<p>
</p>
<p>And obviously the school took up the slack when needed for a parent’s function - the point is that the parent role needs to be filled. I just don’t get the argument that you don’t need home involvement - sure, you can substitute for it, but unnecessary? Not so, from my 16 years experience in public education.</p>
<p>Nope. The school does not pretend to fill the shoes of the parents. The school delivers the necessary education and does not make excuses for its shortcomings.</p>
<p>How is making sure there are “candid photos” for the senior page an academic task?</p>
<p>Does the school ever advance lunch money if the student’s “responsible adult” fails to do so? (My public school stopped doing that this year because of our budget crunch.). Does the school follow up on attendance issues? Where is that line between parent responsibility and academics, exactly?</p>
<p>What is the point here? The absence of candid photos simply confirmed that not all parent could or wanted to spend time on the school grounds. And that this absence did not preclude the students to receive an education and do well.</p>
<p>This is in direct contrast to the opinion that a school cannot be competitive or simply doing its JOB without the involvement or tangible support of the parents. The same type of opinion that fuels the notion that the responsibility of the education process falls onto the parents and not the educators.</p>
<p>Again, this is all about the primary responsibility of providing the schooling and the responsibility to do it reasonably well.</p>
<p>The point is that there IS more to a student’s education than providing academic instruction - and that JOB requires more than most schools are able to provide. And this Chicago school is hoping to improve its students’ education with this program.</p>
<p>CPS is so god awful. Rahm Emanuel did nothing but make it worse.</p>
<p>I Live in Chicago and have kids in the school system. Massmomm #77 totally gets what this is about except that we won’t know the effect until it is tried - no need to be so pessimistic. Rahm Emanuel has done more for the school system in two years than the previous administrations did in 20 years including this initiative which doesn’t cost the taxpayers anything since the cards were donated. Our mayor is an impatient man and the conversation probably went like this:
CPS Admin: Low income parents don’t come in to pick up report cards and therefore don’t see teachers and then complain when the report card comes home at the end of the semester and say that we “didn’t do anything”
Rahm: if we gave them $25 (via a gift card) would they come in?
CPS Admin: Yes, many probably would, that’s a lot of money for many parents.
Rahm: (Already on the phone with CEO at Walgreens) OK, we have gift cards coming for 70 schools - do a pilot project and report back to me. Next problem?</p>
<p>That’s probably how it went down. Fixing CPS requires impatience, not a lot of hand wringing and blaming poverty which will not be fixed in the short or medium term if ever.</p>
<p>I liken this program to situations where a parent attempts to bribe a child to get good grades, or stay with a sport or extra-curricular activity that they deem worthy. It may work in the short run but never works in the long run.</p>
<p>This is a link to s story of a recent kid who was determined to get a quality public school education.[Public</a> school success story - Joel Vargas - Going from public school to Yale](<a href=“http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/crimelaw/columns/classaction/9264/]Public”>Public school success story - Joel Vargas - Going from public school to Yale - Nymag)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I answer in reverse order. The private boys school takes all responsibility for academics. The school makes its rules VERY clear, there is no problem with attendance because if the student doesn’t attend he is OUT. The relationship is between the boy/student and the school. For more than one student the arrangement to get him from his neighborhood to the school (which is 3/4 mile from where former Pres. Bush now lives) involved riding the bus across town.</p>
<p>There are full scholarship kids who receive their uniforms (mandatory) free. The student has the responsibility to come to school in (a clean) uniform, per the rules. If the scholarship student participates in a sport and cannot afford the appropriate uniform and shoes, that comes out of that sport’s budget. Lunch is included in the tuition so a full scholarship boy eats lunch. </p>
<p>So, “the deal” between the school and the boy is that the boy is responsible for getting to school on time in a clean uniform, the school provides the academics. Parents may or may not assist in getting the boy there on time and in a clean uniform, but it is up to the boy even if they don’t.</p>
<p>One active alum is Tommy Lee Jones. His dad was an oilfied worker from a hardscrabble rural area 150+ miles outside of Dallas who had a windfall one year (he got a share of a well) and used it to pay for one year at the private as a boarder (an option no longer offered). Full scholarship after that year until he graduated. Need based scholarship to Harvard to graduate cum laude.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No doubt, but for the public school student who makes the effort, is he or she getting a quality academic instruction/education? If not, why not?</p>
<p>07Dad - It may seem like the school is taking full responsibility for the education, but the reality of the situation is if kids couldn’t get themselves to school or do what the school ask of them then they are OUT. Public schools do not have that luxury. They have to look after those kids who do NOT get themselves to school on time or bother to do their homework. I am sure a lot of those kids at the private you mentioned have their parents make sure they actually get to the school on time, because those boys do not magically get to the school by themselves. Even if those boys seem very responsible and put education at a priority, guess where they got their values? The relationship isn’t just between the school and student. It never is.</p>
<p>I bet you if you were to open a school like that in Newark, NJ, you’ll get a group of students to sign up, and you’ll probably leave 90% of students behind.</p>
<p>My question to you and xiggi is if a population of kids do not want education then should we just forget about them? You know, it is easy to teach when kids want to learn.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I have wondered what the ramifications are in troubled school districts, for students who do not get to school on time. At our public schools, most students live within walking distance (altho most of them are also driven to school, or take the school bus). There are disciplinary actions taken for tardies, like after 3, the student must attend Saturday detention, and there are escalating actions after that, culminating in expulsion. Do these schools not enforce tardy violations in order to deter them? It seems to me that finding the proper deterrent to unacceptable behavior would be pretty important at these schools.</p>
<p>Bay - I would imagine that’s what the administrator and teachers spend most of their time doing. Those kids probably are happy to be expelled, especially if there is no supervision at home or any disciplin at home.</p>
<p>When I say, “expelled,” I mean they may no longer attend that particular school, but they are still required by law to attend (another) school; they don’t get to stay home. Our district has an “alternative” high school, that I don’t really know the particulars about, other than that it is where many of the “problem” students end up.</p>
<p>I guess I meant more like suspension, few days at home.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oldfort, although I have posted plenty on this precise subject, allow me to state again that our attention should really be directed who do not “want” an education, or at least are categorized at such by our system. I would also add that I am convinced that few people fall in the “do not want” an education but many have been so hopelessly left behind that this attitude permeates their actions. </p>
<p>Fwiw, I do agree that it is easy to teach the kids who want to learn … and why debating how the successful fare is not really important. Most --if not all-- of our attention should be directed to the ones who do not fare well, the abject percentage of children who dropout or graduate with a very low level of literacy and no marketable skills. </p>
<p>I also want to make clear that the school system cannot be held responsible for curing the multiple social and economical deficiencies that plague our country. This is the other coin of simply blaming the failing education to the parents. The issue here is that there are failed responsibilities at all levels, but also a real need to set aside the sea of excuses that is coming from our educators. </p>
<p>On a personal note, I have always written about the need to evaluate our system of public education through a lens focused on the … bottom 25 percent, and never refrained to criticize the organized segregation of the “schools within a school” and the excessive focus (and resource spending) on the AP/IB boondoggle. It is not that WE should forget about the lower performing classes, it is that it is exactly what the service providers do. Our system is based on matching the best students (the easy to teach) with the … best and better paid teachers (as a result of seniority and tenure.) One might think that our best resources directed at the most at risk students could lift all boats, as opposed to mimic the Titanic evacuation. </p>
<p>For the record, I have been blessed --and I say this with total candor-- to be educated at some of the finest schools in the country, and especially during my formative years. But not as blessed as having the opportunity to be part of an education system that is as different as one could imagine from the one I shared with 07Dad’s son. I have been part of a system that had little to no parental involvement (with many not speaking any English) and where students were expected to contribute their own (modest) tuition and … show up with clean uniforms. I have posted a link to the Cristo Rey story … to give you a hint. </p>
<p>My overall conclusions remain the same. We have learned to accept the excuses and consider the fingerpointing to the victims of the system as the norm. The cynics among us might say that the system works as intended as some are not recuperable and the rest is destined to a WalMart job. I would like to think that the vast resources of this country could and should permit us to do a lot better, and that we can break the vicious circles, and replace them with virtuous circles based on … education. </p>
<p>And that starts with ending the practice to … forget about the hard to educate.</p>
<p>State law (Texas Education Code Section 25.085) provides that if a student is absent from school without parental consent for any portion of the school day for three days in a four-week period or for ten or more days in a six-month period, the student and the students parent or legal guardian are subject to prosecution by the Justice of the Peace Courts or Municipal Courts. The student may also be referred to a juvenile court.</p>
<p>In my state, the parent has exposure if the kid is a repeat truant.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>xiggi can answer for himself. Unless the numbers are bogus, Texas has a pretty good record on avoiding (diminishing) drop-outs. [Texas</a> Education Agency - Dropout Information](<a href=“http://www.tea.state.tx.us/index4.aspx?id=3505]Texas”>http://www.tea.state.tx.us/index4.aspx?id=3505) On the other hand, using SAT scores (an iff-ish proposition) the end product isn’t all that great. But, the reality is that public school districts that cover predominately wealthy areas provide college prep level education (Highland Park ISD comes to mind). That’s one place where “involved” parents come in. They donate, raise money, provide non-academic assistance.</p>
<p>Also, Texas law provides money for the talented and gifted students at public schools. Many school districts use this money for carve out programs within the school. That provides some means to teach/service the student according to interest/ability.</p>
<p>In defense of 'the godfather" as the mayor is called, he is doing what he can, and he is attempting to prioritize education for the kids in the city. I actually went to high school with Rahm, and I know he is desperately trying to make sure every kid has access to a quality education. It is a shame the teachers union is being so unbelievably uncooperative. The one thing we have that we could give an underpriveledged kid to change his/her life would be access to a high quality education. I think the mayor will never quit trying for that given where he came from and what he knows this can mean. I applaud his efforts.</p>
<p>That would be the ‘Rahm-father’ to us, poetgrl… :)</p>
<p>I agree with Emanuel coming onboard as problem-solver and have fingers crossed that he can make headway in this city that is rife with corruption & graft. Understand that I was not a fan of his at all when he was with the administration, but he grew up here, has a passion for this gig, and weighs every situation carefully. It probably just about killed him to capitulate to the union, but it was the only way out at this time. And he will bide his time to get back at Karen Lewis. What’s that phrase? “Revenge is best served cold.”</p>
<p>He knows that a societal breakdown caused by many factors is the reason for so many subperforming public schools, which is why he is championing the charters. I am with him on this strategy.</p>
<p>SerenityJade,</p>
<p>Did that Freakanomics experiment work?</p>
<p>I was just going to remark that having a dead beat parent show up for a $25 gift card tells me one thing - they want the gift card.</p>