A panelist who spoke out in favor of a portfolio school model that “dumps the low performers” has set off controversy about Philadelphia public schools.

Mark Gleason, executive director of the Philadelphia School Partnership, an organization that solicits millions of dollars in donations in support of innovative school programs, made the remarks during a panel discussion at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, held this month at the Pennsylvania Convention Center.

Gleason said the portfolio school was a business term borrowed from Wall Street and was part of an educational model that allows for a diverse number of operators. It debuted in New Orleans, which was forced to rebuild after Hurricane Katrina, before expanding to other major cities, including New York City and Philadelphia.

The portfolio school model, Gleason explained, “keeps the high performers and dumps the low performers.” He said the Philadelphia public school system is undermined by its own bureaucracy. “You lose sight of what really drives a school,” Gleason said during the panel discussion.

He pointed to portfolio schools in New Orleans as a model, saying the school system runs effectively without a central office, managed instead by “regulators.” He added, “Over time, you keep raising expectations of what we want from our schools.”

Philadelphia School Superintendent William Hite Jr. immediately rebutted the remarks during the panel discussion, saying, “I could not disagree more, particularly with how we think about this work. We have to be cautious and careful with that.”

Hite said he could offer fairer comparisons about what works and doesn’t work, citing The Workshop School, formerly the Sustainability Workshop, a project-based education model created by teachers, as an example. “We really feel it is important to create more of those high schools,” he said.

Local education advocates bristled at the remarks.

“I think his comments were frankly sickening,” said Helen Gym, co-founder of Parents United for Public Education, said, “That’s not how we think about schools and children and their responsibility to public education. That kind of model has only exacerbated the problem in the district. It has done nothing to improve overall inequities within the district.”

Jerry Jordan, president of Philadelphia Federation of Teachers, said, “I’ll make it very clear: none of our children are losers. That’s why they’re going to school so they can learn and contribute to this city and this country.”

“I even hate the idea of talking about schools as losers, especially children. It’s just wrong,” he said.

“I think the portfolio concept of schools is not a good model,” Jordan continued. “I think you’re always going to have to successful schools and schools that aren’t performing as well as others. In all urban centers, you have to look at the effect of poverty and the effect of poverty on families and children.

“When you’re talking about a district that has been underfunded for so long and resources that are needed in order to support children and families, you’re not going to have the same kind of outcomes as more affluent districts,” Jordan said.

The union chief alluded to research showing children living in low-income households hear far fewer words than their peers from more affluent communities.

“They’re at a disadvantage when they begin. The sooner you can get them into an educational setting, the more likely they are to get caught up by the time they reach the first grade,” Jordan said.

Inadequate funding for public education is the core issue, said Kia Hinton, education chair for ACTION United, an education advocacy group.

“Elected officials in our city and our state aren’t properly funding our schools. And we have this group of people who are using this underfunding of schools to push their agenda of privatizing schools instead of using research-based ways to improve our schools that would strengthen students, schools, and parents.

“They would rather go another route that would profit someone other than our students and communities. It’s horrible,” she said.

Ted Kirsch, president of the American Federation of Teachers, Pennsylvania, responded in a statement: “Mark Gleason’s remarks show a complete lack of understanding about the price children in our poorest communities are paying because of Gov. Corbett’s billion-dollar education budget cuts.

“Public schools in Pennsylvania’s poorest communities are being starved into dysfunction so privatization advocates can promote profit-driven, corporate education reform. Our public schools are not stocks and bonds to be bought and sold for profit, or dumped when they no longer fit into someone’s ‘portfolio.’ Public schools are long-term investments in our children and in our communities.

Donna Cooper, executive director of Public Citizens for Children and Youth, addressed misconceptions about portfolio schools.

“Portfolio schools does not, de facto, mean that lowest performing schools are closed,” Cooper explained, saying the model simply refers to attempts to manage schools under various education models.

“You have to try to lift the performance of all who use the model by creating internal competition to drive up performance across the entire model,” she said.

“The portfolio model is not new. You have Career and Technical Education centers, neighborhood schools and special admit schools are examples of portfolio school models dating back decades ago,” Cooper said.

“That’s what portfolio school model is about, taking what’s working in one school and replicating it in another,” she added.

Jonathan Cetel, executive director of Penn CAN, released a statement: “We already have an unequal education system that creates winners and losers. The winners are the students who live in the catchment of a great neighborhood school, win the lottery for one of the city’s high-performing charter schools, or gain admission into one of the many magnet schools.

“PennCAN believes that all students should have the opportunity to be a winner in their own education and we are working hard to create the policy conditions necessary to increase access to high-quality school options for all students. The phrase “portfolio model” simply means that the education system shouldn’t be a “one size fits all” approach. We need a diverse array of school options to serve the varied needs of families and communities.”

Cetel endorsed successful district-managed models such as Science Leadership Academy, The Workshop School and high performing charter school providers such as KIPP and Mastery Charter Schools.

“We also support giving schools and principals the flexibility to make staffing decisions based on the needs of students, rather than on the length of time a teacher has been in the classroom,” he said. “Our current system provides unequal access to quality education. It’s time to take steps to ensure that all students have access to a great school.”

According to Cooper and Paul Socolar, editor of the Philadelphia Public Schools Notebook, public interest in portfolio schools sparked after a failed attempt to privatize the school district and word spread about the growth of independently run charter schools.

“There is no such thing as loser schools. We are all losing,” Cooper said, referring to $300 million budget gap last year as result of losses in school aid. “We need a stable and well funded school district that has a predictable stream of income. You can’t lose $300 million in state aid and expect the district to function well.”

There are advantages to charter school programs, which have found success in elevating academic performance in neighborhood schools with high percentage of students eligible for free and reduced lunch, an indicator of poverty, Cooper said.

But the one downside is shuffling all the students with the most challenges to schools with the least resources. “That’s not a good model for anybody,” Cooper said.

There are many students and teachers who want to perform well but she said some buildings need a jolt that will push them to rise to the challenge of meeting the needs that kids bring to school. This will require focus on three areas: school climate, leadership and instructional, and leadership.

The Philadelphia Tribune – April 17, 2014 – Read article online