Jackson Jambalaya

$9,599,599 million is a WHOLE lot of money...

Well you'll need consultants, lots of administrators to hire and conferences to attend.

9:33 AND vehicles. Will need SUVs, big vans, sedans, and of course credit cards to pay for the gas to travel to "events."

"95% of RePublic’s students identify as people of color."

And what do the other 5% identify as?

Its a federal grant. That means there are guidelines. Someone has to monitor the spending, provide an outline for how money is spent, track it, and report it. Ask the city of Jackson how that turned out when they didn't do it for the HUD grant.

I went to a parent night their last week and I was very Impressed with the commitment, expertise, and strategies that they employ. In reality, I didn't see too much that they do that couldn't be done in a traditional public school in Jackson. I do like the MS charter law that forbids for-profit charter management companies and mandates that the charters serve a more representative student population of the surrounding neighborhood.

I, for one, see the charter as an option, not necessarily a solution for the challenges of education in urban centers. One advantage any charter has over a traditional school is the self selection of parents/students. A charter offers a program, like extended day or mandatory parental commitment, and the parents that can accommodate those requirements enroll their students and parents that can't/won't accommodate these things don't. Ultimately, you end up with a student population that is, if not more prepared to learn, better supported in the home, which is a plus. While a district couldn't mandate these things district wide, perhaps it could offer these things in a few of its schools as an option for parents who choose to enroll their children. This would hit on two main pillars that characterize successful urban schools , time on task and parental involvement. So, JPS, instead of complaining about the money being drawn away from the schools by charters, run the charters out of business by offering what the charters offer, extended school days, mandatory parental commitment (in homework help, student attendance, and volunteer hours of "sweat equity" around the school), and, perhaps in a novel experiment, more culturally responsive curricula and pedagogy (Reimagine prep discussed a lesson on the "Ain't I a Woman" poem by Sojourner Truth at the parent night).

One draw back I see from the charter was the quite narrow curriculum. The students were taught math, science, social studies, literature, and computer science. That's it. All students, all day, everyday (with some breaks for active learning like dance and gym). I'm for working to ensure that the students develop advanced academic skills, but this has to be done in a way that creates within the student a joy of learning (which the school is intentionally trying to instill in its encouragement of students to try more rigorous work in an effort to strengthen their "mind muscles" and learn from failing). The joy starts with a comprehensive exploration of the totality of the human experience. Children need classes in the arts, music, theater, creativity, etc. They need extra curricular activities like debate, robotics, sports, social/community service clubs, etc. (Especially minority students in urban centers). These things help the kids see a different reality, which is vital for them to broaden their worldview and think outside of what their environment and experiences have prescribed for them (look at Harlem Children's Zone for an exemplar program).

Ultimately, whether charter or traditional, the Jackson Community needs to interrogate the notions of school accountability being driven by test scores. This is why the curriculum gets narrowed and decisions made to not incorporate whole learning for children. Everything is driven by test scores or graduation rates or whatever else is required under the accountability model. We as a community must ask ourselves, is what we need in our children and from our schools just a higher test score? Do we need children who are trained in test taking strategies and just learn what is on a test, or do we need schools to develop and draw out of our students their God given potential and creativity?

Nice attempt at propaganda. What you left out was that thirty percent of those kids could not much math when they arrived. A large percentage of them could did not test past a first or second grade reading level. Cherry picking my ass.

If you had actually done your homework and spoken to the principal, which you obviously did not, you would have learned that these kids are not cream of the crop or superstars. 80% or more come from single-parent homes, 80-90% qualify for the school lunch federal program. These are the kids most at risk but then that would destroy your narrative, wouldn't it?

yet you claim the curriculum is too narrow. Yeah, right. They can't read, write, do math, and understand science, they have a real chance of functioning in the real world, don't they? They are teaching computer coding to every student. How many JPS schools do that? Madison County School District has ONE that does so. The world and economy is becoming more hi-tech. It sounds to me like the school is keeping up with the world, not looking behind.

You are absolutely correct Kingfish. No "cherry-picking" here. These children are 98% eligible for free lunches and come mostly from the area around St. Theresa's Catholic Church. They are the same level as many in public schools. This is going to be a level playing field when it comes to comparing results and don't let anyone tell you differently.

The Principal is a "ball of fire and energy" and New Horizons supports them one hundred percent! Why are some so opposed to trying something different if it will save these children from poverty and crime and give them a chance at a better life?

Kingfish,

Where did I say they "Cherry Picked"? I simply said that the students were better supported (as evidenced by the turnout at the parent night) than many in the traditional public school. I also mentioned that by state law, their enrollment had to mirror the population in the neighborhood. So you are arguing a straw man, I never said they cherry picked.

My point about the narrow curriculum is that the students and teachers will eventually burn out if all they do is that core curriculum. All students deserve diverse learning experiences, regardless of their current academic proficiency. In order to develop advanced learning skills, it takes actual time on task (not just structured). In other words, the kids themselves must give the extra time and effort. In order for kids to do this, they will have to enjoy what they are doing. Also, to maximize any effort to the kids would give, the school should look at various learning styles and craft a diversity of learning experiences for the kids.

I am from Memphis, a urban center that is lauded nationally for the innovations they are putting in place concerning charter schools. Second to New Orleans, Memphis probably has more charter schools serving children all around the city, in different ways. Just like New Orleans, the charters are proving not to really be solving anything, but that is not to say they aren't helping. Like I suggested, the charters can provide a model for what the traditional schools could do. I find it also interesting that people are quick to dismiss providing a holistic learning experience for poor, black kids around the state under the guise that they "can't read, write, or do math" so anything else would be a waste of time. Yet, MS lags behind most other sates on many academic measures, and people here see the only answer as less investment, less diversity, and less true learning, in the name of "efficiency".

A school with a narrow curriculum and pedagogy is just not a good school, period. I wonder, though, would a narrow curriculum fly in places like Madison or Desoto? I wonder why? Are the kids there just simply smarter, or have they had the advantage of good schooling all along? Do we see a narrow curriculum in Pre-K or the early grades there, so the kids can enjoys sports, the arts, clubs, and field trips later on? Of course not!!!

"The students were taught math, science, social studies, literature, and computer science."

Trade comp sci for a foreign language and you have the core curriculum for St. Andrew's. Their record speaks for itself as far as where their grads wind up.

And page after page of your bloviating will never change that.

I asked Ravi at the school opening about foreign language. He agreed about the importance of it in a curriculum but thinks the coding/computer science is more important.

THe public schools are real weak in teaching foreign languages. The private schools in this area start teaching it in either elementary school or kindergarten. The public schools, even the good ones, don't start until middle school or later. Even A districts such as Rankin are weak in this area. Notice Mr. (Southern Echo because I think I know who this is) Diversity doesn't ever criticize the public schools for not offering foreign languages as a standard part of the curriculum at an early age when teaching it is most effective.

The last time I checked, St. Andrews had sports teams, civic /social clubs, a theater and visual art departments, debate teams, robotics teams, even a geography bee team. In fact, a brief review of their website would note that they have over 40 faculty sponsored clubs outside of sports and visual/performing arts. I'm not saying do those things instead of the core subjects, but along with. Right now the charter is ONLY doing core curriculum. Perhaps as they grow that will change, but narrowing the curriculum, in a charter, private or traditional public school, is simply not a good schooling policy.

Well said KF. When some guy writes 5 paragraphs on a blog during the work day, yeah, probably has some propaganda intent. Probably a public school administrator. Who else as that much time to type during the day?

Kingfish; Please proofread (and edit as required) your posts prior to entering them. Your second one, above, was much better. The first retort was disastrous.

A child who can't read or properly use English, or comprehend what they are reading, is not able to learn to enjoy for example: Shakespeare, or the beauty of a Robert Frost poem. Some of their works are surprisingly prime examples of the basics of civil, daily living. You need basic math skills to assist with learning logical thinking, not always to see if someone is shorting your change. Computer skills are necessary to survive in even the most basic jobs. Social Studies teaches history: to understand and discuss our past, present and futures. PhysEd makes for strong, healthy bodies, teaches sportsmanship, fair play, and tames aggressive behavior. These Charter Students deserve stability and someone to hold their hand. For whatever reason, they didn't get this in their early years. They WILL be challanged. Advanced Placement classes do no good if you haven't mastered the basics. These kids aren't stupid, either. The parents, no matter how uneducated they are, see the importance of education and want to see their kids to succeed. Rejoice that they care, don't push for extras at this level. These kids don't need "AP" this and that. They need to see success, which DOES breed success in later years. As far as their future careers. Hiring authorities like to hire those with College Degrees, not just because they learned what every other student did (the exception being nursing and other titles with specific skills needed), but because they were able to START and COMPLETE a task...namely college. They hope this will follow through in their work habits and work ethic in the "real world." I think this is what the charter schools are trying to achieve.

@2:46,

Of course basic academic skills are necessary to access advanced learning and even appreciate academic learning in general. The challenge is how do we impart those skills to students who, in the case of the children being served in urban centers, probably have not had a good opportunity to acquire these skills. A narrow curriculum doesn't help impart these skills better than a robust one. Hence, you don't see narrow curricula at good schools, period. The only places you see such narrow curricula are in schools where there is a disproportionate representation of poor and minority students. That is because these are where the children of the voiceless and powerless are compelled to go to school. If a narrow curriculum worked to impart basic academic skills, you would see this at all good schools, but alas you won't see this at any good school.


Charters are notorious for narrow curricula and pedagogy. They can get away with it because when students don't respond to the narrow curricula or pedagogy, the charters can weed them out, or they simply are subject to their charter being revoked, due to accountability. Public schools that have narrow curricula and pedagogy are either "Low performing" or do not exhibit sustained success. Either way, the assertion that students that are behind need a narrow curriculum and pedagogy neglects the notion of differentiation in learning styles and the concepts of relevance and relativity in their schooling. Students must connect to the content and skills they are being taught if they are to invest the time and effort necessary to acquire the knowledge and skills they need to be successful. A narrow curriculum doesn't respect that reality.

2:09 Dumbass - we're talking about a brand new school in its first year, are we not? How many extracurricular activities did SA have in 1947, their first year?

Just shut up and go away. Those of us who have paid a bundle to get our kids the best available education (that means SA) may grumble amongst ourselves, but we keep paying it because we know what the alternatives are like round these parts.

10:08 - translucent...

Well a Broad Cirriculum is working really well in JPS isn't it! Looks to me like it's Reading, Writing and Arithmetic with computer skills. The first three seemed to work well on prior generations. Doesn't make much sense to offer a broad Cirriculum when the average students aren't handling the basics.

I've never heard of RePublic or ReImagine Prep. Interesting. I guess. But, at the end of the day, in the throng of people at the Coliseum Job Fair, will it matter whether they attended RePublic or Provine or Jim Hill? My best bet is you tell a recruiter you graduated from RePublic or ReImagine Prep and the recruiter will ask you what the hell that is.

I once attended an "Old Charter" school. Wait a minute. It might have been a bar.

Sounds like the charter schools have just developed an effective means of separating the "want to's" from the "don't care's".