Mapping the Renaissance Schools
by Erika Owens on Feb 12 2010
All Renaissance Eligible and Alert Schools are mapped out below. Red markers are Eligible and blue ones are Alert.
Each school name links to the profile for that school with a fact sheet of school data, some of it relevant to the School Performance Index that was used to determine which schools are on these lists.
The schools are geographically concentrated in a swath running across West Philadelphia, through North Philly and into Kensington. Large portions of the Northeast, Northwest Philly, and South Philadelphia have no targeted schools
Also, we created a couple of maps last year, and would like to do more. Please let us know if there is anything else you'd like to see mapped out, or if you'd like to help.
Comments (19)
Submitted by Erika Owens on Fri, 02/12/2010 - 13:55.
In case you want more maps, I created another Google map of the schools. That one didn't turn out as nicely--it doesn't color code the pinpoints by type of school, it doesn't include a link to the data sheets, and it doesn't tell you in the bubble if it's Alert or Eligible. But, the big benefit with that map is that if you are logged into your Google account, you can view it and other maps at the same time.
In my personal account I was looking at it with this census data map turned on too. Really interesting when you can see different layers of information together. I just couldn't figure out how to save it so that I could share that easily with everyone.
If you have any trouble accessing these, let me know and I'll try to help troubleshoot. Also, if anyone would like to help me update this map so it has all those elements that are missing now, please let me know and I'll add you as a collaborator. Thanks!
Submitted by http://adrianart.com/ (not verified) on Thu, 03/21/2013 - 21:35.
“Reply to comment | Philadelphia Public School Notebook” was
indeed a incredibly good blog, . Keep posting and I am going to continue
reading! Thanks -Emma
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 02/12/2010 - 13:59.
Thanks for this map. I would be interested in seeing how the location of these Renaissance Schools relates to areas that are experiencing a dramatic increase in home prices. In Chicago, the schools "turned around" by their Renaissance 2010 plan were in neighborhoods that the city was actively trying to gentrify/develop for a higher income class of people. That is, the schools plan was linked with a process of displacing long-time working class communities of color in "hot" neighborhoods. Is this similar to Philadelphia?
Submitted by Erika Owens on Fri, 02/12/2010 - 14:05.
Yes, you commented just as I was leaving my comment above. That census map I mentioned includes housing data. It is from 2000 and doesn't include housing prices, but it's one way to get at the topic.
I just looked in Google's directory of maplets, and didn't see anything about Philly housing prices there. But I wouldn't be surprised if such a map does exist, and yes, I found a heat map of housing prices. What I'm still learning is--how do we pull that heat map and the Renaissance Schools map on the same shareable page? I'm not sure how to do that, but at least you can eyeball the comparison.
Submitted by Paul Socolar on Fri, 02/12/2010 - 19:49.
While gentrification is certainly a huge issue in parts of Philadelphia, my sense is that the dynamics are pretty different from Chicago, and that the intensity of redevelopment activity is not as great. Look at both the neighborhoods and the demographics of the potential Renaissance Schools in Philly and I think you mostly see neighborhoods and schools with the most concentrated poverty in the city... no surprise that those would be the schools to turn up on a list of the bottom tenth of schools on performance indicators.
I should also point out that activists here challenged the Renaissance plan in its early stages, based on the experience of Chicago, and got firm commitments from District leaders that Renaissance Schools would serve the same populations, rather than close and reopen with different students as happened in Chicago's "Renaissance."
My take is that this is yet another round in the decades-long "school reform" saga, trying to make changes in the District's most impoverished schools ... that the main issue is not gentrification, but figuring out what is a viable and respectful process for school change in communities that previously have never been consulted in one reform wave after another. The Notebook's editorial stance is that mandating the removal of the entire staff and making them reapply is not the way to go, nor is that kind of mandate respectful of the communities at these schools
Submitted by Annonymous (not verified) on Sat, 02/13/2010 - 07:44.
Okay, but why so many within Univ of Penn / CHOP territory? Penn set up Penn Alexander and property values doubled over night. Now, Penn Alexander's catchment includes houses which go for $500,000. Houses within Penn's "52nd street boundary" (where they subsidize employees to buy houses) go for over $200,000 when, before Penn put its "boundary" into effect in 1996, the houses went for $30,000. (Yes, housing prices have risen all over but not like the Penn catchment area.) Besides a brand new building, Penn Alexander has far more resources and opportunities for its students than almost any other Philly school. Will this happen now from 34th and Market to 63rd and Market?
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 02/12/2010 - 20:50.
Curiously enough...most of the schools listed are within blocks of colleges or hospitals. Could it be that Ackerman is planning to sell off some properties to "fix" the budget? Is there a little extra for Arlene if she "finds money" a wee bit faster than the last guy?
The Renaissance has never been about the kids...it has sadly been about the cash....
Submitted by Paul Socolar on Fri, 02/12/2010 - 21:43.
At this point the District is on record saying that none of the schools in question will close - that was a demand made strongly by Philadelphia Student Union and other critics of the Renaissance plan last winter and spring, and that stance appears to be embedded in the plan. The commitment to keep these schools open is repeated again and again in District documents and statements about Renaissance Schools.
Submitted by Daniel Jones (not verified) on Fri, 02/12/2010 - 21:05.
Hey everyone, I've been doing some mapping of my own, and while it isn't anything totally conclusive, when you map the Renaissance eligible schools on top of a map showing median home sale price change (in percent) from 1999-2007 broken down by census tract, you do see that 10 of the 14 schools are in tracts or adjacent to tracts in the top 25% in terms of value growth. Again, I need to do a lot more research, but it is an interesting initial finding.
If anyone is interested in seeing the map just send me an email- drjones18@gmail.com
Submitted by Paul Socolar on Fri, 02/12/2010 - 21:48.
Seems like there are two competing explanations of the map in these comments, which shows clearly that the schools are in some neighborhoods and not others.
One is that the District put schools on the list because of an interest in redeveloping neighborhoods that are or could be in transition. Another is that the District actually used a formula to determine which are the lowest performing schools, and that they end up concentrated in the most impoverished neighborhoods of the city.
Is there any way to reconcile these two views?
Submitted by Annonymous (not verified) on Sat, 02/13/2010 - 08:38.
The one school which is "out" of the hospital / university area is Smedley. This is my neighborhood school. It has numerous problems but so are Harding and Jones (middle schools). Why not a cluster by Smedley? Some schools are near Temple and a cluster in Kensington or west of Temple (e.g. Potter-Thomas, Clemente, Stetson) Why the concentration near Penn (two high schools - one will be brand new and the other newer than most schools and scheduled for major renovations). Did Penn have a hand in the selection process? Temple wants to build a high school? Is part of the agreement that is has more say over the feeder schools? (Meade, I believe, is already under Temple).
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 02/14/2010 - 14:33.
Meade was a Temple Partnership school, but this year and last have not been.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 02/16/2010 - 12:57.
There is another issue about these Renaissance schools that I have not seen addressed. A friend of mine lives near a person who runs a charter school program. THAT person told my friend that he was already promised certain schools, or at least one BEFORE these supposed independent evaluations take place. It seems clear that the District has no intention of actually considering the option of retaining control of any of these schools (fewer teachers under union contracts make for a weaker union), and the "evaluations," which are only supposed to be two days per school anyway, are even more of a joke than they appeared. I am curious if anyone knows any more about this.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 02/16/2010 - 14:27.
I can't speak specifically to this exchange, but I do know that at one of the early "community meetings" about the Imagine 2014 plan held at the HS of the Future back in 2009, one of the members of the Board of Directors from Mastery Charter stood up and told the room that Vallas had promised Mastery 10 schools, and that they were willing to pay millions of dollars for them. Considering that Mastery Charter was one of Secretary of Education Arne Duncan's model examples for Race to the Top turnaround/turnover, it seems pretty likely that this and other CMOs already are lined up to get the schools that they want.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 02/16/2010 - 23:44.
There are also rumors that KIPP has been promised a high school as well, which suggests that the community input is in name only, and the decisions have been made about who will be running these schools.
Submitted by Bobbie Cratchit (not verified) on Tue, 02/16/2010 - 20:44.
The position of location in relation to the selection process of the Eligible and Alert schools should be a concern to many. The question has been asked here before. Why were schools located near Penn(Wilson-Made AYP), Temple(Meade-Missed AYP one year), East Falls (Mifflin-Made AYP) selected to be on the list when schools like Clymer (Corrective Action Year 7) on the wrong side of Broad Sreet or Thomas Holme (Corrective Action 2 Year 3) in the Far Northeast not considered? AYP has been the State's standard for determining a school's achievement yet the district makes up a convoluted (by design?) formula-SPI-and schools meeting the AYP requirements don't make the cut? I am sorry, it doesn't make sense. Unless there is another motive. It may be location. Have we considered that theses schools might NOT be closing as Paul suggests above, maybe they will become Charter schools, which the district HAS committed to doing. It would be an attractive incentive for relocated employees at Temple, Penn to offer their children Charters instead of the (dreaded) neighborhood school. I have read the lengthy discussions on Ron Whitehorn's blog (http://www.thenotebook.org/blog/102197/breakfast-meade-school) regarding Meade and it has the support of many educators and community partners. It seems to be a school that is defining change in a low resource neighborhood, yet the school is on alert. Something is not right with this...thanks for your map Erika, it's been a real eye opener!
Submitted by Anonymous on Tue, 02/16/2010 - 23:47.
I agree with you in that I think Ackerman decided which schools she wanted on the list and then made the numbers fit. To my knowledge the data behind the final number assigned to each school has not been released to anyone to confirm the numbers add up the way they say they do. I teach at Wilson which is currently a "Penn-assisted school" which is very different from the relationship between Penn and Penn Alexander and an Alert school which made AYP for several years in a row. I honestly don't think the concentration of schools in West Philly has to do with Penn this time. The way the district people or the hired consultants (coming in to evaluate the school) have treated the people from Penn who work with the school does not make me think the district has any interest in developing a stronger relationship/partnership with Penn. And that is putting it extremely mildly. And the people from Penn did not know we were on the list ahead of time.
Some folks who have been teachers much longer than I commented when they saw the list that Ackerman must have it in for Wiley (SW Regional Superintendent) because of how many schools are in the southwest region. I don't know anything about that, but I do believe it is possible that some of the decisions were personal.
It would also be interesting to look at the placement of the schools in relationship to public transportation. Wilson is extremely accessible by public transit and the schools near Penn and Temple are also. Looking at Charter Schools on a map, public transit clearly plays a large role in the selection of sites for charters so if the plan is to turn schools into charters that would be an important feature.
Submitted by Annonymous (not verified) on Wed, 02/17/2010 - 06:32.
While I would not put it past Ackerman to make vindictive decisions - she does this repeatedly by either "passing the buck" (e.g. South Philly High) or firing those who don't puppet her message (e.g. PR staff who were "dismissed") - I don't think she is necessarily targeting the SW Region because of the administration. Yes, Ms. Wiley has a long history in the SDP - Ackerman appears to resent institutional memory - but there are also so-called "Vanguard" schools in SW Region.
I assume one reasons schools were picked because of the institutions which could be drawn on for support (like Penn and Temple) and also can be turned around quickly. If Ackerman is going to make her mark - other than the disasters she has already created - she wants quick results. If she doesn't get quick results, as usual, Ackerman will blame the school staff and not her staff/self.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 02/17/2010 - 21:37.
I got my words switched up before. Penn Alexander is a Penn-Assisted School and Wilson and Lea are Penn Partnership Schools.
I wasn't trying to say that Wiley really is a target, just raise the issue of personalities and organizational politics as another possible explanation for some of these decisions that seem random.
I haven't been in the backrooms and what not, so certainly do not know for sure, but I have only seen Ackerman act to reduce Penn's role in the schools they currently work with. While I'd believe CDC's with close ties to Penn are involved, for once I don't think Penn's behind this one.
Post new comment