes y a la vez controlar los gastos centrales. Edison reconoce que ha recibido apoyo de filantropos privados en los distritos en que es "clificillograr un rendimiento fmanciero satisfactorio".

Quienes son los dueflos: Las 50 millones de acciones ptlblicas de la compania se comercian en la bolsa de valores Nasdaq. Su ofrecimiento publico inicial fue en noviembre de 1999. Los oficiales y directores de la compania son duefios de aproximadamente 9 millones de acciones.

CEO: H. Christopher ("Chris") Whittle es

PARENTS UNION FOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS

IN PHILADELPHIA, INC.

A resource for Parents and Professionals

New Location: 228 W. Chelten Avenue Philadelphia, PA 19144

215-991-9724 www,parentsunion,org

email: parentsu@aol.com

tambien el fundadar de la comparua y accionista principal. Su compania anterior, Whittle Communications, es muy conocida por haber lanzado Channel One, un controversial pro­grama de television para las escuelas financia­do par anuncios comerciales. Fue el editor de la revista Esquire de 1979 a 1986. Aunque su compania ha tenido perdidas, a Whinle no Ie ha ido mal. En 1999, Whittle recibio sobre $1 mill6n en compensacion ademas de su salario anual de $300,000. En 2001 , ha recibido mas de $15 millones como resultado de la venta de acciones de Edison.

Otros Hderes: Los oficiales ejecutivos incluyen Benno C. Schmidt, Jr., antiguo presidente de la Universidad de Yale, John E. Chubb, un famoso escritor de asuntos educa­tivos, y Floyd Flake, antiguo congresista afroamericano de Nueva York. EI equipo de

·lideres de Edison tambien incluye a 13 antiguos superintendentes de sistemas escolares.

Personal: En las oficinas centrales de administraci6n de Edison hay un personal de mas 0 menos 300 personas. EI ano pasado, mas de 4,500 empleados trabajaron en las escuelas Edison. La campania esperaba anadir 1,700 maestros este ana. Un problema que ha tertldo la campania ha sido la incidencia de renuncias mayor que la normal .

Relaciones laborales: Edison informa que 40% de las escuelas que opera tienen acuerdos de con venia colecti YO, y la compaiiia indica que tiene el comprOlrUso de desarrollar relaciones exitosas de trabajo con las uniones. Las dos uniones principales de maestros en la nacion han senalado que les preocupan los contratos que hacen los distritos escolares can Edison, y algunas uniones locales han irtlciado litigaci6n contra los coniiatos de adm,inistracion.

Para mas informacion comuniquese a: Edison Schools, Inc., 521 Fifth Ave., New YOlk, New York 10175 Te!efono 212-419-1600, Fax: (212) 973-0571, pagina en Internet: www.edisonschools.com

Traduccion por Mildred S. Martinez

10 --------

Takeover fight heats up continued from p. 1

between Ridge and Edison immediately raised conflict-of-interest accusations, because Edison was already seeking other contracts to run schools in Philadelphia.

Since that time, education activists and School District officials have leveled a number of charges at Edison, including:

'11mt the company used a dual standard, min­imizing improvements made by the School District on standardized tests, while exaggerating the sig­nificance of test score gains at its own schools.

• That Edison overstated its track record and downplayed its limited capacity - for example, its inexperience running high schools (no Edison school has yet produced a high school graduate) or performing central office functions .

• That the company has been raiding District talent, sending recruitment letters to Philadelphia principals in November, just months after agree­ing to stop soliciting School District employees to work for Edison.

• That Edison's financial analysis of th~ District presented a faulty picture, providing a false basis for several of their recommendations, such as calls for teacher layoffs and privatization of custodial personnel.

For their part, Edison officials continue to say they are ready to playa role in Philadelphia, both in the central office and in the management of schools, and that they are hoping the mayor and governor can negotiate a partnership.

"We did our very best to understand the District on the financial side and the academic side," Edison spokesperson Adam Tucker said of the report his company prepared. Tucker said the company was "not yet prepared to say" Whether or not there had been errors in their fmancial analysis, which was being reviewed by the governor's staff in December, after repeated challenges from the city.

Edison apologized for sending the recruitment letters.

What role Edison will play in the District is still unresolved, according to Debra Kahn, the mayor's secretary of education and a key nego­tiator for the city. The mayor has said for months that he is open to some private management of schools here. But the governor's proposal to have Edison manage 45 schools is still just a propos­al, Kahn said in a December 5 interview.

''What we have agreed to is that Edison would have a consulting role and would be a service provider. We still have not agreed on what ser-

What the governor has proposed: Reform commission Governor Schweiker (with four appointees) and Mayor Street (one appointee) would select a five­member School Reform Commission to replace the Philadelphia school board . Act 46, the state legislation spelling out the terms for state takeover of the Philadelphia schools, would be activated, giving the commission new powers.

New initiatives at all District schools Bonuses of up to 30 percent for principals who achieve their school performance goals; a two-week leadership training for all principals; promotion of 1200-1500 teachers to lead teachers, with salary increases of $7,500; a 3-year, $51 million "Paint­the-District" campaign; new books and materials; and a "new emphasis on discipline and safety."

Three categories of schools "Dramatic Intervention": Roughly 60 city schools would get top priority. Approved "Community Partners" would make these into "Partnership Schools" by contract with the School Reform Commission. The community organizations would then contract with "approved private providers" (school management (Ompanies like Edison) to run their schools. Spending at these schools would be increased. The partners would provide special student services, parent outreach, and monitoring of the provider. The "lead provider," presumably Edison', would manage 45 schools and would provide $100 million in "start up capital" for the 60 schools; other companies would manage 15 schools. Schools would purchase services from the District, which would still set standards for these schools. The 60 schools would be picked by commu­nity partners from the 175 schools where more than half the students fail state tests.

"Moderate Intervention": At rough­ly 170 low and mid-performing

schools, the district would implement system-wide reading/math/science programs - two or three standard programs would be used at all schools. Systemwide and school-by­school goals wou ld be set. Other priorities would be building parent-community support and improving delivery of special education services.

"Low Intervention": At about 34 of the highest performing schools, staff can retain existing reading/math/sci­ence programs that demonstrate academic results. The District will continue to set and monitor academ­ic goals for these schools. The schools would be designated based primarily on their PSSA scores.

Academic goals Specific academic goals for different groups of schools. For example, low-performing elementary schools would have to lower the percentage of students scoring below basic on the PSSA by 25 points over five years. Another group of scheols might have seven years to achieve the goals.

Balancing the budget Over $225 million in annual cost reductions (1/8 of the operating budget) through measures such as more centralized procurement; reduction of the teaching force through attrition, debt restructuring, and sale of the District's headquar­ters. Other personnel cuts: trans­portation and custodial staff may be cut and privatized. Even with these big cutbacks, the state and city must each contribute an additional $75 million in revenue annually, and a $300 million bond issue is needed to balance the budget ..

Central office: Hire Edison to provide consulting services to the central office. The top management jobs would still be School District employees - but staff could potentially be hired from Edison to fill these positions, including the CEO.

vices it would be asked to provide," she stated. Kahn added that the timetable, the term, and

the cost of an Edison contract have not been resolved. She noted that other companies pro­viding educational management services also "have to be in the game."

According to press accounts; at least eight other companies besides Edison are vying for business in Philadelphia schools. While Edison Schools, Inc. , has become a familiar name in Philadelphia in recent months, there has been no public scrutiny here of companies such as Victory Schools and Beacon Educational Management, which are also interested in taking over man­aoement of some schools here next fall. Governor S~hweiker has proposed that 15 schools be man­aged by companies other than Edison.

The governor's plan proposes that the 60 schools to be managed by private companies be selected by a group of "communiry partners," community organizations with a track record of work on education issues. This plan for "part­nership schools" has been one of the most con­troversial parts of the takeover proposal.

Most of the organizations so far proposed as community partners have a history of involvement with charter schools. But few of these charter schools have much of a track record yet. Some that do - West Oak Lane Charter School Oaunched by State Representative Dwight Evans), Renaissance Charter School (headed by State Senator AJ1lhony Hardy Williams), and Germantown Settlement Charter School - have test scores lower than the School District average.

Philadelphians United to Support Public Schools, a coalition that has been opposing the governor's plan, has been critical of the "partnership school" proposal. A November coalition press release notes that the 60 schools with for-profit management would get substan­tial additional funding in the guise of giving it to the District's lowest performing school s. The

coalition argues that it is unfair to turn over extra resources to schools being run by for-profit firms, and that it will create the impression that for-profit schools are better.

State Secretary of Education Charles Zogby confirmed that the partnership schools can be any of the 175 "failing schools" in the system, and simply must be selected by an approved community partner for pri vale management -they need not be at the very bottom in student performance.

Whatever happens on December 21, court challenges to the takeover plan are likely to move forward in both state and federa l court. In addition, the School District and a 'number of local organizations have a racial discrimination lawsuit against the state on hold , pending the outcome of negotiations over funding.

'Dramatic Intervention' 60 schools targeted for takeover by private management

The state so far has identified prospective "community partners" (in italics below) for pOSSible school takeovers in six communities. While this list of schools is not official or final, it is based on schools these groups have indicated that they are interested in manag~ng . Under the governor's plan, schools in the targeted areas must be on the Districts "Empowerment List" of 175 "failing" schools in order to be subject to takeover by private managers and community partners.

Overbrook! Southwest Penne ll Overbrook Cluster Philadelphia! Wiste r (Overbrook Bartram Cluster Educational (State Senator Anthony Hunting Park Development Corp) Hardy Williams) (Nueva Esperanza) Overbrook HS Bartram HS unspecified schools in Beeber MS Pepper MS the vicinity of 5th St Shoemaker MS Tilden MS and Hunting Park Ave. Bluford Cassidy

Turner MS (schools in this area Anderson include Edison HS,

Daroff Catharine Olney HS, Clemente Gompers Heston

Harrity MS, Cayuga, McClure, .

Lamberton Longstreth and Taylor) Mitchell

Mann Morton

South Philadelphia/ Patterson West Oak Lanel

Audenreid Cluster Penrose King Cluster .

(Universal Germantown! (State Representative

Companies/Community Dwight Evans)

Germantown Cluster Martin Luther King HS Connections) (Germantown Leeds MS Audenreid HS

' Barratt MS Settlement) Lewis MS

Peirce MS Germantown HS Wagner MS

Alcorn Pickett MS Edmonds

Arthur Rooseve lt MS Ellwood

Childs Emlen Howe

Durham Fitler Kinsey

McDaniel Fulton McCloskey

Palumbo Houston Pastorius

Smith Kelly Pennypacker

E. M. Stanton Lingelbach Prince Hall Logan Rowen

Hundreds of Phil: gather outside tl

Photo: Youth United for Olange

Change conduct a mock auction among educational management companies bidding for students.

r to turn over )eing run by 'ill create the ; are bener. Charles Zogby :chools can be in the system, I an approved

anagement -om in student

nber 21, court , likely to move eral court. In d a'number of discrimination d, pending the

7ement

; below) for It official or lterested in t be on the subject to

Inza) hools in 5th St

'ark Ave. s area 1 HS, nente ilcClure,

lei

mtative ) King HS

Photo: Youth United for Change

Hundreds of Philadelphia students organized by the Student Union and Youth United for Change gather outside the Capitol in Harrisburg on Nov. 20, calling for adequate school funding.

At a November candlelight vigil at City Hall, District staff and others protested privatization.

Fads about Edison Schools, Inc. by Paul Socolar

Edison Schools Inc. is the nation's largest private, for-profit operator of public schools, serving students from kindergarten through 12th grade. Edison contracts with local school districts and public charter school boards to assume management of indi­vidual schools in return for a per-pupil payment.

11

History: Edison describes itself as "a young company" with a "limited operating history." After three years of research, development, and marketing, Edison incorporat­ed and opened its first four schools in 1995. The company has added substantial num­bers of new schools every year since. It currently operates 136. The company notes that rapid growth "has sometimes strained our managerial, operational, and other resources." At 12 schools in communities from lansing, MI to Sherman, TX, Edison's management contracts have been terminated or not renewed. In July 2001, Edison acquired learnNow, a privately held school management company, and 11 schools are operating under the "learnNow brand." Edison also operated summer schools at 37 non-Edison schools this year.

Company philosophy: Edison says it offers school districts the ability to ",;tim­ulate positive, market-oriented comprehensive school reform within the framework of the existing, locally controlled public school system." Edison maintains that being a large private sector company allows it to bring consistency of leadership, the benefits of scale, and substantial long-term investment to schools.

School reform strategy: Edison says it uses a variety of educational apprc5ach­es to improve student achievement, including: a longer school day and year. organizing 'Schools into smaller communities, enriching curriculum, career opportunities, profession­al development and planning time for teachers, increasing parent-and community involvement, and an increased emphasis on technology.

Schools: Edison reports that it operates 136 schools in 50 cities and 22 states. Of the schools. 61% are elementary schools. 17% K-8, 13% middle schools. 5% high schools. and 5% other. Roughly one-third of Edison schools are charter schools. Edison's 136 schools have only 108 principals - the company counts a campus that has elementary and middle grades (or one that has middle and high school grades) as two separate schools.

Contracts with school districts: The largest cluster of Edison schools in any one school district is nine - in Chester, PA. Prior to this year's contract with Chester. the largest Edison contract was for seven schools in Dallas, TX. Edison runs an entire 1500-student school district, in Inkster, Michigan. Cost overruns have been a frequent com­plaint of school districts-such as Dallas, las Vegas, Wichita, and Wayne County, NC -with Edison reportedly costing the school district more than anticipated.

Students: Edison schools serve a total student population of 75,000. Edison says this population is 80% minority and 70% low-income. Critics point to a number of Edison schools where the proportion of low-income students dropped sharply after Ediso(l took over.

Curriculum highlights: Edison's elementary school curriculum relies upon widely used and researched programs such as the "Success for AI/" reading program and math materials from the University of Chicago. At the high school level, Edison acknowledges that its curriculum and school design" are not fully tested."

Performance: Edison claims it has achieved significant annual gains at its schools on both norm-referenced and criterion-referenced tests and also cites high lev­els of parental satisfaction. But in comparison to other schools, Edison has had lacklus­ter results. according to two independent studies. An American Federation of Teachers study states, ·Students in Edison schools mostly perform as well or worse than students in comparable schools; occasionally they perform better." Researchers at Western Michigan University found that Edison schools perform similarly to surrounding schools and do not deliver the educational gains claimed by the company. With its short history and its concentration on elementary grades. Edison has not yet produced any high school graduates.

Finances: The company's market valuation in November was just under $1 billion. Annual revenues in the year just completed were $37S.8 million. The company has never made a profit. Its loss was over 10% in the year just ended, and in its brief history the company has accumulated losses totaling over $215 million - a deficit similar in size to the School District's. The company hopes to become profitable by expanding student enrollment while controlling central costs: Edison acknowledges that it has received support from private philanthropy in districts where it is "difficult to achieve satisfactory financial performance."

Ownership: The publicly traded company's 50 million shares are traded on the Nasdaq exchange. Its initial public offering was in November 1999. Roughly 9 million shares are owned by the company's officers and directors.

CEO: H. Christopher ("Chris") Whittle is also the company's founder and a major sha~eholder. His former company, Whittle Communications, is best known for launching Channel One, a controversial advertising-supported television program for schools. He served as publisher of Esquire Magazine from 1979 to 1986. Although his company has been in the red, Whittle has done well. In 1999, Whittle received over $1 million in compensation on top of his $300,000 annual salary. In 2001, he has made over $15 million from sales of Edison stock.

Other leadership: Executive officers include Benno C. Schmidt Jr., former president of Yale University; John E. Chubb, a noted writer on education issues; and Floyd Flake, an African American former congressman from New York. Edison's leadership team also includes 13 former school system superintendents.

Staffing: There are roughly 300 staff in Edison's central administrative offices. last year, more than 4,500 employees worked in Edison schools. The company was expecting to add 1,700 teachers this year. Higher than average teacher turnover has been a prob­lem for the company.

La~or rela~i~ns: Edison reports that 40 percent of the schools it operates have col­lective bargaJOJOg agreements., and the company claims a commitment to developing successful working relationships with unions. Both major national teachers' unions have raised concerns about school district contracts with Edison, and some local unions have initiated litigation against management contracts.

Contact information: Edison Schools. Inc., 521 Fifth Ave., New York, New York 10175 Phone 212-419-1600, Fax: (212) 973-0571, web site: www.edisonschools.com

WINTER 2001-02 12 PUBLIC SCHOOL NOTEBOOK

'Success for All' program used by Edison Schools falls short of literacy principles

Philadelphia has the right reading program - but needs time, money by Tom Gill

If certain proven principles were applied, all children could become fully literate. These principles are followed in successfu l submban schools every day but have never been applied fully or effectively in inner-city schools.

First, children must do copious anlOunts of reading to become fully literate.

Second, the materials a child is given to read must be at a level of difficulty in accord with his or her present level of literacy - not too easy, not too hard.

Third. phonics and spelling instruction is necessa ~ l)uI, like reading, must be in accord with ear h child's current knowledge of how letters work in words.

I COMMENTARY I

Fourth, children must receive guidance from a knowledgeable teacher while reading and writing in small groups.

Fifth, children proceed at varying rates, not according to race or socioeconomic factors, but depending upon individual propensities and the degree to which the materials and instruction fit with their CUITent literacy :evels.

Sixth, a good instructional program pro­vides a balance of reading, writi ng, phonics and betng read to.

Across America, approximately half the students read at grade level or above while one half reads below grade level. That al l tradi­tionally have been taught at grade level has resulted in approximately half of all adult Americans being functionally illiterate.

In most submban schools about 75% of the students read at grade level or above while

about 25% read below grade level. Therefore, if grade- level inst.ruction is provided, the vast majority of students have their literacy needs met.

However, in most w'ban schools, only about 25% of the students read at grade level or above while about 75% read below grade level and fa ll fUlther behind the grade-level goa l each year.

The reason for tl1.is is sinlple: submban chil­dren tend to be raised in literacy-privileged households where they are read to for over 1500 hours before ever setti ng foot in kindergarten, while children from literacy­impoverished homes enter kindergarten hav­ing been read to less. than 50 hours. Since the American reading curriculum has evolved to fit well the literacy privileged, instruction is on their current level and they progress well . However, Iiteracy-inlpoverished children enter the same curriculum literally years behind.

Before we blame parents, we need to remember that it was less than 150 years ago when in much of this country it was against the law to teach African Americans to read. And it is only relatively recently that all children of the working class, black and white, attended school en masse . Their parents couldn't possibly read to them, and when these children came to school behind, they failed and were labeled as s low learners and their parents as uncaring. These children, in tum, could not make progress through school, as they were continuously given reading materials at their frustration level rather than instructional level; and the cycle continued, from generation to generation.

I have read Edison's report on the status of Philadelphia's schools. In the area of literacy,

4 CHARTER HIGH SCHOOL FOR ARCHITECTURE & DESIGN

--- --

t-. . 675 SANSOM STREET

~ PHILADELPHIA, PA 19106

~_~ ~J __ T_E_L_:2_1_5_-3_5_1-_2_90_0 _______ _ . W _ ~ww.chadph il a.org

Does your child love to create art?

Are you seeking quality, innovative, and tuition-free education for your child?

Innovative, certified faculty Safe, new facility in Center City Strong code of good behavior & business-professional uniforms

Architecture, design & construction themes integrate curriculum

Strong industry & business collaboration Mentoring integral to program

Deadline for Fall 2002 applications: February 1st.

Call today for an application.

admission information: 215-351-9053 fax: 215-351-9458

www.chadphila.org

I believe their finding to be incorrect, and I have grave rese~vations about their recom­

mendations. Edison's finding was that the city 's schools

lacked a uniIorm reading program. This sim­ply is not true. The Balanced Literacy frame­work is the School District's program. This framework is based on the proven principles of literacy learrting and instruction. Many di,f­ferent soW"ces of reading material can be used, but there are cOlrunon, all-imp0I1ant threads:

• Each teacher must directly assess all of her pupils four times per year to determine each child 's reading level and phon ics needs.

• Schools purchase for each grade a range of reading materials in accord with its pupi Is' needs, and teachers '1evel" these materials and use the range needed for differentiating instruc­

tion in their classrooms. • Teachers within their heterogeneous class­

rooms group children for small group and inde­pendent work according to their assessed needs.

It requines a great deal of professional devel­opment work to give teachers the skil ls and support they need. However, fitting a wide range of children with appropriate material according to their needs is not just one way to promote literacy for all - it is the only way. None of us has become literate without this condition being met.

Edison 's recommendation is that one of three unnamed reading programs be used urti­versally across the city. When a school con­tracts with Edison, the reading program is "farmed out" to one of three providers.

Only one of Edison's options, Success for All , is an acceptable program. Success for All was created by Dr. Robert Slavin of Johns Hopkins University. Dr. Slavin realized the

power of placing children in reading material according to their u'ue reading level s rather than by grade level. However, Success for All has serious deficiencies when co mpared to Philadelphia's Balanced Literacy framework.

To its credit. Success for All requi.res that

the 90-minute daily reading and language arts block class size be reduced to 15 students. However, to do so, paraprofessionals, aides,

In most urban schools, only' about

25% of students read at grade level; about

75% read below grade level and fall further

behind each year.

librarians, physical education teachers, etc. , have been required to teach these groups. Therefore, the program has had to depend on a very detailed , scripted manual to provide instructional guidance.

If sc ripts were the best way to go, why aren't suburban teachers using them instead of their judgment and expertise? Only a know­ledgeable inslluctor can produce optimal gains.

For a ll intents and purposes, Success for All invests little in teacher training. The premise is that teachers in fai ling schools

continued on p. 13

Cheyney University of Pennsylvania

• Undergraduate programs in 35 ~ajors • Graduate programs in Philadelphia • Full-time and part-time degree programs • Strong focus on career development • Keystone Honors Academy • Excellent financial aid packages • Professional and dedicated faculty

1-800-CHEYNEY Visit us online at

www.cheyney.edu

Cheyney University is a memher of the Pennlylvania State System of Higher Education .

.1 1'

WINli

Tl

cannot pupils' I teacher· thing as

Suc

their ins dren an regardIe proble ' by teac1 nearly a

SUCG

thepasD in grad,

maleri lwoul But Suo

The I at ev,

the the

offi distl

sc inte

It uti

ared to ework.

ut rde er

·s, etc., TOUpS.

end on rovide

l, why tead of know­I gains. ess for

1

.I r

WINTER 2001-02 PUBLIC SCHOOL NOTEBOOK 13

The right reading program continued from p. 12

cannot learn what is needed to meet their pupils' needs and, therefore, they must be given teacher-proof materials . But there is no such thing as teacher-proof materials.

Success for All does group all students by their instructional reading level. However, chil­dren are placed in instructional-level groups regardless of their age - a practice with obvious problems. Further, insDuction is accomplished by teaching to the whole group at once - not nearly as effective as small-group instruction.

Success for All makes gains in areas where the past practice has been to place the students in grade level rather than instructional level materials. If Philadelphia were still doing that, I would consider Success for All as an option. But Success for All is a program of last resort. It is a concession when a school district has gi ven up on being able to give its students the same opportunities suburban children have.

Friends of the Notebook

The Notebook is looking for a "friend" at every school in the District. Friends of

the Notebook make sure the papers that are dropped off at your school

office four times a year are promptly distributed to parents and staff at the

school. Friends also notify us about interesting stories from their schools.

If you'd like to volunteer to be a "friend." contact the Notebook at

(215) 951-0330 x107 or email psnotebook@aol.com.

The Balanced Literacy framework has in fact shown results: first, in the slow but steady nse ill SAT-9 scores and, more irnportIilltly, in the more direct and accurate measures of informal reading inventories, running records, and spelling assessments.

Philadelphia has the right reading program

but needs time and support to actualize

its promise.

But there are significant problems in show­ing immediate and dramatic growth on the SAT-9 and PSSA tests. One is the problem of the measures themselves. Both the SAT-9 and the PSSA include only grade-level passages. If a child is a second grade reader at the begin­ning of fourth grade but makes a year's progress that fourth grade year, the end-of-year measure consisting only of fourth grad", level passages will show none of this growth. When the test is at your frustration level, where your score falls is more due to chance than any improvement you've made towards the goal.

Then there is the problem of class size. In suburban schools folks expect a year's growth per year when the class size is 17-20, not the 30 in our city.

Philadelphia has the right reading program but needs time and support to actualize its promise. Here is what is necessary if our chil­dren are to become literate:

Under the Balanced Literacy framework. schools must purchase a range of reading materials for each grade in accord with pupils' needs. .

1. Reduce class size. 2. Embrace the principles of literacy learn­ing and instruction. 3. Provide systematic, ongoing professional development to support teachers. 4. Include community groups and student representatives in planning at all levels. 5. Extend the Balanced Literacy framework throughout the middle and high school years. This has already begun and must continue. 6. Call on the governor to make good his promise for the state to treat our children as their own. 7. Raise salaries to keep good teachers.

Provide incentives to recruit new teachers. 8. Remember that public schools are ollr most sacred public institution - our charge is to spend every penny available on our children's education, not to make a profit. 9. Design a system so that student, teacher, and school progress can be tracked in accord with the growth made from fall to summer. lO. Don't be satisfied with any result other than fuU literacy for all.

Tom Gill is a pmfessor in the Department of Literacy at West Chester University. The above is excerpted from testimony he presented in City COlmcil chambers November 10.

~ANTEd -.':.:1 .

SCIENCE TEACHER HEROES TO ADVANCE THE FRONTIERS OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SCIENCE

Apply today to participate in ATOFINA'S Science Teacher

Program for elementary school teachers scheduled for

August 5-9 from 9:00 - 3:00 at the company's Research

Center l<?cated in King of Prussia, PA (near the King of

Prussia mall).

ATOFINA's Science Teacher Program brings scientists and

teachers together to spark an interest in science among

students. The Program aims to help teachers become

passionate advocates of hands-on science.

ATOFINA's Program is intended for elementary school

teachers from grades 3, 4, 5, or 6 in teams of 2 teachers

per school. A total of 20 teachers are selected to participate

in ATOFINA's Program.

Kits explored include Science & Technology for Children

(ST() and Full Option Science System (FOSSJ- At the

conclusion of Program week, kits are then given to

participating teachers for integration into their

classroom curriculum.

STC and FOSS kits, which are professionally-developed,

grade-specific, classroom-tested hands-on science kits,

meet the National Science Education Standards.

For an application or more information:

Contact Jane Crawford at 215.419.7614

e-mail: jane.crawford@atofina.com

web address: www.ScienceForTeachers.com

Deadline for Applications: January 25. 2002

(4~ 4TDFIN4 ~

Students from the Philadelphia Student Union and Youth United for Change, along with Asian Americans United, provided a solid core of support for protests against privatization.

After months, a broad movement emerged

Groups unite to oppose school privatization by Aldustus Jordan

The response was almost immediate when then-Governor Tom Ridge announced the hir­ing of the for-profit company Edison Schools, Inc. , August I, to conduct a "study" of the School District of Philadelphia. Sensing that this was me fust step towards the pri vatiza­tion of Philadelphia's public schools, many of the city's advocates for quality public educa­tion held an emergency meeting to respond.

The coalition shared a basic concern that

for-profit companies will prioritize their profit margins over students' education.

''We talked about Edison's failures in other cities and the blatant conflict of interest that existed for Edison in conducting an evalua­tion of a district that it intended to take over," said Dennis Barnebey, a teacher at Germantown High School. The organizations in attendance agreed to build a coalition of concerned citizens, parents, students, and edu­cators to mount a campaign in opposition to privatization of schools in Philadelphia.

Within a brief period, the coalition, which came to be known as Philadelphians United to Support Public Schools, consisted of over 30 community, education and advocacy orga­nizations from across the city. Many of the groups had worked together on past campaigns for increased school funding, but there were groups with a range of attitudes toward the School District - some supportive and some more oppositional.

''The threat of a takeover not only attacked public education, but it also attacked labor, civic participation, and the democratic process, so you saw a lot of groups signing onto this movement that came from widely different constituencies and movements," said Helen Gym of Asian Americans United.

Among the coalition's key unifying prin­ciples were the complete opposition to a state or private takeover of schools, the immediate reinstatement of the racial discrimination law­suit against the Commonwealth and a funda­mental change in the state's fundi ng formula for public education.

Students emphasized the theme "Students are not for sale!" Student groups and others in the coalition shared a basic concern that for-

profit companies are accountable to their share­holders and will prioritize their profit· margins over students' education.

Building opposition to privatization In September and October, building sup­

port for the anti-privatization movement proved to be a major challenge. Even organi­zations with a clear vested interest in the issue, including the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers, initially appeared reluctant to take a strong public stance.

Some took a "wait-and-see attitude" because no one could say with any degree of certainty the role that Edison would play in the District beyond completing the study. For weeks Edison maintained their sole interest in Philadelphia was to conduct a thorough eval­uation of schools.

Others believed that the hiring of Edison meant that the privatization of at least some of Philadelphia's schools was a "done deal." Within schools and the education community, some were reluctant to challenge the company that might soon be in charge. It also appeared that the state held most of the cards at the nego­tiating table, with the mayor having already agreed to allow a state takeover if no agreement could be reached with the governor.

Building support among some parents and community members was also difficult. "It's hard to convince some of the parents to say no to Edison and yes to the same schools that

see "Groups" p. 18

Slut18n15' teaching sfut18n15' about their rights

Freedom of Expression School S~rehes

Diserimination Harmment Censorship

~ tOO I<tllYYOR ~ ~ram iIfo VOOr ckmoom or organlzaliJn! (215) 592-1513, ext. 122

ktobin@aclupa.org

A public education program of the

ACLU

WINTER 2001-02

around the world ... Wouldn't it be njce to know that if your child needed any type of medical or surgical care whatsoever, the resources of a world-renowned pediatric medical center were right around the corner?

They are.

The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia has brought its special pediatric expertise right to your community. So if your child needs the services of a pediatric specialist, you're near the children's hospital that USNews & World Report identifies as one of the best in the country, with doctors recognized as the best in their fields by American Health, Good Housekeeping and Philadelphia magazines, and the reference book The Best Doctors in America.

For any specialized care that your child might need, call the world-class hospital that's around your corner.

Founded in 1855 as the nation's first pediatric hospital, The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia is ranked today as the best pediatric hospital in the nation by a compre­hemive Child magazine survey.

Now around the corner. .. Primary Care Center Main Campus 3550 Market Street 5th Floor Philadelphia, PA 19104 215-590-3000

Primary Care Center at Cobbs Creek 225 Cobbs Creek Parkway Philadelphia, PA 19139 215-476-2223

Primary Care Center in South Philadelphia 1900 South Broad Street Philadelphia, PA 19146 215-467-5870

Primary Care Center at University City 39th and Chestnut Streets St, Leonard's Court Suite 110 Philadelphia, PA 19104 215-590-5090

<!H The Children's Hospital ofPhiladelphia® A pediatric healthcare network

34th Street and Civic Center Boulevard Philadelphia, Pa. 19104-4399

1-800-TRY CHOP www.chop.edu

WINTE

-02 WINTER 2001-02 PUBLIC SCHOOL NOTEBOOK

Advertisement

Philadelphia Public Schools Back Room Deals or Front Door Reform ~e latest political "deal" between the Mayor ~ and the Governor signals a temporary set­

dement of the public school debate. But many wonder, "What was setded?" And, "How will this 'deal' help students perform and achieve better?"

In reality, nothing important involving learning was setded - no answers given and no solutions adopted.

The state retains the power to take over the School District on December 1. The state Control Commission, unelected and account­able to no one, retains total authority to inde­pendendy make all school decisions. They retain the power to undo the "deal" and the authority to raise the taxes of every Philadelphia citizen - not just the taxes of parents or proper­ty owners. but raise taxes on every citizen.

They retain the power to privatize, to dis man­de the entire system of public education and to disband the School Board appointed by the Mayor we elected to help fix the schools.

Edison, Inc. remains an important part of their deal even in the face of newly discovered facts that certify Edison's track record of over prom­

ising and under achieving.

In ~th, nothing was done that will help a

single student, parent or taxpayer. We know Philadelphia public schools need

improvement. We also know what works and

how to fix those problems. But, in the negotiations leading up to their

"deal;' there were no public discussions to resolve the funding inequity our school system

and our city faces. Our students will continue to receive less money per pupil than the suburban schools.

And, nothing that embraces proven reform ini­tiatives, smaller class size and the ability to attract and retain the most qualified teachers. Nothing that endorses greater safety and disci­pline in the schools. Nothing that improves the learning and teaching environment. Yet these ingredients have turned around failing schools across the country.

Our children, their education and the future of this city should not be the subject of political deals. They are our moral responsibility. We demand an end to politics as usual and that the welfare of the children be taken for what they must be - a sacred charge for the future of Philadelphia.

They are our children. TIlls is our city. TIlls is our decision. These are our demands:

• The pursuit of legislation that addresses the funding inequity across the state,

• That the Governor and the Mayor suspend their arbitrary takeover deadline to allow the public to fulfill its right as citizens and vote on the issues,

• That there be no privatization of any public school.

Call the Governor. Call the Mayor. Call your state legislator. Tell them to heed their elected responsibilities to the voters, to the students and to the taxpayers.

Rally to stop the state takeover and the privati­zation of our schools.

Demand an end to political posturing. Demand real and proven refonn.

IUILLV ThursdtlJ, DeCember 20, 200f 4:S0 pm Sellaal Distriet Buildillg (2fst St. & PGrkwuyJ

1845 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103 Phone: 215.814.9310 Fax: 215.564.6764 Paid for by the Coalition to Keep Our Public Schools Public

15

16 PUBLIC SCHOOL NOTEBOOK WINTER 2001-02

Labor fights against a state takeover by Ron Whitehome

[n the streets, courts, and legislative cham­bers, organized labor - led by the unions rep­resenting over 20,000 school employees - has joined the fight against the takeover and priva­tization of the School District by the state and Edison Schools, Inc.

"This plan is about nothing but power, money, and politics," said Tom Doyle, presi­dent of Local 1201 , which represents mainte­nance and transportation workers. "This is about a company [Edison] that is broke, and they're trying to suck money out of a school system that itself is broke."

President Ted Kirsch of the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers (PFT), speaking before City Council on November 8, denounced the governor's school refonn plan as a "flawed plan based on erroneous assumptions, distorted statistics and self-serving analysis." He said the plan fails to address the "core issue" of inequitable funding.

The PFT - representing teachers, non­teaching assistants, secretaries and many other support personnel - has long been opposed to privatization of schools and has opposed Act 46, the state law that would be the legal instru­ment for the proposed state takeover.

Kirsch points to a number of steps the union has taken to pefeat a takeover: press confer­ences, ad campaigns, participation in mass demonstrations and an anti-privatization coali­tion, a legislative initiative to amend Act 46 to require voter approval of the state takeover, and a lawsuit to void Act 46.

But some PFT members as well as community leaders have been critical of the union, saying that it has been slow to mobilize members and aloof from the coalition of

community groups, parents, and students.

Support workers most at risk While teachers' jobs appear relatively secure

until their contract expires in 2004, this is def­initely not the case with the District's mainte­nance and custodial workers and bus drivers. These jobs are on the chopping block.

Act 46 allows the state, after a takeover, to abrogate any of the School District's union con­tracts covering non-professiona l workers. Edison's report explicitly identifies the savings to be gained through elim.inating or "outsourcing" to low-wage. non-union frrms the District's 4,000 maintenance and trans­portation jobs, and the governor has singled out these same areas for cost-cutting.

As Kirsch noted in his testimony to City Council, "this ill-advised and callous plan . would hit minorities and women who are single heads of households hardest."

Charles Zogby, the state secretary of education and an architect of the governor's plan, said nullifying contracts would not be his "fJISt option." He explained, 'We're not going to want to abrogate contracts when we can work cooperatively with unions and with leadership . . to deli ver these services in a way that allows us to produce savings."

Food service workers, school police, and the support personnel represented by the PFT could also be subject to the abrogation of contracts after a takeover, though they have not been sin­gled out in the plans of Edison or the governor.

Local 1201 President Doyle slammed Edison for what he called an unfair evaluation of his membership. Edison compared the square footage cleaned by a typical Local12OI member unfavorably with those of private sector firms.

Give Your Children A Different Pers ectiveo 0 0 Their OWho

Children deserve an opportunity to se·e a fair and full picture of not only the world around them, but a reflection of the world as they see it. Songhai Press Corporation is committed to providing tools, resources. and environments that help foster a sense of confidence, accomplishment, and ownership.

Hey, POp-PDp! A warm and wonderful account of a little boy's day spent with his grandfather. The book explores the bond shared between grandfather and grandson in a rhythmically entertaining presentation.

OF D~ ~~~~~~~2~ g~~~~~~[e Dpe::~~~t~~~~ -- - . discussing .African history, publishing,

creative Writing as a form of - - ~~~~~f~~~~s(~~a:_~ i~e entrepreneurial

IE AmhM"ree~;,~ '-M-Y -'-Fi-rs-t -W-ee-k-o-f -SC-h-OO-'I A Mean Set of Drums ~::~:~~a~~ac~~~~c~o~~eS~~!-A beautifully illustrated In this colorfully illustrated workshops for parents discussing the introduction to kindergarten. collection of rhymes, little Importance of expos 109 children to This collection of rhymes is Rudy convlOces hiS mother literature as early as possible. The designed to help ease the. and a musIc store .owner that workshop includes things that parents transition for children entering not only IS he destined to be a can do to make reading a fun and the formal education process. great jazz drummer, but that he rewarding family activity. This includes (Available in Spanish!) needs "a mean set of drums l " a comprehensive literacy packet and 4

Eboni and the Dinosaur A baby dinosaur's passion for chocolate helps to teach children that overindul­gence of any type is not good.

Making the Parent Connection (For Educators and Parents) Judith Barnes-Claps, a Pennsylvania educator, puts 31 years of education and research into this practical guide to building and effec­tively utilizing strong parent teacher relationships.

thirty book classroom sets.

Young Publishers' Program-In this seven session project students will write, edit, illustrate and publish their book as a classroom effort. This project includes a visit to an actual printing plant. Students wil l perform a read ing of thei r work for younger students, parents , senior citizens, and invited guests.

SONGHAI PRESS CORPORATION 4548 Market Street Phila., PA 19139 Phone: (215) 243-4133

(Toll Free) 1-877-S0NGHAI Fax: (215) 243 4134

www.songhaipress.com

But Doyle says what they neglected to mention is that his members work five hours per day and the pri­vate sector workers work eight.

When hourly productio~ is compared, the 1201 mem­bers actually clean more, both Doyle and School District management stated. . Local 120 I repeatedly turned out its membership for protest actions this fall, bringing hundreds of mem­bers to a November 28th rally at the State Office Building. Local 634 of the Cafeteria Workers Union was also out in force that day.

local 1199C President Henry Nicholas addresses a November anti-privatization protest at City Hall. Photo' Harvey Finkle

Other unions join fight Other unions have been active as well.

Henry Nicholas and members of the union he heads, 1199C, the Hospital Workers Union, have been a strong presence. The AFL-CIO Central Labor Council passed a resolution con­demning the takeover.

The American Federation of Teachers inter- · national leadership has also been vocal. President Sandra Feldman called the Edison report "the wrong prescription for turning around public schools" and called instead for "smaller class size, a rigorous cutriculum, extra help for struggling students and quality teach­ing." The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) international leadership has also spoken out.

The unions have not been mollified by the

compromise offered by the governor, which would lim.it Edison's rille in central manage­

, ment but still allow for massive privatization. High teacher turnover at Edison-managed

schools, the focus on scripted curriculum, and plans to reduce the number of teachers by attrition are all warning signs for teachers, even though the contract offers short-term job secwity. Come contract time, Act 46 provides the means for the state to refuse to bargain over critical issues and impose an agreement hosti le to the union.

Support workers and their unions say they will not quietly be subcontracted out of existence. Continued resistance from labor - allied with students, parents, clergy and other community forces - suggests the book won't be closed on this chapter of school refonn any time sooo.

It's Time To Apply for College and Financial Aid. Need Help?

COLLEGE ACCESS CAN HELP YOU!

Call and Come into one of our Centers:

Center City The Gallery I, Street Level 9'" & Market Streets Philadelphia, PA 19107 215-574- 1341 FAX: 215-574-1535

North Philadelphia Rivera Building 2603 N. 5'" Street, 4,h Floor Philadelphia, PA 19133 215-739-9360 FAX: 215-739-8550

West Phi ladelphia 4601 Market Street Suite 3000 Philadelphia, PA 19 139 215-476-2227 FAX: 215-476-3670

The College Access Program is a project of the Philadelphia Education Fund

WINT(

-02

r

nber Finkle

'hich lage­i on. aged , and 's by

, job , ides over )stile

they ence. with unity xl on

I.

WINTER 2001-02

Proposal to equalize school funding emerges

A Pennsylvania legislators has proposed a new state fund.ing system that would dramat­icaUy increase state aid for high-poverty school districts like Philadelphia and would shift the burden of paying for schools from local prop­erty taxes to the state.

If the proposal becomes law, state aid to Philadelphia schools could almost double.

"Pennsylvania's system for funding pub­lic education is one of the worst in the nation," said State Rep. Nicholas Micozzie (R-Upper Darby), sponsor of the proposal. "It's unfair

News In Brief

to students, unfair to taxpayers, and it's inad­equate to ensure access to a quality education for every child"

The new funding plan - the first to come from a member of a House select committee on education funding - would require school districts to cut local taxes in exchange for increased state money. An increase in the state's personal income tax from 2.8 percent to 4.6 percent would make the shift possible.

Micozzie's proposal is aimed to guarantee that every school district has the opportunity to achieve a level of funding he calls a "Successful School Budget."

This fund ing l.evel is based on the actual average per-pupil spending of 33 districts in the state that performed best on state stan­dardized tests. The targeted funding level for each district would be adjusted to give more to dis tricts with a large percentage of low­income students, students with disabilities, or English Language Learners.

17

For more information on the Successful School Budget proposal, see the web site wwwpsrn.org.

Task force advocates for English Language Learners

The Education Law Center has established an English Language Learner (ELL) Task Force, which is made up of parents, advocates, and others interested in improving the quality of services for English Language Learners in Pennsylvania.

"Our information indicates that Pennsylvania is now the only state that has no specific training or certification requirement for ESL [English as a Second Language 1 teach­ers," said Len Rieser, co-director of the Center.

"Most Pennsylvania COlleges and universi­ties haven ' t developed ESL teacher training programs," Rieser added. "It just doesn't make sense for them to do so unless there's some SOlt

of credential for their students to work toward." There are over 10.000 English Language

Learners in Philadelphia schools. Goals of the task force include: • implementing ESL teacher certification

in the state. • establishing state standards for services

to ELL students. This has been accomplished in part via this year's Basic Education Circular.

• securing funding for ELL programs. On October 24. the House Education Committee unanimously approved House Bill 622, which, if it became law. would provide $600 per ELL student to districts that serve these students.

The Education Law Center has developed a new "fact sheet" on ELL issues for families and advocates, It is available in English and Spanish at www.eic-pa.org/publications.htm.

The PA Department of Education has announced that people with concerns involv­ing ELL services can call (7 17) 787-8913.

Recognizing National Mentoring Month

January 2002

mentor (men' tor), n.

1. a wise and trusted friend.

2. provider of support, counsel, friendship and constructive example.

3. provi der of consistent and regular contact on an individual o r sma l l group b a s i s.

DID A MENTOR MAKE A

DIFFERENCE IN YOUR LIFE?

WHO ARE YOU MENTORING?

SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILAOELPHI A F AMI L Y AND STUDENT SUPPORT SERVICES

MAKING A DIFFERENCE

WINTER 2001-02 18 PUBLIC SCHOOL NOTEBOOK

. . State funding reform: this time, hope WIns by Timothy Potts

Over the past six months, it has been my honor to work with State Rep. Nick Micozzie, (R-Upper Darby) as he created his "Successful Schools Budget" proposal for funding Pennsylvania's public schools (see p. 17).

[GUEST OPINION [

It marks the first time that anyone has pro­posed a funding system that would make it possible for every child to have the opportu­nity for a quality education, whether that child lives in the city, the country, or somewhere in between. It also proposes the biggest tax cut for local taxpayers in history in exchange for an increase in the state personal income tax.

Micozzie announced his proposal on November 13, surrounded by a cross-section of people who care about fairness to children and fairness to taxpayers: representatives from Philadelphia Citizens for Children and Youth, the state AARP, the state Council of Churches, the state League of Women Voters, the state Congress of Parents and Teachers (better known as the PTA), and several other groups.

Since the announcement of the Successful Schools Budget proposal, nearly a dozen major newspapers, from Philadelphia to Pittsburgh, have applauded Micozzie for the quality of his proposal and for his willingness to do battle on an issue that has been harming children for two generations.

Within the General Assembly, however, most lawmakers have displayed an all-too­familiar mixture of timidity and hypocrisy.

Faced with choosing between fear and hope, they look at the politics of taxes, and they become so paralyzed by fear for themselves that they cannot act to realize the hopes of the children they represent.

Philadelphia would have new hope under the Successful Schools Budget proposal . Ifit adopted its full Successful Schools Budget, Philadelphia would get an additional $724 mil­lion a yeal' from the state.

That's a lot of money, but it's no more than Philadelphia's children deserve. Philadelphia educates one out of every eight chi ldren in Pennsylvania, or 12 percent. It would get 14 percent of the total increase in state support for public schools. But that's because 80 percent of Philadelphia's children qualify for free and reduced-price lunches.

With the House leadership against it, this

Groups unite against school privatization continued from p. 14

have fai led students for years," says Cecilia James of the Alliance Organizing Project. But the AOP, Home and School Council, ACORN, and other parent organizing groups took on the challenge.

The coalition worked on clarifying a response to the charge that opposition to Edison meant opposition to change. "Our coalition is fighting for a high quality, acade­mically rigorous education that is sensitive to the needs of our di verse student population, and not supporting the status quo," said Gym.

Meanwhile, Edison built support for a pos­sible private takeover, holding out the promise of jobs to some District employees and com­munity leaders as well as discussing partner­ships to run low-performing schools with reli­gious and neighborhood groups. State legislators Dwight Evans and Anthony Hardy Williams were their two most prominent allies. However, as plans for carving up the District were developing out of the public eye, an appearance of secrecy and "backroom deal­ing" propelled some angry citizens into action.

A sit-in at Edison's Philadelphia office, a City Council hearing about Edison, the pas­sage of a Council resolution to allow a vote on privatization, and a letter-writing campaign to the governor were the first wave of anti-pri­vatization protest events.

Students take lead Student opposition from groups like

Philadelphia Student Union, Youth United for Change, and Asian Americans United proved to be the strongest aspect of the movement.

Students organized marches, camped out­side of government offices, held student-run educational forums, and led a mass lobbying trip to Harrisburg and other protest events.

'We know Edison is not the solution; we know contracting unions out of existence is not the solution," said high school senior Ben Shapiro of the Student Union. "The solution is equal and adequate funding; the solution is treating stu­dents like people and not Uke dollar signs."

The press coverage the students generated kept the movement in the mainstream and con­tradicted the Governor's clairn that the opposi­tion to privatization was driven by adults "who

would rather see poorly run public schools as opposed to well run private schools." .

" It shouldn 't have ever come to this," said James Clark of West Philadelphia High School after one protest action. "We should always have had a quality education. This is our right. We should not have to protest, we should not have to sleep on the cold floor outside of some city building just to prove that we deserve a quality education."

The governor's plan It was not until late October, as details of

the governor's report emerged, that opposi­tion to privatization, particularly in the African American cormnunity, grew louder.

There was a strong response in Philadelphia when the state legislature swiftly pushed through amendments to Act 46, the school takeover law. The amendments call for the existing school board to be replaced with a School Reform Commission dominated by the current governor's appointees. Long terms for commission members limit the next gover­nor's ability to influence education in Philadelphia. The new law gives the state­appointed commission the authority to raise Philadelphia's taxes for schools.

Mayor Street expressed outrage. Fueled by the apparent Republican grab for power, many prominent political officials became outspoken against the potential privatization of schools.

Congressman Chaka Fattah and leaders from the state legislature, most notably members of the Legislative Black Caucus, publicly Challenged inconsistencies in Edison's report, sponsored joint hearings with City Council on the issue and put continued' pressure on the governor and mayor.

The NAACP, Black Clergy of Philadelphia, African American Chamber of Commerce, and Urban League also joined the opposition to the privarization of public schools.

"Privatization would lead to profit-making on the backs of our 210,000 mostly Black students," said J. Whyatt Mondesire, president of the NAACP.

Following disclosure that the Governor's plan would allow for the state-appointed School Reform Commission to nullify all non-profes­sional contracts in the District, the unions rep-

Call Today and ask about our

Educational tour packages for grades 4-12.

Phone (215) 768-8157 www.gatou(s.com

AFRICAN AMERICAN info@gatours,com

I HIS TOR I CAL TO U R S I Present this ad for a special discount!

resenting School District employees, along with the Hospital Workers' Union (Local 1999C), formed the "Coalition to Keep Public Schools Public." These unions' memberships represent not only school staff but also thousands of pub­lic school parents. They brought new energy and resources to the anti-Edison fight.

Negotiating stance Mayor Street stepped up opposition to the

Governor's plan with his stance of refusing to negotiate until the privatization of the central administration was taken off the table and with the symbolic opening of an office at the District administration building. He claimed a "huge victory" when the, mayor and governor announced November 21 that the central administration would not be privatized but that Edison would playa "significant role" as a consultant and service provider.

But with privatization of schools and jobs still on the table, most opponents .of privatization were alarmed at the deal. When the mayor switched back into a negotiating mode after this agreement, the flames he had fanned in the previous weeks continued to burn.

After a meeting with student protesters in late November, the mayor acknowledged, ."This is a community that doesn't want any privatization."

As the December 1 deadline for a state takeover grew near, the anti-privatization coalitions intensified their activities and began to collaborate more closely. In one of the largest actions, on November 28, over a thousand protesters shut down traffic on Broad Street and peacefully protested at the City's annual Christmas tree lighting ceremony and holiday parade. Schools across the city organized press conferences to keep the issue in the media. And students marched, camped out, and even walked out of some schools.

Protesters saw it as a victory when at the 11 th hour, the mayor and governor agreed to a three-week extension of the takeover deadline until December 21, which allowed for more time to build publi c pressure . But the possibility of a hostile takeover durino the holiday break, when it is difficult to mobilize opposition, seemed real.

There is little likelihood of a tidy ending to this struggle any time soon. Deborah Zubow of Philadelphians United to Support Public Schools commented, "Regardless of the conditions that the state tries to impose on us on December 21st, oUr coalition remains committed to our goal of achieving high quality and fully funded public education for all of our children."

. Aldustus Jordan works wiih Philadelphia Cmzens Jor Children and Youth and with Philadelphians United to Support Publi~ Schools.

is a "tough vote." Luckily, there are many rank-and-file legislators who care about kids and will prov ide true leadership. Are any Philadelphia legislators among them? Ask them for yourselves.

Legislators should ask what Philadelphia could do if it finally had funding comparable to what they alTeady spend on children in the suburbs. How about clean, safe, spacious, and well-equipped scheols? How about adequate numbers of up-to-date textbooks? How about smaller classes and bigger libraries? How about parent-friendly relationships between home and school? How about any number of things that we know will raise student achieve­ment but that just happen to cost money?

And how about hiring the best management money can buy to make sure that new money results in higher student achievement? (Hint: That's not Edison.)

Ironically, the crisis in Philadelphia may be exactly what makes it possible to change a funding system that is recognized as one of the worst in the entire country. Gov. Mark Schweiker is talking about sending' an extra $560 to $700 million in state funds to Philadelphia over the next six to eight years. (Way too little and way too late.)

The crisis in Philadelphia may make it possible to

change a funding sys­tem that is one of the worst in the country.

But why should rutallawmakers vote to help Philadelphia when their own children and tax­payers are being treated unfairly? For every dis­advantaged child and maltreated taxpayer in Philadelphia, there is at least one more of each in rural areas. Those who represent them in the legislature are not likely to solve Philadelphia's problem without solving their own. So the time is now for comprehensive change that benefits aU children, \\\Q.erever t/;ley li"e.

Next year, our legislators will be asking for our votes to keep them living in the manner to which they've become accustomed. How about a deal? How about we don't vote for them - in the primary or the general election - until they vote for us and for our children by enacting school funding reform?

If we do that, by this time next year we will be able to say, "This time, hope won."

Timothy Potts is director of the Pennsylvania School ReJorm Network.

ART WORIrnHOP~ for

Teachers, Administrators Community Leaders, Pal'fnts, Students!

Led by Professional Artists In your space or ours!

Theater - Mime - Dance Musi( - Sculpture -I=iber Arts

Reasonable Rates!

Call: Barbara 6reC)son, Dire(tor Women's Artist Network ZI5-951-0J30, ext. 163

- ·t1,·

WIN

11 '/1

by Sf<

By intere publii impro chiJdii

Ne firSt);! of st phila cent 01 for the to be a

Ih! ents 0

teaCh~ areal systen instrui est ex teache firSt ra

Fo! addres Form, the inl trict. tried tl stuilie!

By increru ticchal outa ci refor desi~ Philad change ability, opport spring

The led to Comm comin' irnpro\ Philad( 1997 c propoSl Bill B

In 1 attemp1 legislati toforc( morefl

Toe up to th fundini

Acti short-t,

ious, and adequate ~w about ~s? How

etween Jmberof achieve­ey?

lagement money

t? (Hint:

lhia may change a lS one of v. Mark

~ to ~ys­

the try.

~ te to help and tax­

'verydis­.payer in eofeach ~minthe

delphia's the time benefits

sking for lannerto ~d. How vote for election

ildren by

rwewill

p~ tors 5, I

WINTER 2001-02 PUBLIC SCHOOL NOTEBOOK 19

OPINION

Two views: the future of public education in Philadelphia 'Insist on a new arrangement' 'Stop short-changing our students'

by State Rep. Dwight Evans

By now, it 's no secret that I have a strong interest in shaping the debate and future of public education in Philadelphia. I want to imp,ove educational opportunities for all children in this city.

Nearly one-half of the children entering the firSt grade will not graduate. Fifty-seven percent of students are failing reading and math. philadelphia schools place in the bottom 1 per­cent of schools s[lltewide. These statistics speak for themselves. Failure can no ranger continue to be an option. The time for excuses is over.

I have had enough. The children and par­ents of Philadelphia have had enough. The teachers and taxpayers have had enough. We are all tired of being'held hostage by a school system that continually fails to provide an instructional framework that places the high­est expectations on our children and equips our teachers with the tools necessary to deliver a first rate curriculum.

For more than a decade we have tried to address the financial problems of the district. For more than a decade we have tried to address the inability to plall for the future of the dis­trict. We have attempted fiscal equity. We have tried the fou ndation approach. We have tried studies and commissions.

By the second half of 1996, it became increasingly obvious that there was no realis­tic chance for more state financial support with­out a clear demonstration that the district could reform itself. I introduced Bouse Bill 1343, designed to be a comprehensive reform of the Philadelphia School District. Its focus was on changes in governance, management, account­ability, teacher recruitment, and educational opportunities. The proposal was offered in the spring of 1997.

The discussion that this proposal generated led to the Urban Education Commission. The Commission was charged with the mission of coming up with recommendations for the improvement of all urban schools, including Philadelphia's. Its fmal report in December of 1997 contained many of the same types of proposals that had been incorporated into House Bill 1343.

Io 1998, at the same time that the district attempted to obtain more funding through the legislative process, it attempted to use the courts to force the Commonwealth to come up with more funds. The effort so far has been a failure.

To date, the state courts have ruled that it is up to the General Assembly to determine school funding. .

Action taken by the General Assembly is a Short-term, first step necessary to turn the

KNOW ANY KIDS THAT DON'T HAVE ANYWHERE TO GO AFTER SCHOOL?

~YOU_W''''7

CONGRESO'S lj_-:-~FTER SCHOOL

.'ROGR~MS

e FOR MORE INFORMATION ~ 215-229-4040

~ g~~~~I~gS UNIDOS, INC A multicultural community Agency

Philadelphia School District around and make it a place where all the children receive the qual­Ity education they deserve. , Io the long-term, there IS a funding issue. fhe Philadelplua School District's deficit now stands at $217 million. [n another five years, that deficit could reach $1.S billion. The fund­ing issues over that time involve more than the Philadelphia School District, however. They involve every single school district, every pub­lic school student, every parent, every teacher, and every administrator in Pennsylvania.

Io the short term we have to deal with the structure of the Philadelphia School District. Now is the time for us to come together and insist on a new arrangement that focuses on children first - bottom line. We must encour­age innovations in teaching, create new pro­fessional opportunities for teachers, provide expanded choices in educational options for parents and hold schools accountable for meet­ing measurable academic standards.

Community confidence in public schools will re:urn when students begin to achieve at high levels, and communities will flourish when bolstered by good neighb~rhood schools.

We cannot afford to be fearful of something new and different. The School District of Philadelphia has had its chance. Now it's time for the state to provide the uncompromising leadership that is so desperately needed to rein­vent public education in Philadelphia.

PA Representative Dwight Evans is Democratic House Appropriations Committee Chairnwn.

by Congressman Chaka Fattah

We have an historic opportunity to refOlTIl Philadelphia's schools. Improving the educa­tion, and therefore the life chances, of Philadelphia's 21S,<XXl public and charter school students will have a profound impact on the health and well-being of the Commonwealth.

It is incumbent upon the Governor to use this opportuniry and his leadership to craft a resolution that improves the quality of educa­tion for each and every child in Philadelphia.

An appropriate solution must address the fundamental problem facing the School District of Philadelphia. Our School District is not unique among major urban centers and small rural areas around the country. No large urban school district in the nation perfonns better than Philadelphia. The problem facing Philadelphia and cities like Atlanta, Los Angeles, and New Yolk, is that our students fail to achieve the level of performance found in many of our neigh­boring school districts.

Philadelphia is not dealing with a failure of local leadership; we are struggling to overcome a nationwide phenomenon of poor qualiry schools for urban and rural students. Almost every state in the union is currently in litigation to correct the problem of an ever-widening opportunity gap.

The growing disparities between the best and worst schools can be measured by assess­ing students' access to seven basics of quality education. Philadelphia's children bave been short-changed. Io order to be successful adults, Philadelphia students must have: • access to instruction in all core courses

CI CHILD CARE

INFORMATIO~ SERVICES

1-888-461-KIDS

Helping families FIND, SELECT and PAY-for child care

"Helping Families with Children Since 1992"

Referrals are free regardless of income. Funding is available to help eligible working families pay for child care.

from a fully qualified teacher. • access to rigorous academic curricula, both basic and advanced. • access to textbooks and instructional supplies as current as their suburban counterparts. • classroom sizes substantially equal to their suburban counterparts. • access to a school with an up-to-date library staffed by a certified Ii brarian. • a student-to-computer ratio similar to their suburban counterparts. • access to guidance counselors in a ratio that is comparable with that of other students in sub­urban districts.

The proposed involvement of Edison Schools does not address these concerns. I have done extensi ve research on Edison and found they have lost contracts in schools around the country, including Sherman, TX, Goldsboro, NC, Lansing, MI and Minneapolis, MN. In schools in Macon, GA, Wichita, KS, and Iokster, MI, school boards are trying to end Edison's contract because of poor student performance and rising costs.

Even many of the schools Edison claims are successes, I ike one in Miami and some in Illinois, have failed to show improvement and are at the bottom of their state's assessment test.

Right here in Pennsylvania, the 2001 PSSA shows the Edison-run Lincoln-Edison Charter Academy had 60 percent of students below basic level in math and 70 percent below basic in reading. This is the worst performing school in York County and it is run by the company that is attempting to run many schools in the School District, a district which, on average, perfonned better than the Edison-run school.

I have called on the General Accounting Office of the federal government to initiate an investigation of Edison and other for-profit com­panies ' claims of academic achievement. It is important to get to the bottom of the troubling and glaring inconsistencies between aSSl::SSments like the PSSA or the Manhatran Iostitute study and those commissioned by Edison. I have also asked for Congressional hearings on Edison.

As the Congressman representing many of the students in .the Philadelphia School District, my concern is that students have a right to the same high quality education that produces the high achievement result of our nearby students.

Whatever proposed changes are made in governance or management will mean nothing unless we change the quality of resources avail­able-to students in every neighborhood. It is impossible to get comparable education results without comparable educational opportunities.

The focus right now is on Phi ladelphia. However, there are hundreds of school districts in Pennsylvania that must be guaranteed these seven basics of education.

The last thing that Philadelphia children need is the sizzle of reform without the substance. We will not achieve higher academic perfor­mance for Philadelphia's children without pro­viding more opportunities for them. We must grant all children in this S[llte equal access to a high quality education.

This article is based on a letter from Congressman Fattah to Governor Schweiket:

Volunteers welcome! The Public School Notebook depends on

the volunteer assistance we receive in many areas, including: research,

writing, proofreading, photography, distribution, fundraising , and advertising

sales. If you would like to lend your talents or develop a skill, please call Paul Socolar at the Notebook office,

(2IS) 9S1-0330 x 107, or email topsnotebook@aol.com .

20 PUBLIC SCHOOL NOTEBOOK WINTER 2001-02

Do Edison's test scores tell us what we need to know? by Amy Stuart

Would some Philadelphia schoo ls be better off under the management of Edison Schools, Inc.? The heated debate about this raises another important question. How do we know when our schools are actuall y working - or improving?

Edison gives itself rave reviews for improving student achievement. Among its claims are that, "since opening, 84 percent of Edison schools have posted positive achieve­ment trends," and that "on average, students are gaining more than 5 percentiles per year on nationally normed tests and 7 percentage points on criterion-referenced tests."

These improvements, the company says, have come while Edison has enrolled a growing percentage of "economically disadvantaged students."

Edison gains questioned

compare Edison's scores to the scores of other schools in the same districts with students of similar backgrounds. The results are much less favora ble than Edison's claims suggest.

Researchers at Western Michigan University recently com­pleted an in -depth study of ten of Edison's oldest schools ,. all of which Edison has been running for at least four years. The study found that "Edison students did not

perform as well as Edison claims," accord­ing to co-author Dr. Gary Miron .

The WMU re-

But numbers can be deceiving. While Edison's own reports show substantial student improvement· on standardized tests, outside studies show that Edison children are performing no better, and often worse, than students from similar backgrounds in the same districts. And some outside groups dispute Edison's methods for measuring student success.

searchers measured stu­dent achievement in 49 categories, then com­pared the Edison stu­dents' scores to those of control groups of similar students. They found that

Many educators argue that when schools overemphasize standardized testing. teachers devote little time to skills that cannot be measured on sliort-answer tests. .

Edison students' gains were smaller than others in 23 categories, similar ' in 2 1 categories, and greater in fi ve categories . Edison has disputed the study findings .

For example, the San Francisco-based Parents Advocating School Accountability says that Edison 's "84% positive" figure left out 39 of the 113 schools Edison was running last year. Furthermore, the group disputes many of the "positive" labels, saying that seven of those schools failed to meet state requirements for improvement. In addition, it claims, seven schools rated "posiJi ve" have had their contracts with Edison revoked by their disrricts for a vmety of reasons, includ­ing 101V performance.

Test scores can also improve because of changes in the srudent population or because only certain srudents take the tests. Edison's reported data make it difficult to verify the role of these factors , but critics in San Francisco and elsewhere charge Edison with weeding out disadvantaged students to achieve higher scores.

A report presented to the Philadelphia School Board by Chief Academic Officer Deidre Farmbry in November states that Edison " makes very little of its information on student progress public, changes its reporting methods from year to y,'ar, [and] provides no information on number of students tested."

EdJson measures its students ' gains by comp lring test results at a given school over time. However, ex.perience shows that when -the same standardized test is given at a school year after year, scores inevitably climb as students and teachers become familiar with the format of the test.

The evidence shows mixed results for Edison, at best. But because so much of the evidence about Edison's performance con­sists of test scores, it is worth asking whether standardized test results tell us what we need

In order to get more meaningful results, independent researchers conduct studies that

r-------------------------------, I I I I I I I I I I

Subscribe NOW! We hope you depend on the Notebook

for news and views on our schools

We depend on your financial support o Standard subscription: $15 I 4 issues o Special rate - parents I students: $9 I 4 issue s o Contributing subscriptio,· . $35 I 4 issues o Institutional I organizational: $35 I 4 issues o Enclosed is a tax-deductible contribution:

$500 $250 $100 $50 Other

~arne ______________________________________ ___

Address ______________________________________ _

City/State/Zip ________________________________ ___

Phone ______________ _ School ________________ _

Make checks payable to Public School NotebooklRHD

Mail to 3721 Midvale Ave., Phila., PA 19129 PhNadelphia Public School Notebook is a d ivision o f Rcsoun::es for Human Development, Inc., a registered charitable

organization. A copy of our official registr..ltion and financial information may be obtained from the Pennsylvania __ .:::c:o~t: b:c::n~O~T: ~:7:~~R:S:ti: :s.:t=::: :o.::n~ __ ..J

to knOW" about teaching and learning.

Flaws in testing Critics say that these tests measure little

more than "test-taking ski ll s" or the socioeconomic status of the students' fami­lies. Others hold that a single, brief test can never produce an accurate and comprehen­si ve picture Of ~hat a child knows and is able to do . Still others point 'to stud ies that suggest the tests are biased based on gender, ethnicity, learning style and other factors.

"The tests tell us little about the quality of the education program a school offers," says Iris Rotberg, research professor of education policy at George Washington University. "They tell us mostly about .. which students take the'test, how much the school teaches to the test, . . . [and] how long the test has been administered by the district."

Because the testS are designed to be scored quickly and cheaply, they can assess only those skills- like retention of facts- that are easiest to measure and report quantitatively. Skills such as solving complex problems, analyzing information and expressing ideas clearly are harder to measure .

Many educators and researchers argue that when schools place too much emphas is on standardized testing, teachers devote less time to the kind of cri tical thinking skil ls that cannot be measured on a short-answer test, and spend more time on drill and rote memorization.

Seeking more authentic measures True accountability requires that we look

beyond test scores at what is actually going on in the classroom.

Edison's own measurements of its success are based on three factors in addition to standardized test scores : the extent to which the Edison design (includ ing curriculum, scheduling, and use of technology) is being implemented; responses of parents, students and teachers to "customer satisfaction" surveys; and profitability.

It appears that in the classroom, Edison schools p lace heavy emphasis on preparing for the tests . Edison says i ts programs are "selected to correlate well with major tests," and students must take monthly "benchmark assessments" which "mirror" standardized tests and which are designed to show teachers the areas ill which the tested skills need additional work.

In addition to standardized testing, Edlson's student assessment system includes

performance assessments, portfolios, and quarterly farnily conferences.

Performance assessments are acti vities or tasks that allow students to demonstrate what they know and can do, and that gi ve teachers insight into the ways in which children think and learn. Portfolios are collections of student work that are designed to demonstrate student progress in meeting standards.

Both methods are widely praised by education reformers. However, researchers say that such assessments are effective only if

Outside groups dispute Edison's methods

for measuring student success.

teachers are actively involved in designing and interpreting them, and are able to use the results to modify t.heir lessons to meet student needs.

In Edison's top-down management sys­tem, teachers are not involved in designing the assessments, and the highly-structured curriculum does not give teachers much room to adapt their practices based on student needs. In a situation like this, such "authentic" assessments lose much of their authenticity and risk becoming mere window-dressing.

Because research suggests that over-emphasis on standardized tes tin g is . harmful , we should be skeptical about the effects that Edison's test-driven curriculum would have on our children's education. And because of the gaps between Edison's self­assessment and the reports of independent srudies, we should be vigilant in examining any claims that Edison makes about itself.

Ultimately, schools must be held account­able by the communities they serve, not only for producing attractive numerical reports, but for graduating literate, thoughtful citizens who use their minds well.

Edison 's report on its student performance is available at www.edisonschools.com. Other analyses of Edison data can be found at www.researchforaction.org/edison.html.

Amy Stuart is a teacher and lives in Phi/adelphia. . .