The school reform movement is well under way in Peoria. First it was the Manual Academy model and on Monday, September 27, 2010, immediately before the regular meeting of the Board of Education, the Superintendent and staff of the new Woodruff, will introduce the public to the new Woodruff Career and Technical Center.
Enrollment in the Woodruff Career and Technical Center is limited to Peoria High School students for the first year of the Center, but it will open district wide next year. Additionally, 50% of the space in the building will be used for the alternative program; safe schools component; and an expanded career and technical curriculum.
As changes take place, if we don’t see information regarding the change going before the BOE or the greater public, we can’t help but wonder, who is coming up with all of these grand ideas and what are the rules. Federal rules and regulations surrounding turnaround/school reform is the driving force behind these models. Both the Manual Academy model and the Woodruff Career and Technical Center model have framework that is established by the Department of Education.
The Center for Law in Education's Vocational Opportunity for Community and Educational Development (VOCED) Project has worked to ensure that federal vocational policy - including the 1990 Perkins Act and the 1994 School-to-Work Opportunities Act - embraces these principles and promotes serious, school wide academic reform. An overview:
High School Reform, Including School-to-Career Programs
For too many students, our high schools are not working. Many drop out. Others stick out it out for the diploma, but feel that they are just marking time. Too many emerge without the high-level academic skills we say all should have and without adequate preparation for further education and successful careers. This is the unfortunate but natural product of a century old high school system based on the premise that only some students can learn to high standards.
Vocational education in particular has long been criticized for channeling some students - - particularly low-income and minority students -- away from academic achievement in return for a promise of specific technical skills that too often are rendered obsolete by rapid changes in labor markets, job requirements, and youths' career goals.
Moreover, in low-income communities, the problem is not just inadequate skills but insufficient jobs that use those skills. On the other hand, if infused with high academic content, vocational education and school-to-career programs have a great deal to offer schools.
Teaching methods traditionally used in vocational education -- active learning, students' demonstration of skills through a project, and coaching relationships, for example – are at the heart of what we now know, from educational research, is good academic instruction for students.
We have worked since the early 1980s to improve/promote the following principles:
Quality. Programs should develop the use of high-level academic and problem-solving skills in authentic settings for all students, including the same academic skills expected for all students and the prerequisites to ensure they are not cut off from the option to go to four-year colleges.
Instead of just training students with the skills needed to carry out one narrowly defined job, vocational programs should provide students with strong understanding of and experience in all aspects of an industry. This includes planning, management, finance, labor, principles of technology, technical and production skills, community issues, and health, safety, and environment as it affects that industry.
Programs should enable students to contribute to the development of their communities by exploring community resources and needs and getting involved in projects and enterprises which help make significant contributions to meeting those needs.
Equity. Every student should be provided with equal access to all components of high quality programs, with a full range of supplementary services and modifications he or she needs to succeed in the most integrated setting possible.
Participatory Governance. Students, parents, teachers, and community members should participate fully in all significant aspects of planning, implementing, and program assessment.
The VOCED Project also assists those in the field -- including advocates, schools and education agencies, and parents – in reforming programs and implementing these principles.
14 comments:
Excellent research, Emerge...this is an excellent resource for those of us wondering what is going on at Woodruff, and how it fits in with the rest of the district.
A hearty good luck to everybody involved!
The middle schools have a model of this program through the Paxton/Patterson Labs. Check out one of the middle school labs..
I heard Calvin Coolidge did, and the kids enjoy it...but it is too crowded. Maybe just a logistical glitch?
I took a look at the Paxton/Patterson labs.
http://www.paxtonpatterson.com/
This program, as well as the vocational program are just two reasons why parents will need to be trained on the benefits (or pitfalls) of different programs.
The District continues to change, curriculum continues to change, parents can't help their students if they don't know how or what they are working with.
The majority of parents may have absolutely no idea about Perkins, Patterson, Compass or any of it. However, under Title 1, it is incumbent upon the District to show that they are at least attempting to educate parents on the changes.
Active parental involvement groups in the schools should have input into and be courted to buy into these programs.
Are the Paxton/Patterson labs the science/math/cooking program? I heard about a middle school class that made a smoothie in this class.
My next question would be how much training did teachers have in this new program? My second question would be what equipment is needed, etc., and from where is the money coming to buy equipment to make this a worthwhile offering?
Caterpillar's CEO complained recently that the schools aren't preparing students for jobs such as welding, etc.--that is one field that I often hear mentioned as one that provides good eopportunities for young people in the Peoria area.
I totally understand Emerge's comment to the effect that too often vocational classes have become dumping grounds for minority kids. That is especially true of certain kinds of courses, but I don't think offerings such as welding would fall into the category of a dumping ground.
This statement from this post expresses what should be offered to avoid vocational classes becoming dumping grounds: "On the other hand, if infused with high academic content, vocational education and school-to-career programs have a great deal to offer schools."
Maybe all of the parent education is going to come from the Martha Ross Parent University......because as well all know it is going to be standing room only.
My post didn't go through.
try again, it's not in the spam filter.
Will try again:
Just wanted to say that one of my children took vocational classes because he was interested in them along with college prep classes. He is now a top executive and can do almost any home repair himself. They are valuable for any student. Knowledge is important.
A student has to be careful, however, on the courses he or she selects depending on the college(s) they are seeking admission. Many competitive universities look to see the student is taking the most rigorous curriculum offered at the school, which may or may not be, vocational education classes.
I am a big fan of vocational education, but students taking such courses should be clear about what their career goals are.
He did also take the most rigorous curriculum offered. It can be done. Winner all around!
Apparently, all is not as advertised at Woodruff. Rumor has it that one of the administrators will be demoted. Where do all these demoted administrators go and at what salary? I don't know if has been made official but I was given to understand that the director or Ricketts (scapegoat for the book debacle) was demoted.
Talk about deceitfulness-has anyone seen the school calendar that was just distributed. For each month, there are black and white photographs of people working in technological settings (auto mechanics, electric shop, etc., etc.) and on most months there is a narrative about the wonderful things happening at Woodruff. The problem is that the pictures are stock photos--not of any place or people in District 150. There are about three photos of District 150 personnel scattered throughout--it would appear to give the impression that all are of Woodruff.
Emerge, and others...
This thread appears to have gone quiet a few months ago. 6 months later it seems worth revisiting it.
There are a few things that are a bit murky about the implementation of this "technical and occupational program" at middle school level.
First: it took me MONTHS to even learn what the program was called ("Growing up Ready" is its name), and emails to District about this went unanswered (I received one terse reply to my request for best practices references that influenced the district's decision to implement this VERY EXPENSIVE program -- Ms. Lathan told me to talk to my principal. As it wasn't my principal's decision, I've been unsurprised to see that subsequent mails to her have been roundly ignored). IN SUM, the district is not fulfilling its Title I mandate to keep parents informed.
Second, the program IS at CCMS and not at Washington Gifted (sorry I don't know if it has been force fed to white schools other than Washington, only that Washington students are NOT being compromised). It's not clear what makes the difference -- ie whether it's race, or wealth of parents, or non-giftedness that makes the decision about who has to give up space, instructional time, hopes of college -- remember, no answers from district?. IN SUM, the district appears to be gleefully diving into a new form of SEPARATE "BUT EQUAL" education.
Third, the implementation of "Growing up Ready" has made Foreign Language instruction be demoted to "Encore" (ie only optional for future factory workers) status, in which kids can opt for 9 weeks of spanish out of a school year. IN SUM, doesn't the district realize that when they prep all our "non-gifted" students to be nannies and gardeners, the non-gifted will have to be able to communicate with their Caterpillar-employed bosses on their three-years from Colombia and Spain?
Fourth, the students, 6 months later, consider this class a joke. IN SUM, making fruit smoothies just doesn't seem to carry weight...but I am glad to say, thanks to Paxton, my daughter now will be able to diaper the baby that they seem to be preparing her to have in her teen years.
So Emerge, I am not sure this program is fitting in with your model -- if it did, I'd be okay with it.
Do I hear dumping ground?
For the record, when did Cat become experts in education? and for the record, I know a skilled welder (see Ms. Crews above) who works at Cat for a few weeks and gets laid off, then works a few weeks and gets laid off -- his skills sure don't guarantee him fulltime, year round employment or professional respect. None of the college-degreed engineers (or non-engineers) that I know at Cat get laid off at all. Which do I want my kid to go after? Chris Arvin (the Cat spokesman prominently featured on Paxton-Patterson's website) must think that Peoria parents all were educated in Paxton labs (view him as he talks about the college degrees that only 25% of our kids need, and the high school "degrees" that are going to help the other 75% of kids have "careers" at http://www.paxtonpatterson.com/blog/post/2012/02/17/College-for-All.aspx -- but I recommend doing so on an empty stomach).
Better lead line for my recent comment:
District 150's new DUMPING GROUND INITIATIVE: We've got to get kids ready for sub-par pay before they reach high school. (re: post about Paxton/"Growing up Ready" in middle schools.
Post a Comment