In the past, these “underperforming schools” qualified the BPS for more State and Federal Grants. This money didn’t go to the failing schools in direct services, but was “absorbed” by BPS and “filtered” out to all schools. If you look at the school profiles of those schools earmarked for “turn-around,” you’ll notice the high percent of ELL students and high percent of Special Ed students assigned to these schools! You do not assign students groups with a history of failing MCAS to a school that you want to make AYP!

Bashing teacher unions and faulting teachers is a political technique called “demonizing the opposition.” Now the plan is to suggest that student failure is the teachers fault! It is just a way, at no cost to the city, to extend the school day for free. To ask the union, to make concessions on behalf of teachers, who did not create the student assignment inequities, is outrageous!

To take advantage of teachers, by not paying them for the additional hours and days worked, is a sure cost cutting measure for the city, but it is contemptible, and disrespectful, to teachers and not in the best interest of “the children.” I was disappointed that Dr. Johnson is taking this route. It is obviously that Payzant/Contompasis team members, still salting Court Street, has not filled her in on the historical aspects of school program assignments. Perhaps the “fresh start” should begin with them.

It is very apparent, yet nobody will say it, that the reason schools fail in very low income areas is because of social issues. You have kids coming from chaotic homes, terrified of gunfire, not eating adequately, not having a proper schedule, and then teachers are expected to perform miracles.

Is this true in all low income areas? No, of course not. My daughter teaches in a public school in an area filled with immigrants from South and Central America. Almost all of the kids come from two parent families – all though they are poor, all of the parents work, they usually have three or four jobs between them. They show up for every teacher conference, show, and send in what they can when asked for the classroom, even though they have very little.

Even though English is a second language to many families (the kids are fluent in no time at all), the school is performing well. The obvious difference is not the income but the fabric of their families.

For anything to change in these poorly performing schools, the social issues must be addressed. It is not the kids’ fault.

Parents from underperforming schools were present at the meeting being described. This suggests that fostering parental involvement might be at least as important as changing the treatment of teachers. Reporting here did not go very deep.