Penn Live: 50 WORST school districts in Pa. Mine checks in at #13. Yours??
- Thread starter TheGLOV
- Start date
Absolutely fabulous.GLOV. You can't hold an entire school district responsible for the failings of a few poor students. For if you do, then shouldn't we blame the entire state school system? And if the entire state school system is guilty, then isn't this an indictment of our educational institutions in general? I put it to you, GLOV. Isn't this an indictment of our entire American society? Well, you can say whatever you want about your school district, but I'm not going to sit here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America! Good day sir!!
Seriously, the cost per student appears, to me, to likely be the budget divided by the student/teacher ratio as the lower s/t ratios have the higher budgets.
I attended a small rural school, near two of the bad ones, and we constantly had 30 students in a class. Where do these 13 to 1 ratios come from? No wonder the costs are high. If this number includes support staff the larger districts might have higher costs? I don't know the exact methodology but these ratios are surprising to me, sound like elite private school ratios.
Wrong. Those teachers do fine in other districts. The students on the other hand fail at every school. Many of them have been to MULTIPLE schools.
THAT was my fave read in a long time... thank you!GLOV. You can't hold an entire school district responsible for the failings of a few poor students. For if you do, then shouldn't we blame the entire state school system? And if the entire state school system is guilty, then isn't this an indictment of our educational institutions in general? I put it to you, GLOV. Isn't this an indictment of our entire American society? Well, you can say whatever you want about your school district, but I'm not going to sit here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America! Good day sir!!
No doubt the parents or lack of parenting no matter the number is a major issue. A continually present male role model and father is incredibly important to a family.
I don't doubt most teaches try hard to express the knowledge to the students but it they, the students are just there, placeholders, pawns to draw tax dollars who have no structure at home it is going to be difficult. The attitude that achievement in the school room is a negative is also impacting it.
Another issue I don't grasp, low achievement levels with higher graduation levels? Are they being pushed through w/o being educated?
I don't doubt most teaches try hard to express the knowledge to the students but it they, the students are just there, placeholders, pawns to draw tax dollars who have no structure at home it is going to be difficult. The attitude that achievement in the school room is a negative is also impacting it.
Another issue I don't grasp, low achievement levels with higher graduation levels? Are they being pushed through w/o being educated?
What else would you do with students who can't pass? Do you think they would keep 30 year olds around until they finally learn?
They should cut spending, eliminate charters and convert the worst schools into reform schools with NO sports teams. They should just teach them how to make my fries hot. PS A Big Mac gets one patty on top and one on the bottom not two patties on the bottom.
I have found throughout my career that a vast majority of people hate: education, learning, teachers, and schools. Not surprised that when given the opportunity to make their teachers look bad, a majority of students go for it. That's why these tests are a waste of time and money.
I am always amazed that America has made it this far, because the majority of our population is anti-intellectual growth and academic achievement.
I am always amazed that America has made it this far, because the majority of our population is anti-intellectual growth and academic achievement.
I agree the standardized tests are an issue as teaching to the test is then encouraged vs teaching to the student needs in life. You end up with what you encourage.
I'm surprised at the graduation rates still. When I went to school, long ago, you didn't pass you didn't graduate. I suppose these students are passing their classes therefore graduating yet don't appear proficient? I don't fully understand the paradigm as its changed on me over time.
I'm surprised at the graduation rates still. When I went to school, long ago, you didn't pass you didn't graduate. I suppose these students are passing their classes therefore graduating yet don't appear proficient? I don't fully understand the paradigm as its changed on me over time.
Really? So if we use your plan can we cut spending and increase results?
What are the student needs in life and how will you determine their success? Will you make excuses when they still fail or will you own it?
The reality is they kids that are failing will still fail and will just make more excuses. We have been making changes that they wanted for the last 60 years and the more we do for them the less they do for themselves. If you look at the results most groups don't have any problems with standardized testing.
I have an offer. The failing schools can pick ANY method they want and use it as long as they own it. Name the system where their students will succeed and I will support it. Name the system!!!! At the end of the day the kids from the failing schools will still be flipping burgers.
Last edited:
I am still waiting for someone to tell me ANY system where these kids will succeed. ANYONE? Name a system and I will support it. WE can then cut welfare unless you expect your system to fail.
The reality is we already gave them everything they wanted. The more we did for them the less they did for themselves. Access, funding, busing, mo inner city teachers, inner city administrators, NCLB, No NCLB, and so on. They failed before the changes and AFTER the changes. They failed with testing and they will fail without standardized testing.
What value did the teachers add? Can you explain why some of the students are less educated than people that never even went to school? Do you think they are just there to collect a check?
The reality is we already gave them everything they wanted. The more we did for them the less they did for themselves. Access, funding, busing, mo inner city teachers, inner city administrators, NCLB, No NCLB, and so on. They failed before the changes and AFTER the changes. They failed with testing and they will fail without standardized testing.
What value did the teachers add? Can you explain why some of the students are less educated than people that never even went to school? Do you think they are just there to collect a check?
Last edited:
I asked how non tested proficient students are graduating at a higher rate, far higher at times than the rates of the tests printed on that report? That is a question, not something to become excited about. I do not have answers, well maybe a few but the schools won't be the answer, the homes will be. Possibly the students do better at the classes than the tests at a far higher rate, I do not know. I would like to see the actual teacher to student ratio if the printed version adds in support staff, janitors, etc. yet I accused no one of any misdeed, just asking ya know.
I notice that PA-40 asks for your school district. I assume that info is used to determine avg income and funding by district. You'll notice that many of the poor school districts spend similar amounts per student than some higher income districts.
I don't know how it works in each state but I do know that some very poor performing districts like D.C. and Detroit have among the highest spending in the country.
I don't think those ratios can be compared with class sizes. It probably includes everybody in the school with a teaching certificate -- librarians, curriculum specialists, special ed.
A ratio of 14 probably means class sizes in the mid-20s (which btw is not bad)
Yes, standardized tests are essential as basic measures of functional literacy. And I think requiring functional literacy as a condition of awarding a HS diploma is a good thing.
Yearly standardized tests are essential as diagnostics so that teachers know what their kids have had or haven't had.
They are even useful, if used carefully, for weeding out bad teachers. If a teacher's kids consistently show no improvement over the course of a year, that helps make the case to get rid of an incompetent teacher (which we all know is extremely difficult)
Standardized tests have gone off the rails in three ways:
1) Too many tests and too much classroom time lost to testing. When kids are losing a month's work or more to PSSAs and other tests, that's 12-14 percent of their total usable class time for the year. That is way way too much.
2) Tests being used to "rate" schools and districts. Yes, high scores are to be celebrated but low scores do not NECESSARILY mean the school or district isn't doing a good job. You ahve to look closer.
3) Tests getting used to measure soft skills or topic knowledge. I.e PSSAs in social studies. They may yield interesting information but that has to be weighed against the lost class time. IMHO standardized tests should only test verbal and math literacy.
I was in Washington for some of this time. The problem was that Washington got over-ambitious and designed a graduation test that was really hard -- I think close to 20 percent of the kids in the state couldn't pass it.
Yeah in an ideal world you'd like every kid graduating from high school to be able to do calculus and understand Einstein and write poetry and be prepared for success at Harvard.
But we don't live in an ideal world. If you want to actually deny a diploma to a kid who has come to school and passed high school classes for four years, you'd better have a really good case, better than just "I think it would be a real nice idea if our students knew XXXX, so let's put that on the test."
When the fail rates went so high in Wa., they had a dilemma on their hands. They could either lower the test requirements, and deal with the bad P.R. fallout of doing that, or they could make alternate ways for kids to graduate when those kids were never going to be able to pass the Einstein test.
They chose the second option to save face. But they never should have done this dumb test to begin with. Educators are their own worst enemy sometimes.
Agree with your points. That's why I posted the stuff. There are kids who just aren't going to be able to pass a test with certain levels of academic rigor. Regardless of the causes or reasons, they just can't. It was extremely naive wishful thinking for the proponents of the requirement to think that if they gave the schools, parents and students sufficient warning that this was coming, that all would prepare and all would pass.
Great point. It's just not possible to spend your way to achievement, as others in this thread have noted. It takes parents and kids that value the end game of education, in addition to great teachers, curriculum, and facilities....
As a current teacher who student taught at #45 (very surprising) on that list, and am currently teaching at a school in the top 20 of that list, let me say that you are spot on.
In many instances, students cannot fail... no matter what the teacher says or wants, no matter what was earned. If you do not have a certain graduation rate, schools lose funding principals are fired, students attend elsewhere, etc.
SAT scores are ranked in PA in this article. Another indicator of both parent/student and district effort and success... Mine checks in at #10.
http://triblive.com/news/education/...ols-2017-graduates-had-the-highest-sat-scores
http://triblive.com/news/education/...ols-2017-graduates-had-the-highest-sat-scores
Note that the highest ranked school in the state had an average score based on one student.
Yep.
And others are academy's that are not public schools that have to accept students in a geographic area (i.e. a school district).
You are right on the money. The parents make a school great. If the school has a good reputation, then parents who care want their kids to go there. If they care enough to want their kids to go to a good school then they care what the kid does at home and the grades they get.
Because the kids are simply sheparded through regardless of their grades....
You no doubt are a proud member of the PSEA. Is that not a partisan, political organization?
Many do not know the problems afflicting our youth.... there are too many broken families with problems ranging from poverty to drugs and abuse/violence. Occupational therapy is a real need in many urban kindergartens as many kids enter kindergarten without the experience of turning a page in a book.
One thing surprising about this list is the number of districts that have tiny populations. Our high school has 2,800 kids alone, more than many of the districts listed.
One thing surprising about this list is the number of districts that have tiny populations. Our high school has 2,800 kids alone, more than many of the districts listed.
UNC? The kids are obviously taking the wrong classes. Perhaps they should play basketball.
You don't have to be proficient to graduate. These test scores don't have anything to do with graduation rate. You could be in the bottom category for these tests and still do well. Problem is kids don't take the test seriously. At the district I work at we had students in honors classes not be proficient on the PSSA tests. We put them in a remediation class and then the parents got upset. The students said that if they knew that they would be put in a remediation class they would have tried harder on the test.
Someone asked about charter schools and their numbers awhile back -
http://www.mcall.com/news/nationwor...argall-cyber-charter-bill-20170609-story.html
In 2015-16, the latest year available, cyber charter students in the majority of the 14 cyber charters fared worse on state math and reading tests than the statewide average of all public school students. Cyber charters also have a significantly lower graduation rate than the statewide average, according to the state Department of Education. Cyber charters had a cumulative graduation rate average of 47.7 percent in 2015-16. The statewide average is 86.1 percent.
When a republican legislator wants to force failing kids at charters back to their home school you know there's a problem there.
This is from Maine, but is a good representation on how funding private charter schools is a way for taxpayer dollars to go directly to for-profit corporations opening these "schools". When a student goes to one of these charters taxpayer funds follow them to that school and go right into the coffers of said corporation which in turn lobby for pro charter laws i.e. less oversight, less stringent testing / graduation requirements etc.
http://www.mcall.com/news/nationwor...argall-cyber-charter-bill-20170609-story.html
In 2015-16, the latest year available, cyber charter students in the majority of the 14 cyber charters fared worse on state math and reading tests than the statewide average of all public school students. Cyber charters also have a significantly lower graduation rate than the statewide average, according to the state Department of Education. Cyber charters had a cumulative graduation rate average of 47.7 percent in 2015-16. The statewide average is 86.1 percent.
When a republican legislator wants to force failing kids at charters back to their home school you know there's a problem there.
This is from Maine, but is a good representation on how funding private charter schools is a way for taxpayer dollars to go directly to for-profit corporations opening these "schools". When a student goes to one of these charters taxpayer funds follow them to that school and go right into the coffers of said corporation which in turn lobby for pro charter laws i.e. less oversight, less stringent testing / graduation requirements etc.
Cyber charter schools are simply a scam to divert taxpayer dollars to rich investors. Pretty smart on the part of the investors because there will always be a supply of kids who are looking for an easy way out and trying to avoid compulsory attendance laws. Furthermore, statistics prove they have failed in their attempts to educate anyone. Legislators know both of these things to be true but either refuse (caucus leaders - just check who is contributing to their campaigns) or are unable (rank and file legislators) to do anything about it.
Cyber charter schools are nothing but legalized thievery of taxpayer dollars.
Cyber charter schools are nothing but legalized thievery of taxpayer dollars.
REACHER,I was being sarcastic about firing the teachers at these schools.I'm a retired public school teacher (32years)so is my wife (33years).My oldest son is a high school principal in WPA and his wife is an elementary teacher.
I am hopeful your experience is a one-off. Because I have lived in several different parts of the country (mid-atlantic, Midwest, deep South and far west) and have never seen this attitude exhibited by even a small minority of people. Of course, it's possible that MY experience is the one-off.
and conversely North Penn with 50% more test takers than the 2nd highest number school which may be bringing down their avg but an indicator of the expectations of the community?
but add the number of the 3 CB schools and you get a whopping 1300+ and a higher avg score. So does CB have it correct in smaller school pops but more schools? big debate in North Penn country on making a 2nd high school
