A New Era of School Reform

page 1, 2, 3, 4
(Page 2 of 4)

The State Constitution says all Maryland public school students are entitled to “a thorough and efficient” education. Schiller, however, contended that in Baltimore City Public Schools (BCPS), thorough and efficient teaching and learning were not taking place. Results of the previous year’s Maryland School Performance Assessment Program (MSPAP) showed just 13.5 percent of Baltimore’s 109,000 students performing satisfactorily, almost 60 points lower than in the state’s second-lowest-ranking jurisdiction.

Based on his findings, Schiller penned recommendations for a “transition plan,” the road map for the first five years of court-ordered reform. “Robert’s Rules” included instructional priorities and strategies for improving student achievement during the 1997-98 school year, and Schiller’s own “10-point plan for raising the level of academic achievement.” The Transition Plan was approved in August by the new board, after extensive community input. It lays the foundation for the Master Plan, which will guide the system from July 1, 1998 through 2002.

Thus, the Transition Plan consists of five main goals aimed at improving student achievement and school system management. Each goal lists specific strategies for implementation, clear benchmarks for measuring progress, and progressive action for meeting specific deadlines. The five goals are:

1. Increase reading and math proficiency in grades one-to-three
2. Increase math proficiency in grades seven, eight, and nine
3. Implement the Long-Range Compliance Plan for special education
4. Provide safe, clean, civil, and orderly learning environments
5. Design and implement effective management practices

Hired for three months (with a possible three-month extension), Schiller–former state superintendent of Michigan’s public schools and author of that state’s MSPAP equivalent–was charged with ensuring that Baltimore City’s Public School System shined in its first semester of reform–that the mechanisms were in place to attain the necessary levels of student achievement to secure funding for the next year. Toward that end, starting in September, principals of 51 reconstruction-eligible schools–those facing state take-over due to poor performance–were required to report to the CEO and board each month and demonstrate strides in student achievement. Schiller had built his career on fixing broken school systems. As a principal and administrator, he had previously jump-started and restructured ailing systems in Michigan, Delaware, Louisiana, and New Jersey.

The first installment of the funding for reform, $30 million, arrived with the new school year. Schiller and the board spent it in very visible ways, including calling teachers out of retirement to lower the teacher-to-student ratios in elementary schools and establishing after-school academies for students who needed extra help. Schiller also began attending to long-ignored maintenance problems in many schools.

October came and went, and Schiller, who had a 120-day contract, got a 60-day extension. Along with spending money, Schiller started taking names. He made a general call for resignation letters and received quite a few of them. He replaced a dozen ineffective principals. Between July 1 and December 1, 1997, the system hired 1,062 new teachers, not including the 166 teachers called out of retirement to lower the student-to-teacher ratio. That was a big jump in teacher vacancies filled. During the entire 1996-97 school year, the city hired 826 new teachers.

Like a physician, Baltimore’s new school board examined its sick patient–measuring the vital signs in dismal scores, dropout rates and attendance figures. All the data pointed to one conclusion, only radical treatments would save the city’s ailing schools.

Statistics compiled over the previous months as the school board started the state-initiated reform movement showed that:

• About 63 percent of the class of 1994 dropped or flunked out during their four years in high schools in Baltimore.
• Only 9 percent of Baltimore’s eighth-graders passed a national math test the year before, the lowest passing rate of any state that gives the test.
• The average SAT score for Baltimore students is 832 out of 1,600, the second-worst among 22 urban areas in the nation.

That was just the beginning.

One of the most troubling facts was the difference between Baltimore’s test scores on the Maryland School Performance Assessment Program (MSPAP) and those surrounding counties. On average, 13.8 percent of the city’s third, fifth, and eighth-graders passed the exam in spring 1997, while most counties averaged 45 percent to 50 percent. In Prince George’s County, considered to be most like Baltimore in demographics, 29.2 percent of the children passed–twice as many as in Baltimore. Student scores at some city schools did meet the state average.