Lessons From A Turnaround School

      I am blessed to work at such an amazing school with such amazing faculty and staff members.  Nonetheless, the school I am at previously spent several years on the school improvement list. The school had a reputation of low graduation rates, poor academic test results, and apathetic teachers.  As a result, more than half the teachers were replaced, the administration team was replaced, and funds were made available for 3 years to make substantial changes.  That was four years ago.

     Due to the administration making such amazing gains in student achievement, they moved upward and outward to share their knowledge with other schools.  Thus, we have experienced another overhaul of our administration team.  Nonetheless, we have continued to improve from a previous F school, to a C school, to this year a B+ (89) school.  I believe there are several strategies we have implemented to support the improvement process.

     One strategy we have introduced at our school is an enhancement time block (TB) for our Algebra 1 and English II classes.  Our students are double blocked for those two testing subjects since they are the only two specified required tests to pass of the 7 End of Instruction (EOI) tests.  Just adding an extra TB for a subject area does not in itself mean one will have a better testing outcome.  In addition to the two enhancement classes, our teachers are given a personal plan and a PLC plan.  Believing the PLC is a major part of our success, we placed time within the day for our teachers to meet in a PLC every day.  This is an essential element of our success.  Also, our teachers have been given Professional Development on differentiated instruction focused on adapting for IEP students, the RtI processes, and best teaching strategies.

     These are some of the strategies we put in place to overcome obstacles to success for our low SES, inner city students.  Sustaining and increasing students achievement is a challenge, but it is one we are excited (and nervous) to conquer!

     However, I have recently learned that Rep. Jason Nelson and Rep. Tom Newell are proposing House Bill 3398.  This bill will offer public education money to parents to move students from one school to another should the parents think a school is not meeting their student's needs.  I am opposed to this.  Public education needs more money, not less to enact strategies like US Grant did to change the culture of student learning for all students. 

    Rep. Nelson states, “This is an exciting and timely proposal that will help address one of our state’s most pressing and challenging problems – the effects of poverty on our families,” said Nelson, R-Oklahoma City. “Two thirds of the births of children in our state are paid for by Medicaid. More than 60 percent of the public school students in our state are eligible for free or reduced price lunches. Educators I’ve talked to say that students living in poverty present the greatest challenge in our education system. This bill would begin to help these children and help schools with one of their greatest challenges.”

     My response to this comment is that I agree poverty does affect our students, but this bill is NOT the answer to helping low SES students out.  This bill has the potential to kill the positive movement made at inner city schools like US Grant.  US Grant has made amazing growth in equalizing the learning between those who are high SES and those who are low SES.  Let’s ask our legislators to fund public education at a higher level, so our schools can afford to offer PLC plans, to open up a few hours for pull out time in secondary schools, and to be able to hire and offer enhancement classes for those high stakes mandatory testing subjects our students must master.