School Closings

Dozens rally to protest closing high schools in Indianapolis Public Schools

PHOTO: Hafsa Razi

On the eve of learning which Indianapolis high schools could face closure, about 50 protesters rallied outside the Indianapolis Public Schools central office with a demand: Hold off.

Parents, teachers and community members gathered ahead of an IPS board meeting. The protest was organized by a loose coalition of groups including Concerned Clergy.

Superintendent Lewis Ferebee will announce Wednesday which three of the seven high schools the administration recommends closing. The board will vote on the final plan in September.

Chalkbeat spoke to several of the protesters about why they were there and what they hoped to accomplish.

Elaine Bultman

PHOTO: Hafsa Razi
Elaine Bultman

Indianapolis Education Association member, 27-year teaching veteran, former teacher at School 15.

“There are so many different plans that could be used with these schools to keep them open. They’re in the communities where people live. This is taking our kids away from public education and forcing them to leave the community. No one wins. Students are constantly being transferred here to there, teachers are being transferred here to there. We’re losing our home…(I want IPS) to slow down.”

Bultman said the district did not allow enough community input in the process. “Simply having community meetings (isn’t enough). The decisions have been made about which schools are closing. That’s not input from our community.”

 

PHOTO: Hafsa Razi
Stardust A

Stardust A

Parent of a student at Crispus Attucks High School.

“It’s about privatization and taking funds away from the public … I’m all about accountability. When you put money into private hands, they’re not accountable to us. They don’t have to provide the same services. The money should go straight to the kids. (I hope) maybe that (the school board members) see some dissent and slow it down. The board needs to know that their constituents are paying attention.”

 

PHOTO: Hafsa Razi
Muhammad Siddeeq

Muhammad Siddeeq

Former science teacher at Shortridge and John Marshall high schools.

Siddeeq said IPS is now struggling with high school enrollment because of its own mistakes.

“You created this situation. They bomb our school populations, and then say, ‘You know what, we don’t have enough students to go to school!’ We’re really being invaded. And then they come to us and say, ‘You have a choice.’ Well, yeah, we have a choice, after you already wiped out any way of us possibly resisting.”

“The main thing is to alert the public and to hopefully put in the conscience of the school board to take a second look at how they’re conducting themselves.”

 

PHOTO: Hafsa Razi
Antonio Cardenas

Antonio Cardenas

Sophomore at Shortridge High School.

“It just breaks all of our hearts at Shortridge … A couple weeks before school let out, they were there talking to us, and they stopped taking questions from us after one of our kids said, ‘You’re trying to pack us into a can of sardines.’ They stopped the interview right there with the whole school and wouldn’t take any more questions. They refused to talk to our teachers afterward, and they just left out of nowhere.”

Cardenas said Shortridge is a successful school academically. “It’s growing really rapidly, but IPS isn’t looking at that. It’s looking at the student ratio to the building, but it’s not about that, it’s about how well we’re doing as a school.”

 

PHOTO: Hafsa Razi
Michelle Sanders

Michelle Sanders

Member of Concerned Clergy of Indianapolis from Purpose of Life Ministries.

“(There’s) a lack of communication and involvement of the community. … (We need) a new transition team of folks that have community voices and not just consultants to make the decisions on what to close if there are closures.”

Sanders said IPS can’t expect to be able to move students around the city easily. “Indianapolis is a large community that’s spread apart. You can’t necessarily just close half the high schools — you’re going to create transportation issues, you’re going to create cultural issues. It just creates a lot of different issues that I don’t think they’ve addressed.”

exclusive

Shelby County Schools wants to shutter charter school that opened outside district limits

PHOTO: Laura Faith Kebede
Brad Leon, chief of strategy and performance management

Shelby County Schools is recommending the closure of a charter school situated in a Memphis suburb, outside the district’s limits.

Gateway University High School, which just concluded its first year, found building space in Bartlett just two weeks before the beginning of the 2017-18 academic year. The charter school’s leader, Sosepriala Dede, had planned to open in downtown Memphis, but had trouble finding a suitable space there.

Dede, the founder, president and CEO of Gateway, told Chalkbeat on Thursday that the school is just days away from securing a facility in Memphis. The charter network has signed a letter of intent — but not yet a lease — for a building now occupied by National College on Thousand Oaks Boulevard, Dede said.

“We’re aware we needed to move. We have every intent to be within [the district’s] boundaries this fall,” he said, adding his team vetted “at least a dozen” buildings this year before settling on this one.

Tennessee’s attorney general in September said charter schools do not have authority to open outside the district in which they were authorized. And earlier this year, the state legislature passed a law requiring charter schools to secure school buildings inside their home district’s borders.

In a September letter, Education Commissioner Candice McQueen directed Shelby County Schools to “support Gateway’s effort” to relocate within the district’s boundaries based on the attorney general’s opinion. The decision to locate Gateway in Bartlett also drew opposition from the Shelby County Board of Commissioners, the local funding body for district schools.

Brad Leon, the district’s chief of strategy and performance management, said the district also warned Gateway that if it did not find a building within district boundaries by May 31, he would recommend revoking its charter.

“You have the commissioner getting an attorney general opinion, saying you guys gotta move; you have our contract that says you got to be in our boundary, and third, you now have a Tennessee code saying you’ve got to do this,” Leon said. “And despite all of that, the leadership at Gateway hasn’t been able to do this yet.”

The recommendation will be on the agenda for the school board’s work session Tuesday. A vote would follow on June 26. Dede was part of the Tennessee Charter School Center’s fellowship to train leaders of new schools. He is also is a former charter network leader for Gestalt Community Schools and a former principal at Humes Preparatory Academy Middle School when Gestalt operated it.

Below you can read the letter Shelby County Schools sent to Gateway’s board chair Anthony Brown on June 1.

Update, June 15, 2018: This story has been updated to reflect what Education Commissioner Candice McQueen sent Shelby County Schools in regards to Gateway and copies of correspondence between Shelby County Schools, Gateway, and the Tennessee Department of Education.

A new approach

Denver’s school board is taking a break from its school closure policy

PHOTO: Craig F. Walker, The Denver Post
A teacher returns test scores to her class at Lake International School in Denver in 2012.

The Denver school board will hit pause this year on a controversial policy that calls for closing low-performing schools, as board members embark on a citywide listening tour that has the potential to change how the district defines school success.

The pause would be in effect for the 2018-19 school year. It would impact schools with chronically low test scores. The district has sought to replace such schools with new ones deemed more likely to get kids reading and doing math on grade-level – a policy that has generated significant pushback and even shouts of “shame!” at board meetings.

Instead of facing closure or replacement, low-performing schools this year would be required to give the board “written and verbal reports regarding their ongoing or proposed improvement strategies,” according to a memo written by board member Lisa Flores and district official Jennifer Holladay, who oversees the department that makes school closure recommendations.

The district would provide the board with information about the school’s academics, culture, and operations, and the board would use it “to exercise oversight of struggling schools’ improvement plans and understand the needed supports, and make decisions to move forward with those plans or choose an alternate path,” according to a written presentation.

School closure isn’t entirely off the table. That “alternate path” could be closure – or, more likely, consolidation with another school – if a low-performing school also has dwindling student enrollment, Flores said.

At a school board work session Monday night, Flores pitched the new approach as a “third way” – a middle ground between the strict school closure policy in place for the past two years and the inconsistent way the district previously dealt with struggling schools.

The board would use the “third way” approach as it gathers community feedback on its planned listening tour about what student success looks like, how the district should define a “quality school,” and how it should respond when schools miss the mark.

Board members did not take a formal vote on it, but they informally agreed to move forward. The board’s policy of intervening when schools continue to struggle despite extra help and district funding would remain in place, but the consequences would be softened.

“I see this as a real opportunity for DPS to take a good intent here, which is really about serving kids, and take it to the next iteration, where we can do better for our communities,” board president Anne Rowe said. She said that while the strict policy was well meaning, it had unintended consequences that “can be really, really painful.”

Critics of the district’s policy have said closing a school is disruptive and communicates to students and teachers that they’re not good enough. Those critics are gaining political power. Last year, Denver voters elected one new school board member, Carrie Olson, who opposed the policy and two who questioned how it was being carried out.

Other board members have defended the policy by saying the district can’t let students languish in schools that aren’t working. The district is falling short of ambitious goals it set to improve academic achievement by 2020. It’s notable that Flores, the board member who proposed the new approach, has been a supporter of the district’s accountability policy.

Van Schoales, CEO of the education advocacy organization A Plus Colorado, which has supported the district’s school improvement efforts, is wary of the new approach.

“This sounds as if they’re going to say that kids can sit for another year in schools … not supporting them to read or write, which I think is unfortunate,” Schoales said. “I’m very concerned that they’re just kicking the can down the road.”

Denver Public Schools is seen as a national leader when it comes to holding schools accountable, a key part of what’s known as the “portfolio strategy” of managing both district-run and charter schools, which are publicly funded but independently managed. Before formalizing the current policy, the district closed or replaced struggling schools of both types, but without consistent criteria for when to do so. That led to complaints it was playing favorites.

In an effort to be more fair, the school board in 2015 adopted a policy called the “school performance compact.” It says the district should “promptly intervene” when struggling schools met certain criteria. The criteria were developed in a set of guidelines separate from the policy, and they have changed over the past two years.

Last year’s criteria were:

  • If a school was rated “red,” the lowest of the district’s ratings, two years in a row; or
  • If a school was rated “red” in the most recent year and either “red” or “orange,” the second-lowest rating, in the two preceding years; and
  • If a school’s students did not show enough academic progress on the most recent state tests, the school would be subject to closure or “restart,” meaning the school could get a new operator or a new academic model.

Only one school met those criteria last year: Cesar Chavez Academy, a K-8 charter school in northwest Denver. In a move that avoided a public battle, Cesar Chavez struck a deal with a more successful charter school, Rocky Mountain Prep, to take over its building and give enrollment preference to its students. Cesar Chavez shut its doors at the end of last month.

Three district-run elementary schools met the criteria the first year the policy was in effect in 2016: John Amesse, Greenlee, and Gilpin Montessori. Because of Gilpin’s declining enrollment, the school board voted to close it at the end of the 2016-17 school year.

The board decided to “restart” John Amesse and Greenlee, which both had healthy enrollments despite years of poor test scores. With input from the community, the school board chose new academic programs for both schools. Those programs will start this fall.

But the 2016 decisions were fraught with controversy. Parents at Gilpin accused the district of meddling with the school’s scores to seal its fate, a claim the district denied. A community process to pick new programs at John Amesse and Greenlee didn’t go as planned.

Flores and Holladay cited those and other issues in their memo. The memo says that while having strict criteria for when to close schools is helpful because the decisions can no longer come as a surprise to parents and teachers, such “bright-line rules” also have downsides.

“School staff and community members often did not feel heard about positive aspects of their schools,” the memo says, “and some board members, including Ms. Flores, felt restrained – unable to exercise judgment within these difficult decisions.”

The memo also says the policy put “significant additional pressure” on the district’s color-coded school rating system, which came under fire from the community this year on multiple fronts. The ratings – called the “school performance framework,” or SPF, ratings – are largely based on state test scores. The district typically releases school ratings each fall.

Nine low-rated schools are listed in the memo as potentially eligible for closure or restart in 2018-19 under the criteria the board is now set to disregard this year. Depending on their ratings this year, the nine schools could go through the new process outlined in the memo.

They are:

A tenth school, Venture Prep High School, was also potentially eligible, according to the memo. But Venture Prep, a charter school, decided on its own to close at the end of this school year after not attracting enough students for next year.

At its work session Monday night, the school board discussed picking two of its seven members to work with district staff to develop a “data dashboard” for every “red” school.

Board members would help determine which data – about a school’s academic progress, for example, or its culture – would be included in the dashboard. The board would then use that data to make decisions about the school’s future and its proposed improvement plan.

The idea, Flores said, is that “we would have our ‘red’ schools … come and present to the board on their path forward.” Those presentations, along with the data from the dashboard, would allow the board to “engage with each of those schools about what comes next,” she said.

As for how the policy would be carried out beyond next year, Flores told her fellow board members she expects the feedback they hear on their listening tour “is going to be important in informing what the ‘school performance compact’ looks like in the future.”