The Solution For Low-Performing Schools: Close Them?

The New York Department of Education released a list of 47 "failing" schools Thursday that could be shut down by the end of this school year, reports NY1.

The list, which includes 19 schools the city tried to close last year, has sparked controversy among teachers unions, parents and teachers throughout New York City.

According to NY1, United Federation of Teachers President Michael Mulgrew said in a statement:

"If [Schools Chancellor] Joel Klein and [Mayor] Michael Bloomberg want their legacy to be closing every school in New York City, they should be ashamed. They should be focused on fixing schools, not shuttering them."

But the list is subject to change over the next few months -- schools will be added after the state releases its annual list of the lowest-achieving schools. And some currently on the list will get another chance:

Schools can get removed from the list if officials decide after meeting with parents, teachers and community members that they can improve with major changes -- like a new principal or staff.

The heated debate over school closings comes as no surprise. It's one of the most controversial decisions an educational reformer can make. Former DC Schools Chancellor Michelle Rhee closed 23 schools in her first year -- in addition to firing principals, teachers and education staff at surviving schools -- and remained a polarizing figure nationwide until her resignation earlier this month.

Rhee argued to The New York Times after her first year:

"Public education is supposed to be the great equalizer in this country...Instead, children who grow up in Georgetown and those who grow up in the poor, mostly black neighborhood of Anacostia get two wildly different educational experiences. There's a lot of data showing that we're utterly failing our children in this district."

School closings were her answer -- one that many agree with. But others argue that schools should be paid attention to, not closed. The fear is that the students whose schools have closed will make a lateral move to other low-performing schools.

Parents in Boston gathered earlier this week to protest the closing of eight schools after the city's superintendent encouraged them via letter to move their children to other schools, some of which are also considered low-performing schools.

Both sides make valid points. The schools labeled "failing" fit the bill fairly obviously. But is the solution to shut them down and refocus -- or keep them open and reinvent?

Quick Poll

Are School Closings The Answer?

Yes, shut them down!

No, help them out!

Share your vote on Facebook so your friends can take this poll

WATCH:

Comments

[Christopher Bowen]

05:16 PM on 11/22/2010

It sometimes seems as if we love to HAVE kids, but we just aren't as interested in RAISING those kids. We are real big on throwing the shower and playing dress-up, but a lot less interested in the next eighteen years. Marriage? It's hard work. Parenting? It's hard work. Being vigilant about getting your kids to eat right, turn off the electronics, and get their homework done? Yep. Hard work. When you have a child, you absolutely lose the right to do what's most convenient. You forfeit your right to live life for yourself. You no longer have permission to not grow up. A child should hear about a thousand stories before entering school. Stop whining, get off the computer, walk away from the XBox and start reading. If more parents do that, fewer schools fail. As a teacher, I find myself doing more and more parenting. I love your kids, and I'm happy to do it, but that's really your job.

Chris Bowen
Author of, "Our Kids: Building Relationships in the Classroom"

[buddy boy]

07:37 AM on 11/01/2010

Often times the toxic environment that kills a school is coming from the students themselves. Perhaps these students need to apply to charter schools and make an effort to learn or get kicked out. As a public school teacher I've generally observed the value of education from (both parents and students) as unimportant. They are simply there because by law they have to be in school. I don't have the answer, but it appears that one day the USA will have a work force that is completely ignorant of Science, History, Math, and Language skills.

[Skepticat]

03:59 PM on 10/31/2010

I notice the options didn't include replacing either the students or their parents - or improving local socio-economics.
Be interesting to hear the chancellor explain policy to some inner city kids
"Spoze we don't show up, don't pay attention - don't do any work"
we fire the teachers
"What happens if our parents don't care if we do any work or not"
we fire the teachers
"Say I don't give a @#$&%!!! about school what happens?"
we fire the teachers
"Sounds great - whaddya call this program?"
Personal responsibility.

[Christopher Bowen]

05:02 PM on 11/22/2010

Well said...

[Kimiko Austin-Rijs]

11:34 AM on 10/31/2010

Those that are most responsible take the least responsibility. I am all for parents being culpable but often times you have parents that are simply repeating what they have been taught by rote. That is all people can do really. I am not even dwelling on the economically disadvantaged. I am also referring to those who have had every opportunity in life but have a warped world view that is largely accepted because of the class/caste that they are in. Many are suffering the consequence of decisions made by the few people that are in charge. For example we have school districts with a large population of homeless students in school that are often judged not by their ability but the fact that they are homeless. If their ability was actually invested in I.E. not considered one of the brightest and best based on socio-economic background they would be ahead of the game.

I have seen children categorized as a "problem" child, who were not simply because of they found themselves wards of the state through no fault of their own. The schools got money for that. The kids always ended up the loser.

[Jazzcomedian]

11:33 AM on 10/31/2010

Andre Agassi deliberately located his now renowned school in the poorest section of Las Vegas which was overwhelmingly Black, because he wanted to help the most "at risk" kids get a better education. In addition to hiring dedicated teachers, as a prerequisite for their child's admittance to the school, Agassi had all the parents sign a contract saying that they would be actively involved in their kids education. As a result, in his first graduating class, every kid was accepted into a college. Parental involvement is the key.

I wouldn't be surprised that if you investigated all those "failing schools", you'd find a paucity of serious parental involvement in their children's education. You can close schools, and fire teachers until the cows come home, but if the parents aren't actively engaged, and making their children do the work, study, and obey the teacher, you're just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

I had gifted teachers, good teachers, and poor teachers during my elementary, middle, and high school years, and I got good grades with all of them--because my parents insisted that I do my work, and let me know that education was important. Even in the classes with the most gifted teachers, some students still failed. Why? Because their parents didn't make them do the work necessary to learn.

[Kimiko Austin-Rijs]

11:16 AM on 10/31/2010

Good grief! Why not close all the schools and teach the kids at home by computer?! Sarcasm! This gets worse by the day.

[mrskorn]

11:50 PM on 10/30/2010

Aren't the chancellors and superintendents there to improve schools? Doesn't it mean they are not doing their job if they cannot improve these schools? Kind of like teachers trying to teach students.

Shouldn't they be held accountable for failing schools? Just as teacher's are being held accountable for failing students. Must be that the chancellors are not providing the appropriate interventions needed. Guess they should be fired.

[Gary Stager]

08:42 PM on 10/29/2010

Simple question. After more than 8 years in office, isn't Chancellor Klein responsible for failing schools? Why isn't he fired?

[chgotchr]

08:35 PM on 10/29/2010

They're not on the chopping block, they are on the auction block. I'm sure the NYC DOC will try to sell the schools off to the highest charter school bidder.

[ApprxAm]

07:45 PM on 10/29/2010

Fix them or close them. I'm leaning toward the latter.

[Velvettazz]

07:22 PM on 10/29/2010

If corporations expect to have a pool of intelligent people in the future, they better start investing in schools instead of banks.

[ReZun]

07:45 PM on 10/29/2010

I think you should rephrase that question to if corporations expect to have a pool of intelligent people "in the united states"

[GuiltyOne]

11:39 AM on 12/10/2010

that is an interesting point .. could a school benefit from having a corporate name atop their high school football stadium scoreboard? how about corporations sponsoring a football team ... does Nike give money to schools directly when the have the "swoosh" on the jersey's? How about having schools directly solicit corporate funds at the school level rather than at the Admin level.

Corporation look for a return on their investment if you are talking larger monies. Lots of companies offer scholarship opportunites in the $100 - $1000 range to individual students but what about the elementary school directly.

People are rejecting more and more bond issues for school improvement projects. The school systems need a Corporate FundRaiser (not a longtime school district employee) with their pay based on performance of the monies they raise for their school district.

[wafuu]

07:16 PM on 10/29/2010

I've one class of thirty-two with three involved special needs children and one ESL who is struggling. All are sweet kids, but this is a very good example of how the deck can be stacked against the teacher and the student by an insensitive or inflexible system/admin. Then the command comes down from on high, "PERFORM!" No wonder good teachers who might easily choose a different path walk away.

[cstandri]

06:35 PM on 10/29/2010

A friend visited from Germany. We spoke about the schools here. Somehow it came out about the many modifications I have to make for a lot of my students. She was shocked that we don't move the lower-performing students to special schools like they do in Germany.

I have to ask: Does America get a fair shake in evaluations? We test all of our students and unless you have a brilliant teacher who is adept in helping the best excel and the struggling pull it together, we're really holding a lot of students back!

I'm not saying let's follow Germany's example, but I'd like to know if the game is really fair.

[carester]

07:07 PM on 10/29/2010

Couldn't agree more. I strongly believe that mixing academically-challenged students with overachiving students MAKE NO SENSE. Both groups end up as losers, the ones who needed extra help and the ones who needed extra challenge. It is time to set up two tracks. I am totally in favor of it.

[Venicelady]

10:51 AM on 10/30/2010

At one time, schools had tracking systems. Tracks were abolished in the schools, because the system was considered to be discriminatory towards those were not academically high achieving. However, there still exists a tracking system in terms of Special Education, the area in which I currently teach.

When I started in SpEd, the goal was to mainstream students from SpEd into the General Education population. Presently, very few students that have been tracked into SpEd are mainstreamed, and remain in SpEd for the entirety of their school careers.

As a teacher, I have mixed feelings about this- there are many students that cannot be mixed into the GenEd population, due to various serious disabilities that they have, requiring the extra help they need. But, for those students that fall in between the cracks, that could be mainstreamed, but aren't, I wonder if the system is failing them by not exposing them to the academic world of GenEd. What happens to these students when they graduate with an Individualized Education Diploma, and are lacking the academic and social skills necessary to compete in the job markets?

Most of the debate about test scores and achievement centers on those students that are in GenEd. Rarely do I see discussion about those students in Special Education, and what the future holds for them.

[FrancisII]

03:19 PM on 10/30/2010

I went to a school with three tracks. Some classes weren''t in the tracks, like PE, Art, Music, etc. Therefore, I had many many friends that weren't in my track. None of us felt like we had a scarlet letter because of our track. Sure, we acknowledged it, but it was no big deal -- just information sharing. I did far better in the track system.

[Paganus]

06:34 PM on 10/29/2010

False dichotomy: The solution lies neither in closing schools, nor in throwing more resources into failing ones (assuming funding is equitable, which is rarely is...).

The solution is actively incorporating parents into the educational process and making sure that the education is prioritized at home as well, e.g. do parents regularly ask about their kids' schoolwork; do they make sure homework, papers, etc. are done well and correctly?

Demonize teachers, teachers' unions, and and the educational system all you want; pour more and more resources into troubled districts. Nothing will change until parents are actively and enthusiastically involved in their kids' educations.

[wafuu]

07:18 PM on 10/29/2010

No books or magazines in the home = a home that doesn't value education. And there are plenty such homes.

[Holly Rayl]

12:39 AM on 10/30/2010

Hear, hear! I think the two of your are more on track than most of the people here! Let's let urban schools be a community resource that educates parents just as much as children.

[Amy Rollins]

11:06 AM on 10/30/2010

....or a family that can't afford books/magazines.

[mathme]

05:49 PM on 10/29/2010

Oh good, now overcrowd some more schools until you can close them all. This is just asinine.