Confidential document lists dozens of possible closings, consolidations
by thenotebook on Jun 25 2011 Posted in Latest news
by Benjamin Herold and Dale Mezzacappa
District officials have identified more than 20 schools as prime targets for closure next year, according to a confidential document (part 1, 2, 3, 4) obtained by the Notebook and authenticated by a District spokesperson.
For months, District officials have declared that they were not far enough along in their planning to share school-specific recommendations with the public. But the comprehensive 35-page "options report," dated March 18, details a preliminary but sweeping strategy based around 84 possible action steps including school closures, consolidations, boundary changes, and grade reconfigurations.
For instance, in the heart of North Philadelphia, where student enrollment has been steadily declining, Benjamin Franklin High and up to eight elementary schools have all been identified as potential closure targets. In South Philadelphia, Furness High School along with Nebinger and E.M. Stanton elementary schools could all be shut down. The report recommends that South Philadelphia High School be demolished and replaced with a smaller building.
Despite the report’s obvious significance and a request from Mayor Nutter for "all documents and studies relating to the District's facilities master plan," the District did not include it among the materials sent to City Hall on June 15. The mayor's request was part of a new educational accountability agreement among the city, state and District.
That agreement specifically states that the District should provide any "proposed school site closure list" and "all reports generated by outside consultants.” Both categories would clearly seem to apply to this document, which was prepared by the URS Corporation, a District consultant on the facilities master plan.
The mayor's press secretary, Mark McDonald, said he could not comment on the document or why it was not included in the materials provided by the District. It is unclear if the mayor's office was aware of the report's existence when it made a request for documents on June 5 and signed the accountability agreement on June 9.
The District issued a statement on Friday reiterating that the recommendations are by no means final and are likely to change before being made public and sent to the School Reform Commission for action. That is now scheduled for October.
On Saturday, spokesperson Elizabeth Childs released a stronger statement, saying it would be “misleading” to make the document public “as it does not reflect the District’s current thinking on feasible options.” She also said that school officials are in “constant communication” with the mayor’s office and City Council. But she did not directly respond to a question about why the document was withheld from the materials sent to City Hall.
Contrary to the official statement, a source who is familiar with the report and the District's internal discussions described many of the District's proposals as “very close” to final.
“It is an options list, not a final closure list,” said the source, who did not want to be identified for fear of reprisal. “But the decisions for next year that would be announced in October are pretty solid.”
Regardless of the ultimate choices, the document’s sheer magnitude provides a compelling look into the massive changes in store for neighborhoods across the city and the schools that have long been their anchors.
As part of its facilities master planning process, the District is trying to realign its physical plant to the new demographic realities of a city that has been experiencing dramatic population shifts, declining numbers of school-age residents, and an ongoing exodus of students to charters. Its goal is to shed 35,000 empty seats in closed and underutilized school buildings.
When so many school closings are anticipated, there is no good time to break the news to those who will be most affected. But so far, the District has chosen to play its cards close to the vest.
In the winter and spring, for example, it held three rounds of community meetings without sharing any information at all about specific schools. And the District's timeline for unveiling the final set of closings and other actions assures that the public discussion sticks to the bare minimum allowed by state law before an official school closing vote - three months.
Although it is now clear that the dozens of school closing possibilities in this document had been proposed and vetted in March, none were included in a set of facilities recommendations made to the SRC on April 7. A likely reason for delaying any specific closure recommendations was that the District hoped to ensure that parents and City Council members would support its efforts to win additional funding rather than protest plans to close local schools. City Council on Thursday passed a temporary property tax increase that will provide the bulk of $53 million in new funds to help the cash-strapped District close its staggering $629 million budget gap.
When told by a reporter about the confidential document, a handful of Council members had varied reactions.
Councilman-at-Large Bill Green - one of the District's most vocal critics - said it was "disturbing" that the list had not already been shared with Council and the Nutter administration.
"If this document was not included in what they gave the administration, then that's a serious problem,” said Green. “The whole reason an accountability agreement exists is because the people involved don't trust each other. And the first set of documents that are delivered don't include something that was specifically requested? That's a real problem."
But Councilwoman Blondell Reynolds Brown, who was instrumental in securing the property tax increase for the District, had no problem with the document being kept under wraps until it is completely finished.
"It seems an appropriate thing to do,” said Brown. “These are sensitive decisions. …You can't throw bombs out there when the final decisions haven't been made."
Undeniably, the report contains a list of possible recommendations that are likely to be controversial.
The proposals are divided into six geographic planning areas and are listed as “options.” In some cases, more than one possibility is suggested.
At least 18 elementary and middle schools are being looked at for possible closing, some next year and some the year after. Among them:
-
Blankenburg
-
Drew
-
Dunbar
-
Fitler
-
Gideon
-
Harrison
-
L.P. Hill
-
Levering
-
Nebinger
-
Overbrook Elementary
-
T.M. Peirce
-
Pepper
-
Shaw
-
Sheppard
-
Sheridan West
-
E.M. Stanton
-
Waring
-
A. Wilson
There could also be big changes to the city’s high schools. Among those slated for possible closure are:
-
S.A. Douglas
-
FitzSimons
-
Benjamin Franklin
-
Furness (with students sent to South Philadelphia)
-
Philadelphia Military Academy at Leeds (or the Academy at Elverson)
-
Randolph Skills Center (with students sent to Dobbins)
-
Rhodes
-
Robeson (with students sent to Sayre)
Schools that could see new buildings include South Philadelphia and University City, and Meade and Reynolds in North Philadelphia could be replaced by a single new school.
On paper, many of the proposed actions appear logical. But each school has its own story.
E.M. Stanton, a small school at 17th and Christian streets in South Philadelphia that was targeted for closure in 2003, has an active local community that raised money and recruited volunteers for an arts program and tutoring. Through partnerships, local artists come in to offer drama, dance, music, and visual arts. Plus, its test scores put it among the highest-performing schools in the city with a predominantly low-income African American population. Recently, more middle class residents moving into the neighborhood have started looking at Stanton as an option.
“Stanton is truly a turnaround school,” said Susan Kettell, a member of Bainbridge House, a faith-based community near the school and a former Stanton teacher who has helped build up the arts program. “Nine years ago, we weren’t doing so well, but now we’ve made [federal learning goals] for eight years in a row. I am surprised why they would want to mess with a school that is succeeding. It blows your mind.”
Some suggestions affecting popular magnet schools like Science Leadership Academy, which is now located in expensive rented space, could also prove politically daunting. One possibility has it moving to a closed middle school building in Grays Ferry, away from its Center City location and farther away from the Franklin Institute, with which it is partnered.
Another recommendation would limit the popular magnet program within Northeast High to just Northeast residents. Still another would downgrade Constitution High School, now a citywide admission school affiliated with the National Constitution Center, to a program within another school. Constitution is in a rented space near 7th and Market.
As details emerge about what the District is considering, stakeholders are likely to have strong feelings about how the actions will impact their schools. But thus far, the District has largely avoided seeking out the kind of community input that could lead to deeper understanding of each school and its neighborhood – and result in the type of buy-in that could ultimately help its plans succeed.
“The community has to start to grapple with this,” said the source familiar with the report's recommendations. “The conversation has to start to happen or we’re going to miss the opportunity to ‘rightsize’ the District.”
Patrick Kerkstra of PlanPhilly and Notebook editor Paul Socolar contributed reporting.
This story is the product of a reporting partnership on the facilities master plan between the Notebook and PlanPhilly.
Comments (181)
Submitted by Large_and_In_Charge (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 00:02.
Did anyone see the report on FOX 29 tonight? Ackerman is in negotiations with the SRC to get out of her contract... Hopefully, she take Nunery with her! The only one with any sense in her cabinet is poor Nixon... Hanna can go too because all he is, is a yes man and his only value is rounding out her administrative team so she can say she had some diversity amongst her three academic Associate Superintendents - an African American one (Nixon), a Hispanic/Latino one (Hanna), and a Caucasian one (Weiner, who by the way, is no more).
It is an abhorrence that someone who is not a certified educator can reign as Deputy Superintendent of Schools. Last time I checked, it was State law and a PDE regulation that a Superintendent had to hold a Superintendent's Letter of Eligibility, which according to the Public School Code requires six years of teaching experience...
As we continue to fight the District not being allowed to violate the CBA, let us also protest this... What do City Council, Mayor Nutter, Sec't. Tomalis, and Gov. Corbett have to say about that? While Ackerman is gone, she has left Nunery in charge. No decision he makes can be considered legitimate because he is not properly certificated; it is the same principle as when the Principals who had invalid or lapsed Principal's Certificates were rating teachers -- it was not permitted to stand and the evaluations got thrown out. If Ackerman can leave any old Joe in charge while she's gone, or for that matter allow him to be a Deputy Superintendent, over properly certified and experienced Associate Superintendents and others, then she might as well take the next homeless person she finds outside of 440 inside the building and tell them they can be in charge too...
I'll say it again -- WHEN ACKERMAN GOES, SHE CAN TAKE NUNERY, AND THEN NIXON CAN BE MADE ACTING SUPERINTENDENT AND ALL THE WARS CAN STOP BECAUSE SHE IS AN ADMINISTRATOR WHO IS TRULY ABOUT THE TEACHERS, STAFF, AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, THE KIDS!
#I'mJustSayin'
Submitted by SocialStudies (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 07:02.
I can't seem to find a link to this story on MyFoxPhilly.com.....
Submitted by Annonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 07:48.
Nixon lied to reporters about the Moffett case. She will lie about anything. We need a "clean house" - get rid of all of Ackerman's cronies and start over.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 11:13.
Penny Nixon was horrible in the Renaissance School meetings. What this post tells me is that she has ambitions (the fur coat that she wore to our school-based meeting could have told me that) and wants folks to start rooting for her as a replacement. No thanks.
Submitted by Large_and_In_Charge (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 14:52.
You probably don't like her because she's an African American female. If she had been anything else, or a man even, I'm sure your position would be different.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 15:51.
Could it be that you like her because she is an African American woman? When will people stop throwing the race card out there?
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 08:52.
well said!
Submitted by Annonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 16:34.
Nixon has chosen to represent Ackerman's agenda. That makes her culpable in fiscal fiasco and and instructional choices (e.g. scripted instruction). So, regardless of her gender and ethnicity, she is no different than Ackerman. Like Ackerman, she has lied in public and created more upheaval than we've experienced in decade. All of Ackerman's leadership needs to resign.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 08:03.
Everyone in the cabinet have to do what Dr. Ackerman says to do. If she says lie, then you lie. It is no different than any other corportation where you are told to make a statement that the Head says to say.
Penny Nixon has been a teacher and principal and has her Superintendent's letter of eligibility. She cares about the children, teachers, and other school staff, and she knows Philadelphia. She would never ask unions to give up their contracts to save money. She would find another way that is not on the backs of our children.
Submitted by Chaos is Winning (not verified) on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 08:19.
If the statements in your second paragraph are true, that's encouraging. But if she didn't choose to leave and hold onto her integrity, rather than lie (as stated in your first paragraph), and she does what she's told, what will make her resist the instructions of the SRC to continue along Ackerman's path?
How do you know Ms. (Dr.?) Nixon? It would be great to feel confident in a potential leader, but some foundation would really help.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 09:47.
Once you are in a leadership position, you can get a staff you are comfortable and have confidence to help you make the changes needed to accomplish your vision...which is improving student achievement.
Being a Superintendent in Philly is much harder than in a non-urban situation. Other districts have to deal with only the board. In Philly, you have to deal with the Board, City Council, and State Reps (house and senate), and the parents and community. All the political people want their people to have a contract with the district. It is rough. You have to have thick skin to move forward. I believe Ms. Nixon can weather the storm to make things happen for our children.
She and others have done alot behind the scenes to ensure our children get what they need to succeed. It is that we hear the bad and not the good, because good does not sell papers or make good news.
Submitted by Chaos is Winning (not verified) on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 10:14.
But how do you know her and why are you sure of these things? I can't tell you how much it would be to be reassured that we can count on her to reverse some of the last few years and really set the kids on the right educational path.
Submitted by Large_and_In_Charge (not verified) on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 10:36.
You're right. Penny would never do anything to hurt the children. Everything that's happening is Ackerman's fault. I'm sure if what we are hearing is true and Ackerman's out, if given the opportunity to lead, Penny would find a way to avoid a lot of this malarkey with people unnecessarily losing their jobs -- especially school-based positions where the cuts hurt the most. I'm not saying she'd have the answer for everything, but I'm saying the condition and situation of the District would be much better.
I'm a realist. Look at Penny's record -- if there was theme word to describe it, it would probably be "Excellence..." Look at the excellence she demonstrated as a teacher at Gillespie JHS... as the principal of Wagner MS... and as the Superintendent of the Northwest Region, the City's highest performing region of schools! Record gains were made in the classrooms. For all these people who comment on here to want to pass this up... to keep gassing this pipe dream of having someone put in the seat of superintendent who is not properly credentialed, does not have the experience, and has not risen through the ranks of the District, is beyond me!
Personally, as a teacher, parent, and taxpayer, I don't want another CEO or whatever they or the SRC decide they want to call them leading our schools when they are not properly licensed to do so!!! That goes for Lee Nunrey who is a complete idiot and Helen Gym who is a critic of the District who they should probably bring on board to lead their parent involvement and community engagement efforts. Apply this same logic to the classroom... Would you want any old Joe Schmoe standing in front of your child's classroom teaching them? I know I sure as heck would not...
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 20:43.
yeah, sure you're right. especially since i'm also an African American female. *clueless*
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 09:19.
Why does the race card always get pulled? We are human beings no matter what we look like. If Ackerman has done a bad job (and she has!) Then get rid of her! We need another Constance Claton!
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 06/28/2011 - 09:43.
I agree--Constance Clayton should come back and save our schools!
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 07/21/2011 - 19:00.
Ummmm no, her race has nothing to do with it. People dont like her b/c she is destroying the public education system in phila. Whether white or black, male or female, she should be held accountable for what she has done. How about not taking a 100k bonus in a district that is being beaten by loss of funds. PLease! She is a disgrace~
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 01/01/2013 - 01:29.
And how exactly are you so "sure" the poster would have liked her if Nixon was "anything else, or a man even"? You're only defending her because she is an African American female. Her incompetence and racist attitude (i.e. Hope Moffett) doesn't seem to bother you one bit.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 11:16.
I hope you're---The Nightmare may be finally over--I HOPE !! This is not about money. It's about Arlene 24/7 and God, PLEASE let this be over.
Submitted by Mark (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 11:24.
Sorry, this has not been substantiated at all. Where is a link to this story? Look at all these rumors...
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 11:47.
Please don't crush my feeble hopes. Say it ain't so, Joe !!
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 13:03.
It is not a rumor. It was on Fox29 at 10 pm last night.
Submitted by TeachersStandTogether (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 13:48.
But there are no details on Fox 29's site and no one else has mentioned it. What were the details of the broadcast?
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 14:13.
Unfortunately, it sounds like a fib or at least an exaggeration.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 15:53.
I saw it myself and it is not a fib or fabrication, unless the newscast was a lie.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 16:01.
No, even the Queen couldn't pull that off. Glad she's trying to get out of here. Just Go !!!
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 15:49.
The details are posted earlier in the thread. The news stated that Ackerman was in negotiations with the SRC to see if they could come to an agreement for her resignation. The news said they spoke with a council member who did not want to be identified.
Submitted by Annonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 16:24.
440 needs to clean house. Nunnery, Nixon, etc. need to go.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 16:45.
Agreed and agreed. Nutter--complicit or not??
Submitted by TeachersStandTogether (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 16:28.
That's pretty tenuous. I hope it's true.
The SRC should break her contract the way they're planning to break ours.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 16:46.
Very CLEVER and Appropriate. I wish I had said it.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 08:41.
I also heard twice that Ackerman is in negotiations to cancel her contract. Apparently, it will be discussed at today's SRC meeting. I heard last night and this morning on Fox 29. That was the only information given and I, too, cannot find any more information on the Fox website. I guess we will need to stay tuned to the Notebook for information on today's SRC meeting later today!
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 15:29.
PLEASE let it happen.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 14:49.
I hope you are right. Anything would be better than the distrust--with good reason--that always circles around Ackerman. Just no credibility at all.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 15:23.
Dr. Ackerman has signed a document giving signing authority to Deputy Supt. Leroy Nunery for the contracts and other documents usually signed by Ackerman on behalf of the district.Nunery is to be the designated signatory during t July and August. Ackerman will not be at 440 during this period. Is she taking a long vacation, doing outside work or just preparing for a future in which she will not be leading the PSD?
Submitted by Large_and_In_Charge (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 15:30.
I think it's symbolic of the fact that she ain't comin' back!!!
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 08:06.
Dr. Nunery needs to go. I don't want anyone from Edison and someone who has never been in the classroom making decisions about our children. Not unless he is willing to take a pay cut in his salary. They both need to go. We don't need an extention of Dr. Ackerman to continue this mess she has started.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 08:06.
Dr. Nunery needs to go. I don't want anyone from Edison and someone who has never been in the classroom making decisions about our children. Not unless he is willing to take a pay cut in his salary. They both need to go. We don't need an extention of Dr. Ackerman to continue this mess she has started.
Submitted by Inspired_Apple on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 00:42.
Dear Large_and_In_Charge...
Are you a single man? I'll marry you tomorrow.
Submitted by Large_and_In_Charge (not verified) on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 04:11.
Yes. Yes. Yes. Indeed, I am. And no, you will not have to sign a pre-nup. Lol.
Submitted by I Teach in Philly (not verified) on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 08:50.
Dear Large_and_in_Charge:
If her proposal falls through, please let me be second in line. I've been a fan of yours for a long time. You are smart, perceptive and to the point.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 10:43.
Hers' the lint to the FOX news story
http://www.myfoxphilly.com/dpp/news/local_news/sources%3A-ackerman-talki...
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 17:47.
NO ONE in this city cares about what fox has to say. nor should they. which is good.
Submitted by Inspired_Apple on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 14:31.
Wasn't Nixon one of the people Ackerman promoted because her school made dramatic leaps in test scores?
The same test scores that are now in question for cheating? ...just asking...
Submitted by Involved Parent (not verified) on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 19:03.
Nope. Nixon was gone from the school during the "questionable" period. Her reputation as an excellent educator far preceeded Ackerman's arrival in Philadelphia.
Submitted by MMA class in Suffolk County (not verified) on Mon, 09/17/2012 - 22:42.
Why viewers still use to read news papers when in this technological globe everything is existing
on net?
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 00:25.
Large_and_In_Charge:
Clearly you've never worked for Ms. Nixon.
Submitted by Large_and_In_Charge (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 14:54.
You don't know that. Have you ever worked for her? I'd rather have her than Ackerman. How about this? Since you don't like her, let's call back Deidre Farmbry or better yet, Constance Clayton. Will that satisfy you, or will you find fault with them too?
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 15:13.
Sorry, but Constance Clayton was the best Superintendent ever in the Philadelphia School System. I'd take her any day of the week over the rest of them.
Submitted by Tara (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 21:04.
Diedre Farmbry would be a great choice to run the SDP. She is from Philly, went to school here, went to college here, taught in Philly schools, etc. She understands the issues Philadelphia schools, teachers, students, parents, etc. are facing. But more than that, she is open-minded and fair.
Submitted by TeachersStandTogether (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 21:14.
This seems like a promising suggestion. A quick google search shows someone who has an understanding of the district from a variety of perspectives. I hope they take a look at her.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 18:54.
She understands the teachers? Please!! Oh we miss you Constance Clayton!! No one can fill her shoes.
Submitted by TeachersStandTogether (not verified) on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 10:12.
If Dr. Clayton feels up to it, please, bring her back. And Deidre Farmbry also proved herself to be a compassionate leader who cared for children. Where is she now?
Submitted by TeachersStandTogether (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 00:32.
Missed the Fox 29 Broadcast (details would be much appreciated), but find it an appalling lack of leadership that she would run away at this critical time. At the same time, who wouldn't be glad to see her gone?
Submitted by Involved Parent (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 06:34.
Thank you for this information. It is as informative as it could be at the present time. Unfortunately, this doesn't surprise me but it should. The relationship between the SRC, the District, and the City is too cozy for there to exist true accountability. All of the District's woes are not solely attributable to the admittedly draconian budget cuts. The District's lack of transparency, inefficiency, and fiscal irresponsibility must cease. If the Mayor and City Council wish to demonstrate that any accountability agreement will have teeth, they should call the responsible District personnel to task for its failure to comply with the request for complete disclosure. Why raise taxes and spend good money after bad if the status quo (lack of transparency) and business as usual continue?
Sidebar: Mrs. Nixon is an outstanding educator who believes in Philadelphia children and their ability and acts in their best interest. As a principal she turned around a poorly performing middle, sat in classrooms (as opposed to an office all day) and held teachers accountable for appropriate instruction. The District would be blessed to have more teachers and administrators like her.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 11:43.
If by "appropriate instruction" you mean that she forced teachers to follow the test-based curriculum then she certainly should not be superintendent.
Submitted by Large_and_In_Charge (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 14:58.
I agree with your comments about Ms. Nixon. I too, share the believe that she was a wonderful principal, given her accomplishments at Wagner. Then again, I am of the belief that most principals in what was the Northwest Region were among the best in Philadelphia... all except for the principal at Roosevelt who assisted the students in cheating on the PSSA.
Submitted by Inspired_Apple on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 14:49.
...uh... again, Wagner's scores during her administration are in question for ridiculous results & C H E A T I N G. She cheated to get where she was. Do you know her, yes or no? Did you work at Wagner, yes or no? Because the people that do know her and did work there say the exact opposite...
Submitted by Involved Parent (not verified) on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 18:27.
Uh, perhaps you need to check your dates. During the years in question Mrs. Nixon was no longer principal of Wagner and had moved to a Regional position. Surprised by your seemingly unprofessional accusation, unfounded to date, and spreading of a rumor. Your opinion is yours and you are certainly entitled to it. To assert it as a foregone conclusion, however, is simply erroneous.
To answer your questions, yes, I do know her. Very well, in fact. Your conclusions and opinion are not based upon personal knowledge or interaction but upon the opinions of others or what someone else said. That's called hearsay. It's immature to base a personal opinion on hearsay, accusations, and innuendo as opposed to personal knowledge and interaction. I have plenty of that with Mrs. Nixon.
No I did not work at Wagner, I simply spoke with Mrs. Nixon during her entire tenure at the District and listened as she voiced her frustration with a few teachers, emphasis on FEW, who were seemingly uninterested in giving their best for the students, whose expectations of the students were too low, etc., etc. Perhaps those are the teachers upon whose opinion you are seemingly so ready to rely. Turnabout being fair play my question is do you know her, have you ever worked with or for her, or have you ever interacted with her personally? My guess is "no." If that's the case it's spurious of you to assume that her elevation is because she cheated. She started out as a classroom teacher, pursued her masters, additional certifications, and now her doctorate. Prior to her present position she was a regional administrator, principal, was selected as an instructional coach, and was also selected to present at several professional development seminars for District staff. I guess those achievements don't qualify her for her present position...she MUST have cheated her way to the top. Yeah, ok.
Submitted by Large_and_In_Chare (not verified) on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 18:33.
Well I wasn't going to respond to the asshole who launched this unwarranted attack on Mrs. Nixon, but you did a great job of putting them in their place! The fact remains that "they" don't like to see any of "us" in top leadership positions...
Thank you for responding with facts that cannot be refuted and which provide a true representation of Mrs. Nixon's qualifications and experiences.
Submitted by Involved Parent (not verified) on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 19:06.
*fist bump* re: second paragraph. I'mma leave the first one alone ;-)
Submitted by Inspired_Apple on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 19:18.
According to The Philadelphia Tribune on July 24, 2010, Dr. Ackerman assigned 3 people new titles, including, "Penny Nixon, principal at Wagner Middle School was promoted to associated superintendent of schools."
http://www.phillytrib.com/tribune/newsheadlines/13310-ackerman-reshuffle...
According to the people at the Top & your website, prior to her appointment she served as Principal of Wagner for 6 years.
http://www.phila.k12.pa.us/offices/ass/biography.html
According to the Philadelphia Public School Notebook, Wagner Middle School was not only flagged for cheating, but cheating in multiple grades in 2009.
http://www.thenotebook.org/blog/113871/2009-report-identified-pa-schools...
The facts are refuted with your own website at the SDP, if you would like to clarify with some type of documentation, that would be nice. I don't really feel like I was put in my place because I still don't have any type of documentation that shows me anything.
But hey -- thanks for calling me names! It's really effective when you are trying to share information & completely solidifies your credibility! Keep up the good work!
Submitted by Large_and_In_Chare (not verified) on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 19:26.
Again, you have posted incorrect information. When Mrs. Nixon was elevated to the reinstated position of Associate Superintendent of Schools, she was serving as Interim Superintendent of the Northwest Region where, prior to that time, she was the Assistant Superintendent of the Northwest Region. Check your facts... Penny was NOT the principal of Wagner at any point in time when the alleged cheating was taking place.
Submitted by Involved Parent (not verified) on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 19:28.
What would satisfy you as documentation? Her resume? Her personnel file from the District? Journalist OFTEN summarize facts for brevity. Fact: prior to her appointment in her present position Mrs. Nixon held two positions in the Northwest Regional office. She acted as Assistant Regional Director and Regional Director. She was NOT prinicipal of Wagner in 2009. Fact. The end.
Submitted by Benjamin Herold on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 20:30.
The Notebook has confirmed with the School District's Office of Communications that Penny Nixon, currently the District's Associate Superintendent of Schools, was principal of Wagner Middle School during the administration of the 2009 PSSA exams. She moved to a post in the Northwest Regional office in July of that year.
In response to a request for comment from Ms. Nixon about Wagner having been repeatedly flagged for suspicious test results under her watch, the District issued the following statement:
"We entrust the care of our young people to our principals and teachers and the overwhelming majority of them are hardworking professionals who take on that task with fidelity. Until we have reason to believe otherwise, we stand on the integrity of these individuals who educate our students throughout the year."
The Notebook is actively seeking firsthand accounts from teachers, administrators, students and parents of the administration of the 2009 PSSA exam at all 99 Philadelphia schools that were flagged in the erasure analysis commissioned by the Pennsylvania Department of Education. We are willing to grant anonymity.
Those willing to share their experiences should contact Notebook/NewsWorks reporter Benjamin Herold, 215.901.9774, bherold@thenotebook.org.
Submitted by Involved Parent (not verified) on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 20:57.
and if I confirm with Mrs. Nixon that she was not would any of her detractors be satisfied?
Submitted by Tara (not verified) on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 21:09.
Really? Either she was the principal of the school in the spring of 2009 or she wasn't. The School District of Philadelphia says she was, but they have been known to have a credibility issue as well. You seem to know her and claim she wasn't the principal at the time. Maybe the SDP's information about their administration is incorrect. However, I would tend to believe the Notebook reporter's information.
Submitted by Involved Parent (not verified) on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 21:18.
Really. I'm not particularly concerned about your preferences or beliefs. I happen to know the personal work history of a good friend and well respected professional. Don't know the Notebook's reporters, biases (if any), journalistic practices or anything else. And I definitely believe my own personal knowledge and recollection over "a confirmation from the District's Office of Communications."
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 07/13/2011 - 07:08.
FIrst, Tara did not offer any personal "preferences or beliefs." She said she either was or wasn't, and then she said that perhaps the district is wrong but that they maintain she was principal.
Second, if she is a "good friend" and you know her, why don't you simply alert her to the impression people have of her and suggest that she simply email The Notebook to clear up the issue?
Third, to suggest the Notebook's reporters may be in question is absurd; have you read anything else on this site at any time or looked at the ridiculously good reputation it and its reporters have in the city, state and even nation?
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 07/13/2011 - 07:11.
***Correction: I see Tara did offer her belief and faith in The Notebook. That being said, for someone who so vehemently is not "particularly concerned," why did you actually even reply?
Submitted by Involved Parent (not verified) on Wed, 07/13/2011 - 09:14.
Dear "Anonymous" I'm sure Mrs. Nixon is as concerned about your impressions of her as I am. Clearly, as evidenced by your necessary correction, your reading comprehension skills would benefit from improvement. I never suggested anything was wrong with the Notebook or its practices (note the "if any."). I replied because I chose to, as did you. Now I'm done with this and you. Reply ad naseum if you like. Have a great day/life...whatever.
Submitted by Inspired_Apple on Wed, 07/13/2011 - 08:02.
Thank you, Benjamin, Tara & others that read the news and took the time to look at the facts.
I apologize that my two liner caused such a controversy but I'm glad the notebook clarified. Sometimes with the comments I feel like I'm living in The Twilight Zone...thinking to myself, "let me go back and re-read the story from last year, re-check that it was the school I saw on the list & my friends that teach there did say 2009 & not 2008...." ...working for the SDP, this happens often. Even just trying to work out the statement "until we have reason to believe otherwise" combined with multiple teachers that said "our school cheated. Here is the test in my hands, Philly Inquirer." Hello? Isn't that reason? I guess these 'unusual' thoughts of mine are the thoughts of the few...
But to Benjamin & all staff at the notebook -- the little fireman's hat stunt you all did at the Celebration of Education benefit was hilarious & inspiring. It's so true! You really *do* put out fires every day!!! You restore my faith in the educational system!
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 21:31.
Stop making everything about race. There is one of "us" in the top leadership position of the free world. Let it go.
Submitted by Inspired_Apple on Wed, 07/13/2011 - 08:57.
hahaha,
that's how clueless I really am! When I read the "they" and the "us" I assumed he meant "they" [as teachers] don't like to see "us" [as central office] at the top.
If you go back about a week in the postings on this very page, Large_and_in_charge, I actually asked you to marry me for your ideas. Didn't know you were either at the time -- as I am either for or against ideas & facts :: not what you are or where you came from.
But since you called me terrible names & hurt my feelings I guess we'll have to get an annulment...
I guess you weren't the chivalrous & classy individual I thought you were. ::sighs::
Submitted by Annonymous (not verified) on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 18:39.
I do not know Ms. Nixon but she obviously has been successful in the SDP. Anyone who moves through the SDP has to play the political game - build on connections and move his/her way up. I do know Ms. Nixon lied to the public regarding the situation at Audenreid this year and about Ms. Moffett. That was on the news. So, maybe she lost her integrity when she climbed the SDP ladder.
Submitted by Involved Parent (not verified) on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 19:00.
1) I don't know if she lied or not;
2) If she did I guess her entire credibility AND integrity is out of the window with you (I supposed you have NEVER lied and have your credibility and integrity fully intact...please spare me any comments on what you chose to lie about personally or professional...a lie is a lie;
3) again, I love the conclusions you spout as fact based on nothing more than opinion. To accept your position would require believing that no one who "moved up" in the District has merit; they must be politicians. Prove it, give me facts - not anectdotal stories - no opinion; and finally,
4) Were you one of the violinists on the Titanic? Sheesh! But it's your opinion. Stick with it even in light of facts to the contrary.
Now I'm done with this assessment of Mrs. Nixon; originally a sidebar to the focus of my initial posting.
That is all.
Submitted by Annonymous (not verified) on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 19:18.
Nixon lied about Audenreid in front of reporters. That said, there are some folks who seem to put Nixon on a pedestal. She seems to have a vocal fan club. Whatever she accomplished, she now does the work of Ackerman.
Submitted by Inspired_Apple on Wed, 07/13/2011 - 08:41.
Point of clarification:
--My position is that, in light of people coming out and flat out saying "WE CHEATED", I believe that certain schools cheated and it should be looked into because the only people it's hurting are not the people in the district, nor the teachers -- but the students whose educational standards have been lowered in the name of our favorite topic: High Stakes Testing. <-- whatever *that* means.
--You can accept that position and also simultaneously believe that there are many, many people at 440 that are doing a fantastic job & rightfully deserve their positions. I most certainly do.
--I do not think Ms. Nixon's entire credibility nor integrity is thrown out the window, as I have lied before also, because I am human. I do not necessarily think that she shouldn't be in her position now: I simply don't think someone that stresses the performance on the PSSA as an indicator of a great school should be the Superintendent of the PSD. We've seen the wake of the destruction caused by so much pressure on a test that means nothing to the kids and 'everything' to our funding & reputation as a district. I wouldn't want that trend to continue.
--You are correct. It is my opinion -- a two liner that *was* a sidebar until both you and Large_and_in_chage heckled & attacked with, as you threw at me, "hearsay" & "anecdotal" stories. It was myself and the staff at the notebook that were presenting the facts. We have yet to hear from either of you how your stories have any validity in light of our *actual* facts to the contrary.
Submitted by Involved Parent (not verified) on Wed, 07/13/2011 - 09:31.
Personal knowledge does not equal hearsay. I never offered any anecdotal stories. My recollection and personal knowledge don't require validation. Period. It was never my intent to attack you or anyone else. Don't think I did. Hearsay definition is in the dictionary - look it up. Repeating the words of another, without direct personal knowledge or witness, is hearsay. Fact. How is that an attack? I never called anyone any names or attack. Just spoke my opinion - one that may be quite contrary to yours, and that's ok - in what I hope was a reasonable fashion. I learned how to agree to disagree long ago. A skill that many Notebook posters (at least on this protracted post) may wish to hone. Again, this is laborious and non-productive. I'm done. My original statement was "thanks for the info and I'm no surprised...Mrs. Nixon is an asset to the District." My statements and opinion remain unchanged. Have a great day.
Submitted by Inspired_Apple on Wed, 07/13/2011 - 10:44.
Repeating words of another without direct personal knowledge, "I did not work at Wagner, I simply spoke with Mrs. Nixon." --Involved Parent, July 12.
Anecdote: "She started as a classroom teacher..." --Involved Parent, July 12.
You called me "unprofessional" and "immature" for posting something that I read in a newspaper and was confirmed by a newspaper reporter, multiple sources on the internet and the School District of Philadelphia itself. You also *fist bumped* a person that called me an asshole, confirming the fact that you "put me in my place" and he also alluded to the fact that I was a racist, twice.
Due to the fact that every poster after you has refuted your recollection & snarky postings, I highly doubt many have sought you out to help develop skills to "hone" themselves. And what's worse, besides going after the facts [that are not on your side] you go after other people's reading comprehension levels when it's clear to all of us you sit in front of both a dictionary [based on your post enlightening the world about the realities of hearsay] and a thesaurus at every post. [based on the fact you incorrectly use words whose synonyms of "lesser importance" are more appropriate for the sentence, but you feel that the "bigger words" make you sound more important although they're syntactically ridiculous.]
With each successive post you manage to destroy your credibility even further. While it might not be your intention, your posts it come off as "I don't care what the newspapers say, I don't care that the Notebook has clarified the facts, I know what I know, and all I need to know is the truth which is my direct knowledge and you can't take it away from me! Ha! Fact! I'm done!"....the tone is incredibly snarky and uninformed. I found this to be a fair assessment when you claimed I was unprofessional and immature.
Thanks for the incredibly witty, intelligent and informing banter! It's been a remarkable day & I plan to enjoy the rest in the sunshine reading a great book.
I guess the jury's still out on the alleged 2009 scandal -- definitely excited by the preliminary results.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 07/13/2011 - 15:25.
It's somewhat painfully obvious that "Involved Parent" knows/ is close to Ms. Nixon and is just whining despite clear facts to the contrary. Just so you are aware, those of us who read and do not comment that frequently clearly see their ridiculous and immature tone.
It is clear that Ms. Nixon was in charge, and now it remains to be seen what, if anything, the district will do. Chances are that nothing will happen, though.
Submitted by SocialStudies (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 06:54.
Lincoln HS has SO much ground that they should have built two schools instead of just the one.
I say, close Meehan and instead of rebuilding it, build a second Lincoln.
Of course, I would love to know where they would get the money to build or rehab any of the schools they suggested.....
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 07:12.
Nixon has colluded with Ackerman et al. Hiring an insider would likely perpetuate the pay-to-play politics that are so pervasive at 440. Phil Goldsmith is the choice.
Submitted by TeachersStandTogether (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 08:26.
Helen Gym is the choice.
Submitted by Inspired_Apple on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 19:22.
Second!
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 11:02.
BINGO !!
Submitted by Large_and_In_Charge (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 15:02.
So would you expect one of your Deputies to go against you and not fear keeping your job? As much as I love Helen Gym, if you read my initial post, I am all against having a non-certificated person in the Superintendent's chair or any other chair where that is a part of their title. With all due respect, she is not qualified for that position. I do, however, think it would be a good idea for them to put her in charge of the Parent, Family, Community Engagement, and Faith-Based Partnerships Office.
Submitted by TeachersStandTogether (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 16:21.
Gym is probably one of the few people in Philadelphia who combed through the entire budget documentation. She had common sense and direction. She's motivated by her belief that every child needs and deserves an education that will help them move successfully through their lives. We need someone like that a lot more than someone with a certification. A piece of paper doesn't prove anything.
There should also be a parent on the SRC. Gym would certainly be qualified to fulfill that position.
Your endorsement of Nixon sent off a few red flags. She sounds like another worshiper of test scores.
Submitted by SDP HS Teacher (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 16:58.
It sent off red flags because she's Black... Black and a woman. What a shame! People still can't stand to see a Sister in charge. One of the reasons the District is failing short is because there's no continuity in leadership. Say what you want, but the test scores have come up. I'm no Ackerman fan, but the fact of the matter is, if she's out, someone who's in there and is familiar with what's working should be asked to lead. I endorse Nixon too! She'd be a heck of a lot better than Ackerman.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 17:09.
test scores may be coming up.....but many of the kids that graduated from my High School couldn't even read. How does that happen? I am sad to say that cheating does go on. I'm not saying it goes on everywhere, but it is disgusting how we are forced to teach to the test. The test is not the end all be all. I say we start a facebook group that is against testing our kids to death.
Submitted by TeachersStandTogether (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 20:23.
Wow, really? Since a) I had no idea what she looked like and b) am an African American woman, I find your accusation pitiful. There are thousands, if not tens of thousands of cases of true racism that occur in this country on a daily basis and knee-jerk claims like yours cause people to fail to take them seriously.
The red flag had to do with the way she was described to be "forcing teachers to stick to a standard" or something to that effect. The suggestion that most teachers don't strive for excellence on their own - and replies that suggested all Nixon cares about are test scores, was further cause for caution.
Submitted by SDP HS Teacher (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 20:33.
Are you sure you're an African American woman? If you were, then I don't think you'd throw another under the bus, holding her there to make sure there are tire tracks on her back! I would hope you were raised better than that.
I should also note that there was nothing racist about my comment. Through all the comments that are thrown around about this administration, which I am also not a fan of, at least in structure, there are a lot of comments that people seem to invoke race on...
Submitted by TeachersStandTogether (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 21:04.
Let me tell you something: There was no one more thrilled than I when, three years ago, I first saw a photo of our new superintendent. But when it comes down to it, what matters is how an individual behaves, especially when they're in a position of power.
Your comment suggested anyone who opposed Nixon was racist, with no basis at all for the accusation. All of us teachers are being thrown under a bus by an administration that includes her.
Submitted by SDP HS Teacher (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 21:24.
I'm sure your hand was on your hip and your neck was rolling when you were "telling me something..." There's a saying for people like you, "Et tu, Judas?"
Stick to the issues and the facts. Nixon is not the issue here. Since you want to make her the issue, put yourself in her shoes, at your level.
If your principal tells you to do something, you do it. If you don't, tenured or not, you risk being pushed out of your job or having it made uncomfortable. If your principal told you to implement something that students didn't like, whether or not you agreed with it, you'd have to do it right? If you didn't, you'd be 204-d and probably force transferred, and God forbid you spoke about it, you'd be in a rubber room somewhere. I am sure she is in the same position. Before you're so quick to make cast stones and make people guilty by association, contextualize the situation for yourself.
Submitted by Inspired_Apple on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 00:47.
I threw Gym's name in the gauntlet last week for SRC!! She restores my faith in humanity and integrity.
HELEN GYM FOR SRC!
We need to get the Commonwealth to let us VOTE FOR OUR SCHOOL BOARD!
Are you listening Philly?! We need this done by September. Let's start making deadlines. It's time.
Submitted by Inspired_Apple on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 19:25.
If we can ever come together, as I think all of us -- loving certain people or not -- can agree that we need to elect a school board.
Helen Gym would make an excellent candidate and we should start grouping together for our common goal, which is having an elected school board & not an appointed one.
What can we do to perpetuate this movement?!
Submitted by Large_and_In_Chare (not verified) on Tue, 07/12/2011 - 19:31.
Well if it isn't the pot calling the kettle black...unless of course you have a problem with being called black. Here you are admonishing us for supporting Penny Nixon, but you constantly throw your support behind Helen Gym.
An elected school board would be nice to have, but that is not the answer because like most other things in Philadelphia city politics, that would be a popularity contest, or rather one of who could raise the most campaign funds. Change will only come for the District when you get a Democratic governor and control by the Democratic party in the General Assembly. Since that isn't going to happen any time soon, then we have to make lemons out of lemonade and find a way to work within the boundaries of what we have.
Sad, but true...
Submitted by Inspired_Apple on Wed, 07/13/2011 - 09:29.
1) I didn't admonish *anyone* for supporting Ms. Nixon. I made a statement that was that she was the Principal of a school in 2009 and that school has been flagged, in that year, for severe cheating. There is nothing wrong for you supporting her. Nor did I ever state that.
2) I didn't know Ms. Nixon was black until a commenter stated it & if you see me throw full support behind Helen Gym it's because she's intelligent, well spoken & a leader with integrity. I supported her 100% through her words before I attended a rally where she spoke & saw what she looked like. Nothing can change my opinion of people because of anything other than what they stand for.
3) I completely agree with you about making lemons out of lemonade & work with what we have. I think your ideas about change are fairly accurate & although I swing to the liberal left on many issues -- our problems within the district transcend "parties".
The only way we will ever come together is if we stop 'dividing' based on party lines and "who supports who" and look at what everyone can see is a clear solution. The petty banter is what divides us when reality is that we can agree on many, many things, Large_and_in_charge.
Maybe we should start focusing on the things we agree on and can CHANGE, instead of the dividing comments and preconceived notions about people you don't know on the other side of the screen.
Submitted by Teach (not verified) on Wed, 07/13/2011 - 15:18.
I agree that Helen Gym would be a fabulous SRC member or superintendent and also agree that random wild accusations of racism and hypocrisy (for what?) serve no one's purpose, most particularly the children's.
We should all be on the same side - the children's. Period.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 18:57.
I believe Helen has a background as a school teacher.
Submitted by SDP HS Teacher (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 17:03.
Goldsmith walked out on the District when he was in charge. Reappointing him as CEO is as logical as reappointing Pedro Ramos as a Board Member.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 17:32.
I thought he was an interim superintendent...and had to leave when they hired one full time (was that Hornbeck then or Ackerman...can't keep track)
Submitted by Annonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 17:59.
Goldsmith and Farmbry were in after Hornbeck and then Vallas.
Submitted by Annonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 07:51.
Academy at Palumbo is underutilized. Why not combine Furness with Palumbo? Furness' catchment fits with Palumbo more than Southern. It would also allow for Furness' immigrant students to have a "safe" space rather than pushing them into Southern which is not safe.
Submitted by StudentTeacher (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 17:20.
Palumbo is a magnet program and if it were combined with Furness I'd bet that many parents would pull their kids out. The city should preserve its magnet schools while taking the necessary steps to break the comprehensive high schools up to the same level. Set the bar high!
I worry about Furness combining with SPHS because of South Philly's status as a Promise Academy. We shouldn't be putting any more students in Ackerman's pet projects, especially if she's looking to skip town!
Submitted by Annonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 18:01.
Northeast has an internal magnet program. Why not Furness with Palumbo as its internal magnet program?
South Philly HS has proven to be unfriendly to immigrant students. That won't change over night. Immigrant students shouldn't have to go to SPHS.
Submitted by StudentTeacher (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 19:51.
I doubt Furness and Palbumbo would be able to pull of the neighborhood/magnet mix like Northeast. For starters, Northeast's building is absolutely gargantuan. While it's overcrowded right now, it's still able to function as a neighborhood high school and a magnet school quite effectively. Palumbo has a far smaller building, and while Furness's student population isn't nearly as large as Northeast's you can't count on things staying that way forever. If the neighborhood sees a big boom--which it may, considering that it's a neat little part of town and plenty of folks would like to live near a good school like Palumbo--I don't think the building would be able to fit a growing magnet school AND a growing neighborhood school the way Northeast has.
If Furness is to close, it'll create a tricky situation no matter what. I just don't think the District should put one of its successful schools in jeopardy. I'd much rather see Palumbo grow to make full use of its own building. Unlike the Renaissance schools, the magnets have a track record of success and they should at least get to keep the resources they have whenever possible.
Submitted by Philly Parent and Teacher (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 20:02.
Before your trash on a neighborhood school, you should check your facts. Furness has a good track record - scores have gone up and it is no longer on the persistently dangerous list. Magnet schools are "successful" because they can cherry pick students and get rid of students. Neighborhood high schools can not. Furness has many hard working and capable students - probably more hard working students than Palumbo.
I've heard negative things about Palumbo - it is not "Jewel" - just selective in enrollment. It is plenty big enough for about 1200 - 1300 students which would be more than Furness and Palumbo combined.
Why should magnet be "kept safe?" For who? Philadelphia teachers have to embrace all students - not just those admitted to "magnet" schools.
Submitted by StudentTeacher (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 20:27.
For starters, I didn't trash Furness. Everybody I know who's worked there has nothing but good things to say. And we should preserve the magnet model because it has a record of success--Masterman, Central, Palumbo, Northeast Magnet, Constitution, SLA, etc. They're not successful just because they're able to "cherry pick" students and kick others out. I WENT to a magnet school for eight years and I don't know a single student who was kicked out. The magnet's have been able to create and maintain a really strong, healthy learning environment--if you don't have then schools can't succeed. As you point out, Furness's environment is clearly improving as is Palumbo's (it's a new school, after all). Don't you think combining two different schools might put a damper on both school's progress? Northeast is doing fine because it's gone through its growing pains. It also had a steady flow of resources coming into the SPARC program which really gave the magnet school the kickstart it needed, ultimately helping out the neighborhood school as well.
With all the budget craziness and inept leadership in the District, do you honestly think that 400 N. Broad would give the Furness/Palumbo merger the resources it needs? If the combined school isn't able to keep up with the requirements of NCLB, what happens? Northeast technically became a empowerment school last year because it failed to meet AYP by the slimmest of margins. The magnet program MET AYP, but still had to go through with all the corrective reading programs and the like because it's part of the larger school.
I understand that money and space are two of the hot issues right now, but there's a lot more going on in school mergers than just combining budgets and sharing space. Palumbo and Furness may be great fits for one another at some point, but now is not the time.
Submitted by Philly Parent and Teacher (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 20:40.
As a "student teacher," where are you getting your information? How do YOU know the "right" time for a merger between schools? Furness and Palumbo could combine programs just like Northeast. Since we already have tracking ("pathways" according to the SDP), then students who qualify or ask to be admitted to honors classes could continue to be in the classes. Music, arts, etc. classes /programs could be combined. Sports are already combined.
Here are some facts:
Furness would have made AYP last year except for graduation rate. No one at 440 nor Harrisburg can tell a school how they calculated graduation rate.
Northeast and Furness have been "empowerment" schools for the same amount of time.
Palumbo is at less than 1/2 capacity. It received $25 M plus in renovations. It has the facilities for a high school so let all students have the benefit of a renovated building with high school facilities such as science labs.
Submitted by StudentTeacher (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 20:53.
If you'd rather see two schools combine in the midst of a budget crisis and potential leadership change, I won't argue. I just think that closing and combining two different types of schools would cause a lot of unnecessary problems. I'd rather not see Furness get folding into South Philly High, either. I'd rather see Furness stay Furness. If the school's on the up and up, the district should foster that growth rather than risk losing it. Same goes for Palumbo.
Submitted by K. R. Luebbert (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 21:01.
As a seventh and eighth grade teacher, I have had an issue with the way Palumbo, as a new magnet, picks students. If they are under capacity, I do not know why they have turned down some of the students they have. We had a couple of great candidates with excellent scores, and just a few attendance glitches--they could have accepted these students on a provisional basis. I believe the attendance would have been resolved in high school, and the students would have been good for the school. Like many magnets, they seem very inflexible in their requirements--but if they are under capacity, this makes no sense.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 22:35.
Palumbo is well on its way to being at full capacity. After filling out the four grades, more and more freshman are both accepted and enrolled each year. At the current rate, the school will be well over 1,000 students in September 2013.
Additionally, the school's admissions criteria really is not all that selective nor is it rigid. As far as attendance goes, it is one of the items that that schools are evaluated on, so of course that would be an issue - if a student cannot get to his or her neighborhood school on time each day, how would he or she do so when traveling alone to attend a school across town?
Submitted by K. R. Luebbert (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 22:48.
True--but many K-8 students in Philly are NOT in their neighborhood school. The students I am thinking of actually live closer to Palumbo than to the K-8 they attended. That is why I think the attendance issue would be moot in high school. Also, sometimes students have difficult circumstances which schools could help with. I find too many magnets to be inflexible on admissions, that is all.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 10:29.
They can sell Furness for it's real estate alone. South Philaelphia has enough room for Furness an BOK
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 10:30.
They can sell Furness for it's real estate alone. South Philaelphia has enough room for Furness an BOK
Submitted by Annonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 16:22.
Why Bok? Academy at Palumbo has far more room.
Submitted by Anton Bruckner (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 10:45.
All this talk of building 'smaller' high schools. When the new Lincoln HS was built, the enrollment was supposed to be 850. Then it was upped to 1100. Then finally, the planners and designers built a building for 1500 - ABSOLUTE MAXIMUM !! When the building opened, the enrollment was over 2000. They purposely overcrowded the school. It was designed to fail. They will do it again and again. What a shame that a beautiful and expensive building is jammed and overcrowded !! When is someone at the SDP going to have some brains???
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 11:05.
It's NOT about brains. It's about conscience and they have none. Money taks for the Queen--end of story. Sell the kids to the highest bidder.
Submitted by Sheppard Teacher (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 10:45.
It is a tragedy to see Isaac Sheppard Elementary School on this list. At Sheppard, where despite reports to the contrary, every classroom is filled with children, is a haven for youngsters living in one of the most violent communities in Philadelphia. It is a small, homey school where they can receive individual attention and instruction, where teachers and the principal go out of their way to help them build fulfilling lives. And yes, the school did make AYP.
The building is old, but in perfect condition and it's architectural craftsmanship is something we won't see again in a public school.
There is no room for the 300 children who attend Sheppard in the nearby local schools, which means, to save money (rather than children), those schools, already overcrowded, will be more so. Is this how we put "Children First?"
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 11:10.
Ackerman's Wishes--First, Last and Only-----Money and Politics, that's who she is and will be when she finally slithers out of town which should have been 3 years ago. The citizens have no rights with her in the picture. Beyond destructive !!
Submitted by Meg (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 10:46.
How would they have the money to build a new school building to house Meade and Reynolds? The Meade building is sound and needs very little work. I have not been in Reynolds in a long time, but is it in need of so much?
Where would this building go? Or are they just discussing moving Reynolds into Meade? With all that has been done to Meade lately, this is a very illogical inclusion on this list.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 21:24.
Yes, Reynolds is in need of repair. They had to evacuate to Vaux because of boiler problems over the winter. There is no parking lot, rooms need air conditioning, etc...
Does Meade have the capacity to hold all of their students and Reynolds' 350 students too?
It wouldn't make sense to create a new building if Meade can hold everyone and keep the class sized low.
Submitted by Meg (not verified) on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 10:45.
Yes - Meade could hole that many new students. When I started there over 20 years ago, she was full with just around 850. We would loose some things and may need traveling preps, but it could be done.
The building is beautiful and in good shape. I do not understand the plan to build a new building... but that seems like a pipe dream in the financial situation of today.
Submitted by Meg (not verified) on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 10:46.
sorry - hold that many
Submitted by TeachersStandTogether (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 10:48.
Bill Green says, "The whole reason an accountability agreement exists is because the people involved don't trust each other. And the first set of documents that are delivered don't include something that was specifically requested? That's a real problem."
Bill, it's a real problem when you rant and yell and publish articles about how outrageous you consider the idea of a tax increase is, point out where the district can save and then vote for that increase. You're as untrustworthy as the SDP.
Submitted by Anton Bruckner (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 11:31.
Bill Green - Just a another generation in a family lineage of political hacks and liars.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 12:28.
I hope you're wrong about Billy Jr. Actually, Blackbeard would have trouble matching Ackerman etc. for low life awards. Even Charley Manson would have to hustle to match the Queen. Well, maybe Manson but few others.
Submitted by Paul Robeson (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 11:17.
Unless some pages are missing, the document doesn't mention Robeson, which the article lists as being on the closure list.
Submitted by Paul Socolar on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 11:26.
Robeson is listed on a supplementary document, which the Notebook will post as soon as we are able.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 11:53.
The Principal of E.M. Stanton is a joke--more concerned with looks than substance. She plays the corporate game and will sell out anybody at any time. That's a definite. Having said that, Stanton is a turnaround school with landed gentry types coming in in all directions. In 5 years, it may well be a Greenfield type school unless the folks catch on to the Principal.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 12:12.
E.M. Stanton has a new principal as of the 2011-2012 school year.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 12:22.
Thank God !!!! Glad to hear it. I didn't know that.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 14:50.
Good.
Submitted by Annonymous (not verified) on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 05:47.
The former Stanton principal is going to be working for Universal in "supporting principals." The new Stanton principal is very well connected via her husband - thus, she got the job. The new principal has a reputation for hating teachers.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 06/27/2011 - 07:23.
Sorry to hear it. What's her name?
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 13:01.
I hope they do close Pepper Middle. That place looks just like a prison. It's awful; not the staff or students just the actual building.
Submitted by Pro Public Education (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 13:14.
Has anyone noticed that since the School District went "corporate" back with Hornbeck, that education became more about the CEOs and not what students/teachers/principals actually working in the schools need? Corporate is top down edict, not lateral collaboration which education thrives on. Worse yet is that CEO/Superintendents move from city to city every 4-6 years (ironically only up to 1/2 of a child's K-12 school experience), accumulating high salaries, retention bonuses mid-contract, very high pension plans and hosts of other expensive perks, while asking the workers and students (and taxpayers) to make sacrifices. Sounds like Wall Street economics to me. No wonder so many EMOs heads want to jump into this lucrative market - it's all about the Benjamins.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 13:40.
BINGO------and where else is easier to make that money than in inner cities with enormous social problems with politicians with their hands out??? Of course, playing the Race Card is Ackerman's specialty. Ripping the families off while playing their savior--great gig if you can get it !!
Submitted by Ms. Chips (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 14:41.
School District real estate holdings seem to be viewed as a liability, which strikes me as more of the smoke and mirrors that passes as administration here. Many of the named schools are in renewing neighborhoods, like South Philadelphia, or close enough to some sort of redevelopment, like airport expansion, to be pretty valuable. Before they are given away, has it been revealed how they are valued? And where the money from their "repurposing" will be allocated? Conservatively, each location is worth hundreds of thousands of dollars and could augment significantly more traditional funding for schools.
Many are historically designated buildings, or are, especially those on the sites of former cemeteries, on archaeologically significant sites. The district does not seem to see itself as subject to the laws applying to historic properties, as the razing of the old Audenried, HS on the list of National Historical places illustrates. But then, if Sunshine Laws and contracts are meaningless, except for the Queen's, of course, why should any other federal, state or local laws apply?
Must make sense to the five puppet masters pulling Philadelphia’s strings.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 14:57.
Yes, I agree but they won't spin it like that. Also, any funds will be secreted away but absolutely not given to kids' s issues or teachers' etc. I just hope the postings here about Hackerman leaving are real. We can't bee credible with her in charge. I just hope the Feds are getting ready to house her, Nunnery, Archie etc. They surely deserve it. Nutter.............. Yes, maybe him also unless he's the weakest and dumbest mayor in the history of the world.
Submitted by Pro Public Education (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 16:42.
Remember when the SRC was created - supposedly because Philadelphia couldn't manage the finances? How's the SRC doing? They went through $300 million of a special surplus under Vallas to a deficit ($73 mil), two years of federal stimulus money and now we're $649 mil in dept???????!!!!! Unheard of number. From what I've read, original SRC chair Jim Nevels went from a owning a 1/4 million dollar investment firm to one VERY rich man; present SRC Robert Archie recently said we had no right to question him since he's a "volunteer" - but his firm makes money from EMO creating charter schools and he's had very questionable conflicts of interest with two high schools (MLK and Audenreid) and the two EMO's with whom his firm has ties. (I wonder about other SRC members' financial/power growth - with the exception of Heidi Ramirez, who Ackerman (and Archie??) "ran out of town" because HR wanted to be effective for school children - not the bottom lines of a few individuals).
Shame on all of them!!!
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 19:23.
I completely agree with you. Crooks in all directions, lead by the Queen, of course. Is Nutter dirty too-----------Maybe !! They all need to be in jail.
Submitted by Linda (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 20:20.
If the SDP CEO Dr. Akerman leaves can someone please review the SRC? It was that commission that gave her that HUGE salary and permission to hire so many "extra people" for jobs that I have as of yet to understand. The budget alone for the Public Relations Department is astounding. As a teacher, I am still buying supplies to teach my students. Where is the money----somewhere far above my school administrator and nowhere near my classroom.
Submitted by Chaos is Winning (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 21:54.
Here's where some of the money's going:
http://blogs.philadelphiaweekly.com/phillynow/2011/05/10/will-arlene-ack...
Submitted by tom-104 on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 20:25.
The SRC has threatened to break the teacher's contract if $75 million in concessions are not made by Thursday. On Thursday Ackerman is due to receive a $100 thousand bonus (which she has so graciously (not) offered to defer). Coincidence? Why no talk about breaking her contract?
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 22:30.
I just watched tonight's Fox29 News Report. It is true that Ackerman is meeting tomorrow to see how she can get out of her contract. What really irked me was that the report says if the SRC allows her to leave, she walks with nearly $1 million dollars!!!! Unbelievable!! This District is $629 million in the hole after all her and the SRC created and where will they get the $1 million dollars to give her??? Nutter should say NO to her getting out of the contract and make her fulfill her duty until 2014 or take her to court and she gets no going away money. She stirred all of this going on in our school snow wants to slip out the back door--No way!!!
Submitted by Chaos is Winning (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 22:44.
NO! She'll destroy the whole district by 2014.
She doesn't deserve the money, of course. They should straight-out fire her. But she needs to go.
If the SRC can break union contracts, they should break hers as well. This can't be something they initiated - they love her. She wants out and she's getting her buddies to steal from children in order to give her a going away gift.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 22:59.
Archie needs to go with her!!! Corbett said he is doing 2 replacements on the SRC (one was Ramos) and the next is supposed to be a high authority SRC position--could he be replacing Archie with someone else?? He may be.
Submitted by Chaos is Winning (not verified) on Sun, 06/26/2011 - 22:39.
According to Fox News, not only aren't they going to break her contract, they're going to give her - you may want to sit down - A MILLION DOLLARS to leave.
That is the base salary for about 16 - 20 teachers, depending on degrees and experience.
This woman has made a mint getting kicked out of school districts. This, too, is something the SRC should have foreseen.
Post new comment