To Open the Right Doors You Need the Right Keys
by YourSFPublicSchools Team ~ November 5th, 2009
Author: Richard Carranza, Deputy Superintendent of Instruction, Innovation and Social Justice, SFUSD
SFUSD has a new goal for students entering high school in 2010. We want every one of them to graduate eligible to enroll in California’s public university system.
This should seem like an obvious goal. But today, only 54% of students in San Francisco’s public schools graduate with the course credits required for enrollment in state universities.
You think 54% is low? Statewide, only 34% of students are making the cut.
San Francisco may be ahead of the pack, but that doesn’t make our numbers acceptable. Every student should graduate with the keys to a better future. As a district, it’s our responsibility to make sure a great college education is one of the doors available to them.
Starting next year, every student entering SF public high schools will be required to complete the A-G course sequence required for entrance to any California state university. For most students this means taking more advanced math and foreign language courses than they may have otherwise taken.
But while we want to challenge our students with the academic rigor that they need to succeed in a college environment, we have to create more opportunities for them to access courses and earn the credits they need for that opportunity.
Right now, SFUSD is exploring the ways to incorporate online courses, community college partnerships and real-world internships to better engage students and help them complete the coursework they need to meet UC requirements.
Interested in helping every San Francisco student graduate with the opportunity to enroll in college? We want to hear from you. Maybe you have an internship opportunity available with your employer, or the resources to help schools improve their capacity to make coursework relevant and exciting.
San Francisco is full of creative people who know a good opportunity when they see one, but more importantly, they have the heart to open those opportunities up to others.
Which doors will you help open?
November 6th, 2009 at 1:55 pm
Before college one must learn to read and write. Or so it used to be. It would be wonderful if we lived in a society with all 18 year olds prepared, willing and able to go to college. But it is very misleading to frame the issue of college readiness as one in which the district simply needs to provide more college prep. It is not a simple matter of taking the course AG course requirements. In order to prepare for college and do the necessary course work you have to be able to achieve a basic degree of competence in reading, writing and math. And that is not rocket science.
Everyone including the district administrators know that there is a huge literacy problem facing our youth and our schools. Large segments of our population don’t have the basic skills to do even menial jobs in this technological age. They can’t read or write sufficiently and continually fail to achieve minimal standards.. In what magical kingdom are these students going to be college bound? The district administrators love to talk about making SFUSD a prep district for college. Hello? Last I heard you have to be able to write a basic essay and be able to apply some critical thinking.
Mr. Carranza, if the district would use proven methodologies to teach basic skills, remove underperfoming teachers and administrators and limit class sizes, kids will become college bound of their own accord as a matter of choice. Providing the AG course requirements is not a solution unto itself. You can bring a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink.
November 9th, 2009 at 1:24 pm
Many schools districts are incorporating the “Multiple Pathways” program that provides career education options for kids in high school. Forcing all students to go the college prep route will inevitably lead to more dropping out as some cannot achieve the unrealistic standards set for them at this time.
Currently the CAHSEE sets the standard for graduation at 10th grade competency. Success in the first year of college is going to require more than a 10th grade knowledge. Rather than require all students to complete the AG course requirements, why not simply require that they meet 12th grade standards. If students are missing certain courses at the end of their high school career due to their own shortcomings at the time, after graduation they can move on to obtain the necessary courses at CCSF or elsewhere, knowing they have a diploma and the skills necessary to succeed. But if they fail to satisfactorily complete the AG course requirements and do not receive a diploma and/or have very low grades the district will have helped to dig them a hole which will be hard to get out of. Either way, students must obtain the fundamental skills to achieve at the college level. Simply mandating the course work is not a magic bullet and, worse yet, can backfire.
SFUSD is making a terrible mistake in making college readiness the standard. We should focus on teaching and learning and tackle the fundamental illiteracy problems before we enforce college readiness on all students. The AG course requirement is a political ploy to create the appearance of equity. Ironically. such a policy is only likely to further the academic divide.In the era of high stakes testing and standards-based education, creating unrealistic universal standards like the AG course requirements does nothing to help SFUSD children to find a place in high school that fits their own needs.
November 10th, 2009 at 1:58 am
This is very true. Don makes great points. For a kid to be ready to go to college, they need to be taught values froma young age. Responsibility, work ethic and competitiveness are key. You have to teach kids that to do well in life, you have to treat school as the most important thing, read and study 20+ hours a week, turn off the TV, and pay attention in class. If they don’t do that from a young age, it won’t be easy.
Right now, you can’t fire teachers who are incompetent. A principal should be able, at the end of a year, to look at say 19 teachers and cut the worst 1 or 2, so that the teachers know they have to focus and work hard to keep their job. Maybe not every year, but he or she should have that power. At Alamo and Presidio most teachers are excellent, but there are clearly a small number who underperform the rest and clearly the Principal could make these schools better quickly by replacing a couple teachers with recent grads who are motivated, and yet have the right to get rid of them if they don’t work hard and impress. This is what business does. I’m always afraid of being fired and this drives me to work hard, work long hours, and be the best I can be. It’s called Capitalism, not communism, and I say that as a liberal Democrat, but not a Communist Apparatchik. I also believe 80% or more of the teachers at my kids’ schools are excellent, but telling principals they can’t fire anyone unless they commit a felony is like telling LeBron James to play basketball with his left hand. In this case it is our kids, not the fans, who lose big.
We have many resources and it must be pointed out that libraries are free and can be used by all. It really all comes down to hard work and dedication. Empower principals, empower our kids, and empower parents. We are prioritizing Union rights and tenure over innocent children. This is wrong and must change.
November 10th, 2009 at 2:38 am
We must also go back to neighborhood schools, as parents are more likely to volunteer, donate and commit long-term to a school if they have certainty when they buy a house. I had 3 parent-teacher conferences this week and am at my kids’ school all the time, but many parents whose kids would increase racial and class diversity have been told they can only send their kid to a school far from home, adding to traffic, reducing involvement, and depriving the district of children who would do well and help our averages and parents who would donate and volunteer for their PTAs by driving them into private schools or to leave the City. We want these parents in SFUSD again and can achieve this by offering them a school close to home. We are the only District in the U.S. that doesn’t guarantee parents priority on getting a school close to home, and this has to change. We are a diverse city and schools would be less, not more, segregated if we offered neighborhood priority. Parents close to their kids’ schools will be more involved and studies have shown this helps children to achieve more. Put a child in a car for an hour and you deprive parents and kids of study time together and ultimately, sleep and healthy food. You make our community less connected, more stressed out, and sadder. It is hurting our communities.
November 13th, 2009 at 1:08 pm
“If students are missing certain courses at the end of their high school career due to their own shortcomings at the time, after graduation they can move on to obtain the necessary courses at CCSF or elsewhere, knowing they have a diploma and the skills necessary to succeed.”
I do agree with Mr. Krause’s point re: kids not being prepared for this radical change in instruction expectations and the effects going through with it might have, but i want to point out that CCSF held a GARAGE SALE a few weeks ago to save fall classes! If things keep going the way they are headed, with SF State and CCSF classes getting cut to the bone and beyond, there will be no alternative for kids who want to continue their education but for whatever reason, can’t.
November 17th, 2009 at 5:40 pm
It is humilating to have courses cut. I traveled through the orient and the respect for education is high. It’s considered more important to offer everyone any class they want than for millionaires to get a tax cut. It’s also more important to get a good grade than watch TV or goof off. In Europe, particularly England, children who don’t read much are considered ridiculous and everyone believes it’s more important to forego an extra yacht for a millionaire and keep the class than give more money to the rich in tax cuts. However, everyone has their fingers in the pot here. Teachers need to embrace merit pay and any principal should be able to fire teachers who aren’t good, and teachers have supported a union leadership that prevents needed reforms.. Everyone is selfish and it hurts the kids. We need to put the kids #1, not ease of work and lack of stress over firing for people who are lucky enough to have Summer off, not tax cuts for Bill Gates, but innocent young children. We also need to praise the best students, not the worst.
January 15th, 2010 at 12:12 pm
Pretty good post. I just stumbled upon your blog and wanted to say that I have really enjoyed reading your blog posts.
January 15th, 2010 at 8:20 pm
I really loved that post, I am a little puzzled, and have a tiny question. May I send you an email?