Mann and Shenandoah already are neighborhood schools. imho, Tower Grove South residents will be less likely to send their kids to Shenandoah if Mann closes even if Shenandoah is completely new or remodeled. My belief is that it would be wiser to keep both schools open and upgrade the physical facilities to decent ones, rather than one "state-of-the-art" school. Parents are more focused on academics and walkability than fanciness. Mann has a top-notch principal and leadership team by all accounts, and if improvement continues I'm pretty certain Mann will begin to attract more middle class students.onecity wrote:Questions regarding the Shenandoah/Mann meetings this weekend - I had a plumbing emergency that massively disrupted my weekend plans and so couldn't attend.
1) My understanding is that the SLPS superintendent sees the demographics around Tower Grove as an opportunity to improve SLPS by catering to the families in that neighborhood. Is it true that the new elementary school (or renovated school) would be a neighborhood-based school, and that it would be large enough to serve stroller central / aka Shaw, Tower Grove etc?
2) If (1) is true, are there any plans to extend this neighborhood based approach to middle and high school so as to capture to increasingly affluent (and thus high performing) demographics of the well-educated, professional-anchored families in the surrounding neighborhood?
- 8,155
^ Any discussion of what happens post-elementary school? Is there any plan to make a nabe based middle and high school? Because those need to be on the table as well.
- 8,155
You are right about the need for improvement at all levels; I don't know all the ins-and-outs but my understanding is that Fanning Middle School is the neighborhood-based Middle School., which needs a lot of improvement on student achievement.onecity wrote:^ Any discussion of what happens post-elementary school? Is there any plan to make a nabe based middle and high school? Because those need to be on the table as well.
In other words, Fanning needs the affluent professionals' kids to attend in order for student achievement to improve.which needs a lot of improvement on student achievement.
http://www.theatlanticcities.com/jobs-a ... lege/7154/
Paying for the college tuition of poor students, using college as a motivator, and money as a way to close the gap. STL, take notes.
Paying for the college tuition of poor students, using college as a motivator, and money as a way to close the gap. STL, take notes.
- 151
Looks likes good news for the Tower Grove neighborhoods.
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metr ... 83fdc.html
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metr ... 83fdc.html
- 1,792
So how is this for a fix...
Divide the St. Louis school district into some number of different school districts. You could divide the districts along lines of affluence and be REALLY blatant about that but make them roughly equal in population. The poorer district will fail while the affluent districts will attract more families...
Now the Missouri Supreme Court decision allows a failing school districts to attend school at any district within the county or any ADJACENT county. SO, bus failing district kids to most affluent districts in the county (Clayton, Ladue, Webster Groves, Kirkwood, Parkway).
Suburban wealth will start to migrate to the "safe districts" of the city. If done wisely the most troublesome students will be roughly distributed throughout St. Louis County ensuring the County cannot send their kids back to the most affluent City districts. Well they could but only from a failing district (currently Riverview, or Normandy).
Now an extremely distressed county will complain but in reality what can they do the city can only bus to within STL City or STL County so the County agrees to merge with the City so they can bus the kids from the roughest districts to St. Charles County. Thus accomplishing both merger and improving the city schools in the process.
Proof to my theory that the best solutions to our problems are hilarious.
Divide the St. Louis school district into some number of different school districts. You could divide the districts along lines of affluence and be REALLY blatant about that but make them roughly equal in population. The poorer district will fail while the affluent districts will attract more families...
Now the Missouri Supreme Court decision allows a failing school districts to attend school at any district within the county or any ADJACENT county. SO, bus failing district kids to most affluent districts in the county (Clayton, Ladue, Webster Groves, Kirkwood, Parkway).
Suburban wealth will start to migrate to the "safe districts" of the city. If done wisely the most troublesome students will be roughly distributed throughout St. Louis County ensuring the County cannot send their kids back to the most affluent City districts. Well they could but only from a failing district (currently Riverview, or Normandy).
Now an extremely distressed county will complain but in reality what can they do the city can only bus to within STL City or STL County so the County agrees to merge with the City so they can bus the kids from the roughest districts to St. Charles County. Thus accomplishing both merger and improving the city schools in the process.
Proof to my theory that the best solutions to our problems are hilarious.
^You are being satirical, but your approach makes a lot of sense, however fraught with legal difficulty it would be. SLPS should have a district within it whose catchment zone is designed to mimic the overall metro's student demographics. Does it help the poor students? Not really. But it helps the middle class parents, which builds tax base in the city, and that helps the city provide better services, furthering the cycle.
A little math based on 2010 Census and SLPS stats:
There are almost 47,000 5-17 year olds in the city. A little over half of them are enrolled in SLPS schools - including magnets and gifted. Now, if you put all those gifted and magnet kids, and all the kids from all the random types of private schools into the SLPS mix, the district would improve dramatically, and immediately. The only reason SLPS sucks is because the ratio of parents that suck to parents that don't suck is too high. That is it. Period, case closed. If the parents of 18,000 of these kids would enroll their kids in normal SLPS schools (reflecting nationwide non-public enrollment stats - STL is exceptionally screwed up in this respect), and invest the same time, energy, and resources and placed the same demands on SLPS as they do on their magnet, gifted, parochial, private, charter, montessori schools, the issue of the district being repellent to newcomers would instantaneously cease to be an issue.
There are almost 47,000 5-17 year olds in the city. A little over half of them are enrolled in SLPS schools - including magnets and gifted. Now, if you put all those gifted and magnet kids, and all the kids from all the random types of private schools into the SLPS mix, the district would improve dramatically, and immediately. The only reason SLPS sucks is because the ratio of parents that suck to parents that don't suck is too high. That is it. Period, case closed. If the parents of 18,000 of these kids would enroll their kids in normal SLPS schools (reflecting nationwide non-public enrollment stats - STL is exceptionally screwed up in this respect), and invest the same time, energy, and resources and placed the same demands on SLPS as they do on their magnet, gifted, parochial, private, charter, montessori schools, the issue of the district being repellent to newcomers would instantaneously cease to be an issue.
- 1,320
Parents that suck?
Come on now. I understand your idealism. But we're talking about parents who love their kids. Just because they choose a different school than you would doesn't make them wrong. They have to make the best decision they can make based on the system as it actually is. I have known parents who have made very different decisions, and I respect all of them.
Come on now. I understand your idealism. But we're talking about parents who love their kids. Just because they choose a different school than you would doesn't make them wrong. They have to make the best decision they can make based on the system as it actually is. I have known parents who have made very different decisions, and I respect all of them.
That's actually his point. Those parents don't suck (as parents). Those parents care a great deal about their kids education. In addition to sending them to "good" schools, they invest time and resources on their education.Presbyterian wrote:Parents that suck?
Come on now. I understand your idealism. But we're talking about parents who love their kids. Just because they choose a different school than you would doesn't make them wrong. They have to make the best decision they can make based on the system as it actually is. I have known parents who have made very different decisions, and I respect all of them.
Meanwhile, a large amount of kids who are in SLPS schools have parents who are either entirely uninterested in actually having kids OR are living in poverty and are unable to commit the resources or time (if they're working many hours to survive) to their children's education. That second category of parents shouldn't actually be considered to "suck." They may be doing everything they can but are just stuck in an unfortunate situation. But the result is the same.
And that's the point. I'm sure some SLPS schools do suffers form a lack of funding. I'm sure there are some teachers who are no longer committed. But I'd be willing to bet that more often than not the conditions and teachers are at least adequate. But because so many of the kids they're teaching have no support outside of the hours they're in the building, the children will underperform and the schools will be judged as underperforming.
What OneCity is saying, I believe, is that if you took all the kids who get sent to private school because their parents care and instead sent them to SLPS, SLPS would instantly become a decently high-acheiving school district. Not because any conditions within the building would change, but because a majority of the kids attending the schools would have educational support at home and that would lead to higher achievement in the school.
I can't truly say this until I find myself in this situation. I understand how it would become hard to be a "pioneer" with your own children. But I have every intention of sending my kids to public school when I have them. And I have little doubt they'll end up with a great education. Because I will be there when they get home to re-enforce it.
- 1,320
Yeah, I got that part and can affirm the ideal behind it. But urbanism at the expense of urban people is not urbanism.
How does my idea come at the expense of the citizens of STL? It's pure upside. At minimum is ends the gratuitous torching of $50,000+ over the course of their child's non-college education. You know, the K-12 that everyone pays taxes for .
Right. And it's not like we're talking about people who want nothing to do with the city. We're talking about the people who like living in the city but are afraid of the schools so they send their kids to private school and/or move to the suburbs.
It's not like we're asking for suburban-minded people to infiltrate the city. We want urban-minded people to believe they can remain that away and send their kids to public school.
The number one reason a child gets a good education is because the education he's getting in school is being reenforced at home. That can happen at SLPS if the parents who do that with their children only gave it a chance.
It's not like we're asking for suburban-minded people to infiltrate the city. We want urban-minded people to believe they can remain that away and send their kids to public school.
The number one reason a child gets a good education is because the education he's getting in school is being reenforced at home. That can happen at SLPS if the parents who do that with their children only gave it a chance.
Seriously, if you care about St. Louis at all, send an email to your state legislators and the governor today, urging them to address the legislative disaster that is the state education foundation formula and the school transfer policy.
http://news.stlpublicradio.org/post/stu ... -transfers
http://news.stlpublicradio.org/post/stu ... -transfers
Hi everyone. First time poster, been a reader here for a while. We currently live in Charlotte, NC, and I am trying my best to find a compatible job for me (Epic certified in healthcare IT) in the St. Louis area, and my wife and I both want to live in the city. I am in my mid 30's and wife is in her early 30's, and we have a 14 yr old, a 4 yr old, and another on the way.
I've been researching charter and magnet school options in the city, and the issue I've found is that all of these schools seem to have a registration deadline with residency requirement in order to attend. Since we would be moving during a current school year or during the summer, we would be too late to even have a chance to attend any of these schools. I was wondering if any one here knows of any charter schools that don't have the application deadline, and might be able to take a student mid-year? I understand why they have to have application deadlines, but you would think that due to the quality of education at most neighborhood SLPS schools, that there might be an option for families moving from out of state to help attract families to the live inside the city limits and increase the tax base.
We like several neighborhoods, especially Shaw. I've read that the elementary school for Shaw is Mann, which would be fine for my daughter. I just have to figure out where to send the 14 yr old when we move, and we probably won't be able to afford private school for him.
Thanks in advance!
I've been researching charter and magnet school options in the city, and the issue I've found is that all of these schools seem to have a registration deadline with residency requirement in order to attend. Since we would be moving during a current school year or during the summer, we would be too late to even have a chance to attend any of these schools. I was wondering if any one here knows of any charter schools that don't have the application deadline, and might be able to take a student mid-year? I understand why they have to have application deadlines, but you would think that due to the quality of education at most neighborhood SLPS schools, that there might be an option for families moving from out of state to help attract families to the live inside the city limits and increase the tax base.
We like several neighborhoods, especially Shaw. I've read that the elementary school for Shaw is Mann, which would be fine for my daughter. I just have to figure out where to send the 14 yr old when we move, and we probably won't be able to afford private school for him.
Thanks in advance!
Again, deconcentrating poverty, this time in the schools. I'd argue that a major goal of SLPS ought to be to explicitly aim for student body income demographics reflective of regional income demographics in neighborhoods that are in the process of gentrifying.
http://national.deseretnews.com/article ... ation.html
http://national.deseretnews.com/article ... ation.html
Many proponents seem to shy away from the most obvious question: Does it work? By which they mean, Does it improve test scores? Maloney hesitates to make such a claim for Cambridge. Alves resists test scores as the primary measurement, as well.
“All I try to do is make sure that the child is going to have a fair opportunity,” Alves said. “If you have a school where there is a good mix of socioeconomic backgrounds, I know from firsthand knowledge that this is a better situation than having a school filled with kids who are poor.”
Others are less reticent about touting the statistical benefits of socioeconomic integration. Everyone talks about teacher quality or per-pupil expenditure in improving the performance for low-income students, says Kahlenberg. But both of these measures pale compared with the impact of socioeconomic status of a student's classmates.
“High-poverty schools are 22 times less likely to be high-performing than middle-income schools,” Kahlenberg says, “and low-income kids stuck in high-poverty schools are two years behind low-income kids who go to more affluent schools.”
Read more at http://national.deseretnews.com/article ... R3qqJY1.99
- 8,155
Saint Louis Public Schools have been touting the individual schools that have accredited ratings:
http://slps.schoolwires.net/Page/19892
7 schools have enough of a rating to qualify for "Accredited with Distinction" honors and another 13 for "Fully Accredited" status. Most are the gifted and magnet schools as one might imagine; however, I noticed that Buder Elementary in South Hampton and Bryan Hill Elementary in College Hill are regular schools in the Distinction category. Shenandoah Elementary in TGE is a neighborhood school with full accreditation as are Mason Elementary in Clifton Hts. and Lexington Elementary in Kingsway West.
http://slps.schoolwires.net/Page/19892
7 schools have enough of a rating to qualify for "Accredited with Distinction" honors and another 13 for "Fully Accredited" status. Most are the gifted and magnet schools as one might imagine; however, I noticed that Buder Elementary in South Hampton and Bryan Hill Elementary in College Hill are regular schools in the Distinction category. Shenandoah Elementary in TGE is a neighborhood school with full accreditation as are Mason Elementary in Clifton Hts. and Lexington Elementary in Kingsway West.
Thought it was interesting that the SLPS is now advertizing on CBS Sports 920. The ads are touting some of the athletes that have been the product of SLPS schools.
-RBB
-RBB
^As well they should. Perception is reality (which currently isn't fantastic). SLPS needs to show that it's proud of it's students and good things come out of their system. With enough promotion, that'll eventually push out the bad mindset people have about city schools.
That's fantastic. Once decently well off parents that have the time and resources to value their children's education start sending their kids to SLPS, the schools will turn around sharply.
It's not what happens in the buildings that leads to the underperforming schools.
It's not what happens in the buildings that leads to the underperforming schools.