home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
TIME: Almanac 1995
/
TIME Almanac 1995.iso
/
time
/
032690
/
0326120.000
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1994-03-25
|
6KB
|
128 lines
<text id=90TT0754>
<title>
Mar. 26, 1990: Parent Power's First Big Test
</title>
<history>
TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1990
Mar. 26, 1990 The Germans
</history>
<article>
<source>Time Magazine</source>
<hdr>
EDUCATION, Page 72
Parent Power's First Big Test
</hdr>
<body>
<p>Clashes over local councils roil Chicago's schools
</p>
<p> The cafeteria at Chicago's Morgan Park High School was
jammed, and tempers were rising. Only a week earlier, the
school's new eleven-member, parent-led governing council had
voted not to renew principal Walter Pilditch's contract. The
move had sparked violent protests among students, parents and
teachers, resulting in seven injuries and ten arrests. Now
council president Calvin Pearce was gamely trying to get on
with other pressing matters.
</p>
<p> But many in the crowd would not cooperate. They demanded to
know why principal Pilditch, a 21-year veteran, had been fired.
When the council refused to discuss the reasons, Cheri Dybus,
mother of a Morgan Park junior, rose and stormed out of the
room. "They don't know what they're doing!" she said. "It's a
political power trip. Pilditch has raised the scores of these
children. These people don't represent me!"
</p>
<p> Morgan Park is one of a handful of schools that have been
shaken by turmoil in recent weeks after principals were ousted
by local councils. The dismissals were the first big test of
a revolutionary decentralization scheme launched last fall by
the city of Chicago. Under the plan, locally elected councils--composed of six parents, two community residents, two
teachers and an ex-officio member, the principal--were put
in charge of each of Chicago's 541 public schools. The aim was
to shift authority from the city's bloated board of education
to local neighborhoods. But giving parents the power to hire
and fire principals, approve budgets and develop long-range
plans for improving student performance has so far proved to
be more of a headache than a panacea for the nation's third
largest school district.
</p>
<p> The problems erupted early this month, when about half of
the school councils were required to decide whether or not to
retain their principals. A majority of those 270 panels chose
to keep their current principals; 49 did not.
</p>
<p> Protests immediately broke out at half a dozen schools where
popular principals were let go. When Spry Elementary School
principal Benedict Natzke was fired after twelve years on the
job, some teachers deserted their classrooms to lobby for his
reinstatement. Many students were divided in their loyalties.
"The council is holding the school hostage," says Natzke. "Now
we're worse off. We have local bureaucrats."
</p>
<p> Some of the bitterest clashes have taken place in schools
where Hispanic-dominated councils have ejected non-Hispanic
principals, leading disgruntled teachers and parents to
conclude that race, not competence, was the real reason for
dismissal. Language differences have only exacerbated the
mounting anger and frustration. "All members of the council
should speak Spanish and English," one member of a
predominantly Hispanic council told Catalyst, a publication
that is monitoring Chicago's decentralization efforts.
</p>
<p> Some parent-power advocates say that allegations of racism
are part of a campaign to undermine the city's experiment in
school-based management. Others play down the tensions. "There
may be some places where issues of race and ethnicity overrule
competence, but overall that is a small percentage," says
Michael Bakalis, professor of education policy at Loyola
University in Chicago and a former state superintendent of
education.
</p>
<p> Parent-led councils have also been handicapped by their lack
of training, particularly in budgetary matters. The city's
board of education has promised help but has been slow to
deliver it, giving rise to charges that the central bureaucracy
is not committed to change. "The concept is real good, but they
have set us up to fail," says Leroy Johnson, whose daughter is
a ninth-grader at Morgan Park High School.
</p>
<p> Advocates of reform continue to believe the radical
restructuring of Chicago schools will ultimately help lower the
city's 41% dropout rate and raise college entrance examination
scores, now ranked among the lowest in the U.S. "Who has the
purest commitment to the education of children?" asks State
Senator Arthur Berman, who chaired the committee that drafted
the 1988 decentralization law. "The answer is the parents."
</p>
<p> Other cities might dispute that theory. New York City
decentralized in 1969; since then, many of the 32 district
school boards have become nests of political patronage and
criminality. A third are currently under investigation for
charges ranging from embezzlement to drug dealing. At the same
time, there is little doubt that many old-fashioned centralized
school boards are in need of major overhauls. In October the
state of New Jersey stepped in and took over the Jersey City
school district because the system was found to be rife with
fiscal mismanagement.
</p>
<p> The Chicago turmoil, meanwhile, is far from over, and more
trouble could erupt this week. Uno, a Hispanic group active in
the principals controversy, is expected to pack a meeting of
the board of education. Unquestionably, the highly charged
atmosphere robs students and teachers of precious classroom
time. But, for the moment at least, many Chicagoans take some
comfort in the notion that parent-led councils, while
imperfect, could not possibly make the city's beleaguered
school system any worse. "All we've done now is empower people
to make decisions that may or may not be right," says Professor
Bakalis. "It's a mistake to believe only people with Ph.D.s
know what to do."
</p>
<p>By Susan Tifft. Reported by Elizabeth Taylor/Chicago.
</p>
</body>
</article>
</text>