It’s Not Rocket Science

There are many problems with PPS high school redesign plan but one key problem is that it’s being developed absent common sense.  This has been apparent from the beginning. 

Do you remember getting the postcard earlier in the year inviting you to the high school redesign meetings?  If the meetings had been held according to the schedule on the postcard, Superintendent Smith wouldn’t have been able to attend all of the meetings because someone double booked her.   The meetings had to be rescheduled, making the postcards a waste of time and money. 

I’ve attended three of the redesign meetings and heard at each one that the purpose in making the changes to the high school system is to:

• Promote equity
• Increase graduation rates (which sounds much better than reducing dropout rates)
• Inspire and engage students
• Ensure all schools are in high demand
• Ensure all students are prepared for success at the next level

Let’s talk about equity.  Has the district defined it?  How will they know if they’ve achieved the goal of creating equity?  Who will monitor it?  What is the plan for correction if they’re not achieving equity (the thing that they haven’t defined)?

PPS Chief Academic Officer Xavier Botana has said repeatedly that students need a solid K-8 foundation to be successful at the high school level.  Yet, the K-8 reconfiguration is still a mess in many schools.  So what if PPS offers Advanced Placement classes at all high schools when not all students are being prepared to take them.  Where’s the equity?

It seems that district leadership is hellbent on making sweeping changes without having taken the most obvious smaller steps to address the issues.

The proposed high school model in the redesign plan reduces the counselor/student ratio by 100 students per counselor.  That’s a waste of time without a comprehensive evaluation of the high school counseling offices.  

Some school counseling offices are responsible for increasing dropout rates.  The #1 reason that students drop out is because they are too far behind in credits to catch up.   

Many counselors are not available to students.  They don’t return parent phone calls.  They fail to inform students that they are not eligible for credits in some situations.  Communication about withdrawal/transfer policies and deadlines is often inaccurate.  School counselors rarely (in high poverty schools) initiate contact with students.  Unless the student goes to the counselor for help with getting into college, it won’t happen.

I have yet to hear specifics about how the proposed high school redesign will “close the achievement gap.”  Wasn’t that the goal with the switch to smaller schools? 

My final thought on this whole redesign process and the lack of common sense behind the plan is regarding students. 

Why are district administrators soliciting input from students that are doing well?  We know the system works for them.  That’s wonderful. 

What about the kids that aren’t on Super SAC or didn’t attend the community meetings?  District administrators need to be actively seeking out the students that the system failed and engaging them in genuine conversations.