An alarming move at S. Philadelphia High
by Helen Gym on Jan 28 2011
The decision to name South Philadelphia High School a Promise Academy is an alarming move for a school community that deserved to go through at least one year without dramatic upheaval and chaos.
Southern arguably started its own turnaround process this past fall – one that was community-driven, supported by new school leadership, and backed by both federal and state agreements about addressing repeated civil rights violations against Asian immigrant youth. Otis Hackney, the school’s principal, had called on his staff to work with him to create a radically different school culture, a school culture that by all accounts has improved immensely.
The naming of South Philadelphia High School as a Renaissance School sends a bewildering message to everyone involved that the school isn’t on the right path after all and that it is the District, not the school, that holds all the right answers.
One of the reasons for concern is the process of this week’s announcement. Despite the active involvement of students, community members, and staff in the work of rebuilding Southern, no one from the District apparently thought it worthwhile to dialogue with either the school or broader community about its intentions. I would assume the decision to make Southern a Promise Academy wasn't made overnight. Yet in multiple recent meetings about how the school would move forward both academically and culturally, not one District official ever made mention of the Promise Academy model.
It’s hard to make sense of why the District moved so urgently. For much of last year the District refused to make administrative changes and stood by disgraced then-principal LaGreta Brown on the basis that students couldn’t afford further instability during the year. One can hardly forget the superintendent’s complaint at around this time last year that South Philadelphia was taking up “a lot of my time.”
Now, at a time when students, staff, and community leaders express confidence and optimism about the school’s progress, the District apparently has its own plans – driven not by the overall health of the school, not by building up a culture which can support academic excellence, not by helping a community heal from years of racial division and abuse, but by test scores. The District’s selective sense of urgency couldn’t be more apparent.
It’s been suggested that this could be a way for new principal Otis Hackney, who will remain in his position, to rebuild his staff. But last year's experience with Renaissance shows that extreme turbulence rules the period between the school's designation and the early part of the following school year. Given the District’s clear knowledge of that reality, it raises serious questions about whether this was the only route the District could have taken at a school that already has teacher site selection.
Other concerns also demand answers:
- Staff and student trainings were supposed to be a major focus of the school year, according to both federal and state settlement agreements around civil rights violations against Asian youth at the school. Those trainings are likely irrelevant now as staff restructures. Isn't this a point of concern, given the settlement agreement reached with federal and state authorities?
- Promise Academies are likely to be under heightened scrutiny to enact the empowerment model curriculum. This is a heavily scripted curriculum often involving whole classrooms with little if any differentiation among students. How will that work in a school like South Philadelphia High that requires skilled and diverse methods to work with the school’s significant immigrant population?
- This year’s analysis of Promise Academies indicates that these schools have a high concentration of new, inexperienced teachers. Is that an appropriate model at a school like South Philadelphia High where violence and racial conflict have driven away plenty of teachers and students? How will the new teacher training program reflect the need for racial and cultural sensitivity and a commitment and familiarity with multiracial dialogue?
At the end of the day, one has to wonder what the District thinks its educational mission is at South Philadelphia High School. For years, groups of students acting often on a mob mentality beat up their fellow classmates based on race – a situation the school and District allowed through “deliberate indifference” so awful it was deemed to constitute “unlawful discrimination” and warrant federal intervention. The problems and resentments still linger among students and staff.
One would hope that when looking at this school, educators would see it through the lens of trying to understand our youth and helping them develop their sense of humanity. Don’t we need some time for our youth to be human with one another, or for us as caring adults, teachers, and mentors to better understand what’s going on with them as people? It’s stunning to think that of all the things this community needs, the District’s determination is that it wants new staff to enforce a generic curriculum so Southern's students can pass a test better.
The District’s "my way or the highway" approach did not bode well for schools like West Philadelphia High, where engaged school communities have worked on reform issues over a period of time. Yet, here we are again with a District barreling through with its version of reform, on its timeline -- all the while cutting off any communication with engaged and deeply invested communities. It’s the height of arrogance and is a huge problem for school communities looking for sustainable – not dramatic – change.
UPDATE: The District issued a statement from the Office of the General Counsel:
"The decision by The School District of Philadelphia to designate South Philadelphia High School a Promise Academy will not interfere with the District's implementation of the settlement agreements reached between the District and the United States Department of Justice and between the District and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission. The District continues to move forward in fulfilling its commitments and obligations in accordance with the terms of the settlements. This includes student and staff trainings scheduled to take place this spring."
Comments (13)
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 08:58.
I have been wondering what would happen if the SDP tried to put Promise Academies in schools where you actually have an active parent group. Because, really, even if your school is "failing"...as a parent do you really think the solution is replacing most of the teachers, knowing that the replacements will likely be brand new inexperienced teachers to the SDP.
I am a philly teacher who used to work at Clemente, before its transformation to a promise academy. From talking to friends still at Clemente and reading the article on it last month, it is laughable when the SDP tells people promise academies are working,
As a frequent reader and poster to this site, your article was one of the best I have read. Really, I just feel all of this pent up frustration you must have. The hallowness and hypocrisy of the SDP, while not stunning, is certainly depressing. The fact that the SDP made no effort to involve the school communties in their plans to me shows how little credibility they have when talking about Imagine 2014, which I quote from here "We hope that literally thousands of stakeholders, from within the District and throughout the community, will continue to help shape Imagine 2014."
So South Philly High, like West Philly High, seems to be making progress....but the SDP is allocating their (very scarce) resources to blow it all up and start over again. I can't be the only person who thinks that one common thread these two schools have are stakeholders willing to go against Ackerman...
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 09:16.
Ackerman lures Hackney back yo Philly, then effectively takes the school from. Ozzie Wright had to leave West because of her micro-management, so what do you think will happen here.
There is a sense among some in the African-American community that Asians have too much power in South Philadelphia, so I doubt that this is any thing more than a power move.
Ackerman is colonizing one school after another and it won't be long before her picture is hanging in the principal's office in each of these schools.
Submitted by Annonymous (not verified) on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 09:28.
So, you're assuming Ackerman is trying to get rid of Hackney and put in an Asian American principal at Southern? Ackerman has shown the utmost disrespect for Asian Americans - in San Francisco and Philadelphia.
West was falling apart because Ackerman removed a popular, effective principal who happen to be African American. Wright was replaced with a joke - John Chapman - who is only good at running anything he touches into the ground.
While I agree Ackerman is "colonizing" schools through micromanagement, threats, and imposed scripted curricula, I don't understand your comment on Asian Americans and "too powerful" in South Philly (or any other part of the city, for that matter.)
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 19:13.
I've heard that there are some who hold the racist belief that Asians are too powerful and so that she wants to make certain that the school is run in a way she sees fit. I don't know if this is true, but her actions in the immediate aftermath suggest that she in not interested in forming alliances with members of the Asian community.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 11:11.
Is anyone suprised that she wants to destroy South Philadelphia High School? For the past year, all of her scandals point back to that school.
First we have her bumbling racist handling of the attacks on Asian students - allowing an innocent student to be framed and kicked out of the school, refusing to meet with the victims, blaming the victims, saying that it was taking up too much of her time, paying a crony ex-judge to create a biased and irrelevant report for $90,000, paying her cronies at Prime Directive $250,000 to do a professional development that was undergraduate level at best, and ultimately having to face the decision of the Justice Department that yes, the School District was at fault and that changes would have to be made. The students were hailed as heroes - how dare they steal her place in the spotlight?
Next, we have the discovery that Lagreta Brown was not a certified principal, which led to the discovery of 16 other principals who were not certified. Why hire Lagreta if she wasn't certified? Well, Lagreta, Evelyn Sample Oates(former communications officer) and countless other $100,000+ salaried employees are all members of Ackerman's sorority.
Next, the security camera scandal where she threw millions of dollars at IBS, owned by yet another crony of people in her inner circle (Boozer was involved in an organization w/Evelyn Sample Oate's husband). Where were the cameras installed? You guessed it - South Philadelphia High School.
The fact that she still holds her position as the head of the school district is baffling, Reconstituting South Philadelphia with no community input, handing Audenreid over to Universal Companies, home of the United Muslim Movement, with no community input may be her last power grabs before she is forced out by the new governor.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 12:29.
Not to mention the white South Philly teacher, William Aiken, who had tried to warn LaGreta Brown of the impending attack only to be condemned by the bigot Brown. He ended up in a rubber room in the regional office for his efforts and is now suing the district. How about the black aide who physically put herself into between one of the Asian kids and a black attacker? For her act of courage she was laid off. You'd think Ackerman would have tried to play this up, but instead Ackerman seems to have viewed this brave woman as a traitor.
Submitted by Anon and anon (not verified) on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 14:07.
Who is strong and brave and connected enough to lead the movement to get Ackerman and her posse out of power? Whoever steps up to do this would find a legion of angry parents and teachers at their disposal.
Submitted by Veteran of WPHS "Renaissance" (not verified) on Sat, 01/29/2011 - 15:14.
Welcome to the Renaissance, Helen. You sound so refreshingly naive with your righteous indignation about the community not being consulted. I was there once. West had a community process going, but she crushed it. The SAC had no power and she made sure that it could have no input. Any pretense of community involvement in the Renaissance process even last year when that was supposed to be the hallmark, what distinguished school takeovers in her Imagine 2014 plan from the diverse provider/privatization model of the previous era -- forget about it this time around. A hollow slogan. The earlier comment that anyone or any setting that seems as if it might not rubber stamp the Ackerman way is crushed - yes. How does she do it? Decisions behind closed doors, planning as you go, meeting with individuals and making things up so that she pits one part of the community against another to break down whatever solidarity or incipient solidarity there might have been. And you are completely right when you note that the constant change is destructive. This whole turnaround thing -- superficial solutions to complicated situations. Wish I could think of something to do about it --
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 01/31/2011 - 09:57.
These changes are being made to other schools as well. What becomes of the community as a whole? Ackerman and the SRC have made economic decisions driven from their horrendous mismanagement practices. The companies taking over these buildings are based on profit. Profit based institutions will exit the premises if monetary goals are not met. That isn't education and certainly not beneficial to students. Next year the district will propagate increased PSSA scores with supporting "data". Well of course data will improve! They have eliminated schools reflecting poorly on their data driven system! Our community is not data, they are humans with tremendous personal needs. Acknowledge and address basic needs and positive educational growth will be a future biproduct. But never forget, it is the teachers fault. Right?
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 01/31/2011 - 11:41.
South Philly is a failing school, a drop out factory. Why are folks concerned with changes that might include shutting this factory down. I am a long time resident of the city who loves the city. I want the the city and its community to be great however South Philly Drop-Out HIgh contributes to the destruction of the community. Why continue to support it? Don't make this a personal attack on Ackerman or the principal thats not fair.
Also the reality is that any superintendent in Philly will be greatly criticized because the problems are so large that good solutions are hard to come by. Of all the criticism from pessimist I have not heard any ideas that are free of controversy. People are good at identifying the problems and poor at helping to solve it.
Submitted by Helen Gym on Tue, 02/01/2011 - 14:10.
Whil I understand the general sentiment behind this comment, you are wrong on one front: the communities and people who identified the problems at South Philadelphia High School have been directly involved in achieving the turnaround at the school. Any sustainable turnaround effort requires the full engagement of staff and communities at the school. This has been reinforced not only by practical experience but by multiple academic studies. The District's move is hardly "controversial." The top-down authoritarian approach that cuts out communities is a typical move by an administration that failed to learn from past mistakes (see Vare Middle School, West Philadelphia HS, and the entire EMO experiment).
Submitted by Garth (not verified) on Thu, 02/17/2011 - 12:06.
I went to the Facilies Master Plan session last week at South Philly High, and I learned some important things from the presentations. South Philly is huge, it's built for 2,200 kids but currently has only about 900 students. There's a bunch of huge, underutilized high schools around the district, some of which are only about 33% to 50% full. I'm a Masterman parent, which isn't a large school but has tons of students so it's currently over-capacity by about 300 kids. There are public schools in NE Philly that are currently 50% over-capacity. I'm curious what everybody thinks will happen to the over-capacity schools in the Master Plan. Will the School District try to move some of the excess capacity into a school nearby that's way underutilized? I'm not sure about that but it seemed as if the District & its contractor on this project are considering that possibility.
Submitted by Helen Gym on Thu, 02/17/2011 - 12:24.
The District is in a difficult place as a result of a host of decisions made over the years, and in particular a host of decisions delayed over the years.
If you are solely looking at capacity which is the weakness of hiring a real estate assessment company to lead your facilities management plan - then yeah, you'll look at consolidations. But if you receognize other factors that schools serve - neighbor hub, community center, small learning community, specialized programs - then you might consider other ways of addressing the facilities burden within schools. I would check out recent posts on school closings and the notebook's editorial in the Daily News about school closings for a fuller picture on how to look at schools and facilities.
Post new comment