What would it take to REALLY improve Atlanta Public Schools across the board? (North Atlanta: school district, college)

[aries4118]

Originally Posted by equinox63

...

There’s a LOT of controversy among parents and community members about Centennial Elementary being zoned for Grady. But that another story.

OK. Please at least give a summary of this story--or at least some bullet points.

Inquiring minds would love to know...

[aries4118]

Originally Posted by equinox63

Many of the posters have already discussed this in various degrees of detail. But the answer is really very simple. To ask “how to really (and continuously) improve low-performing APS schools” is really to ask “how to get educated, middle-class parents to send their kids there to balance out the haves and have nots”. That is really all we need.

So the real question is, how to make that happen. It’s like the chicken and the egg. Parents won’t send their kids to APS schools unless they are top-notch, but they will NEVER be top-notch until they send their kids there. And nearly every other option weakens or indirectly damages the neighborhood schools even more.

I mentioned financial incentives (perhaps in conjunction with the city’s housing push) for families who would do this in groups. But the charters are almost all about perception and clientele. If the population of KIPP or Drew (which is still largely low income) attended Washington HS with the current Washington students, I think the performance would be comparable. I mention this all the time in regard to Jackson HS because it happened and it is true. I wouldn’t say it if I didn’t see it for myself.

At the end of the day, I think parents just assume that poor black people in the same building as their kids would harm or bring them down, when, in fact, the opposite is true. A rising tide lifts all boats. But often because of preconceived prejudices, many parents are scared to even fathom this option — which IMO is the best and simplest solution.

This.

[aries4118]

Originally Posted by equinox63

... If you really MUST have charters, why not have the charter take over the existing schools?

...

This was the original blueprint for charter schools in Georgia--and it was good. Conversion charters of existing schools to allow the school/community to be innovative and try new strategies and programs.


Addison Elementary
Sedalia Park Elementary
Walton High
Riverwood High

etc...

[aries4118]

Originally Posted by equinox63

As usual, you hit the nail directly on the head...

Thanks.

[aries4118]

Originally Posted by red92s

The whole problem with this theory is that you are hoping to take some certain point in time at a given demographic and socioeconomic blend that is seen as beneficial to all, and freeze it there. Like you said, at some point along a trajectory of school improvement, those schools become a "viable option" for stable, involved, well-educated households without incentives. You'd likely see continued improvement from there as the demographics continue to change.

At that point, have you really "fixed the schools", or just turned over their populations? Large numbers of those families and kids who attended a struggling elementary school are still "out there" a decade later once it's turned the corner. . . maybe just in a different district. In a perfect world, yeah you'd be able to uplift and improve schools without it resulting in displacement of already marginalized residents. But let's be honest about what actually happens: over time like seeks out like, those with the resources to optimally position themselves and their offspring for success will continue to do just that.

The problem with a question like "What would it take to REALLY improve Atlanta Public Schools across the board" is that the answers that don't involve the eventual displacement of the residents around those failing schools are things like "eliminate generational poverty".

Originally Posted by equinox63

I think once the schools are viable options, parents would no longer need the incentives. But we have to start somewhere. How else can we break the myths if no one is willing to look inside? What I don’t think you understand is that most APS schools are severely underenrolled. Nobody has to be displaced. Jackson went from less than 0% white to 10% white in 5 years and the scores, performance, and reputation have increased tremendously. Even KIPP, which is all black, has a relatively large number of active middle class parents with the knowledge, resources, and wherewithal to advocate for things that poor families cannot. Therefore, everyone gains.

It’s not a zero/sum game. The poor families at Brown or Washington would still be there, but have far more opportunities available to them because of the interest and investment of the few higher educated parents/students, thus attracting more educated parents/students. It’s like a snowball effect. If the entire population of KIPP collegiate and Drew Charter’s senior academy were all at Washington with their current enrollment, it still would not be at capacity, but i bet it would be one if the top schools in APS. You are talking like these are abstract theories. These things can/have actually happened. Urban public Atlanta schools can turn around. And in over 15 years in education, unless everybody’s hiring Joe Clark, this is the only way that I have ever seen it work.

A lot of the commentary in the links/articles below explain, step-by-step, how what equinox has outlined above will work.

Middle-Class Schools for All
https://democracyjournal.org/magazin...hools-for-all/

The Benefits of Socioeconomically and Racially Integrated Schools and Classrooms
https://tcf.org/content/facts/the-be...ooms/?agreed=1

How Socioeconomic Diversity In Schools Helps All Students
https://www.kqed.org/mindshift/47765...s-all-students

Integrated Schools
https://integratedschools.org/


^^^^^^

Originally Posted by chabang

So, how exactly do the kids from educated, middle class families benefit in that setting? I don't see it all. I can definitely see how the current kids there would, but I see no benefit at all to those from educated families. They will be in classes with mostly children that are significantly behind them academically and that have a host of behavioral issues due to their home environment. Teachers will focus on the kids most desperately in need of academic help or discipline issues. Your well-mannered kid that's performing at or above grade level will be ignored.
I think Hope-Hill may be one to watch. There have been a huge number of young professional couples that moved into O4W over the last 8-10 years. They had babies which are now close to kindergarten age. Their only public option is Hope-Hill. I have heard of a couple of families that are sending their kindergarteners there this year so it will be interesting to see if this ever becomes a tipping point. But Hope-Hill has a LONG way to go. It is lacking in diversity (90% black; 1% white), and 100% of the kids are considered "low income". I think it is more likely that O4W will create a charter school (like Grant Park did when it gentrified) and that will become as popular as NCS while Hope-Hill languishes.
I have heard of several intown parents that have encouraged us to send our kids to Parkside Elementary over the last several years. I thought they must be further along since they gentrified well before O4W. I was shocked that Parkside appears WORSE than Hope-Hill. Although slightly more diverse, it still has >70% low income kids and lower scores. Private school is very expensive in Atlanta. Most of the families I know with elementary aged kids in O4W use charter schools, less expensive Catholic schools or they home school.

Make yourself some tea, and read the articles above.


Also...

https://www.atlantapublicschools.us/Page/32465
https://www.atlantapublicschools.us/Page/53722

[aries4118]

Originally Posted by arjay57

Dumb question but what makes charter schools better than (or preferable to) regular public schools?

Nothing.

Charter schools are not better than public schools.

[kgpremed13]

Originally Posted by jeoff

I believe that most of the successful charter schools have *tiny* barriers to entry—such as applying in advance, or requiring volunteer hours from parents, etc.. This weeds out a fraction of the least involved parents that are more likely to have children that are behind or disruptive. This “addition by subtraction” can have huge effects—to a tiny degree, removing some low scoring students— but, much more importantly helping kids that are more likely to succeed—less distractions, fights, more instruction time, more positive influences. Folks keep talking about how adding maybe 10% “gentrifiers’ kids” can help things—well, what do you think that removing 10% of the most troubled kids from a “bad school” would do for the kids that remain? No matter what hand waving folks do, I think that is the thing that makes charters better.
If you really want to make the worst schools better, find more alternatives and interventions for the worst students and parents—the damage that they do to a school is immense.

You know I almost never agree with you, but in this case, I think you are right. I taught middle school science for 1 year, and it’s always those 1 or 2 in each class that disrupt everything and stop an entire group of kids from learning. I think that one of the biggest downfalls of public education is making school mandatory. 7-12th grade should be optional with no penalty to the child or parent for not attending. That would remove the ones that don’t want to be there and allow them to stay home or pursue vocational training. You would instantly have a rise in the quality of public education. Trying to use kids from high income highly educated households to pull everyone else up is a failed strategy. Smart kids that want to learn are usually targeted and bullied low income schools. Parents have choice and most will choose to send their kids to a place where there aren’t thugs ( thugs that don’t want to be there) constantly disrupting class. I’m not gonna get into the racial aspect of it all, there will always be racist segregationist that just don’t want their kids around black kids, and put them in private schools for just that reason.

[chabang]

Originally Posted by kgpremed13

Y
I’m not gonna get into the racial aspect of it all, there will always be racist segregationist that just don’t want their kids around black kids, and put them in private schools for just that reason.

Atlanta has a significant number of wealthy black families so there are plenty of black kids in private schools. I do think they do tend to group with the largest number though. Woodward K-3 school is over 70% black (a number that admissions likes to keep to themselves); even black families are worried about the declining diversity in that school and that it's become some elementary version of Morehouse or Spelman.
I agree throwing kids from educated, middle class families to "bring everybody up" is ridiculous. There's no advantage to those kids other than their parents feeling good about themselves.

[brown_dog_us]

Originally Posted by arjay57

Dumb question but what makes charter schools better than (or preferable to) regular public schools?

First there are low performing charter schools too, so it's not a guarantee.

Charter schools are generally successful because they pull in kids who are more focused, wealthier, and have parents who make education a priority. There are hidden barriers to entry like no bus service. Parents have to have a car and be able to pick the kids up at 3 pm or afford onsite after school care.

[red92s]

Originally Posted by aries4118

A lot of the commentary in the links/articles below explain, step-by-step, how what equinox has outlined above will work.

Middle-Class Schools for All
https://democracyjournal.org/magazin...hools-for-all/

The Benefits of Socioeconomically and Racially Integrated Schools and Classrooms
https://tcf.org/content/facts/the-be...ooms/?agreed=1

How Socioeconomic Diversity In Schools Helps All Students
https://www.kqed.org/mindshift/47765...s-all-students

Integrated Schools
https://integratedschools.org/

I'm not debating the well-documented merits of having schools that are well-blended across racial and economic cohorts. I'm questioning how you maintain that beneficial balance over longer timescales, in a setting that requires you to educate the local population. I just don't buy this theory that neighborhoods will reach some static state of integration Nirvana. Even charter schools, which have waaaaaay more control over who comes through the door than a local public school does, have shown it's really hard to maintain said balance even if it's part of your ethos. State law currently prevents reserving seats at a school based on economic status, and at some point that is going to become a necessity.