Communities in Schools of Chicago Sara Ray Stoelinga, PhD April 11 th, 2013

Overview Chicago school reform context Changing demographics of CPS/segregation Achievement gap Influence on your work

Chicago Tribune: Worst in America Schools hardly more than daytime warehouses for inferior students, taught by disillusioned and inadequate teachers, presided over by a bloated, leaderless bureaucracy, and constantly undercut by a selfish, single-minded teachers union.

Two-tiered school system The Chicago Public Schools operates a two-tiered high school system, which concentrates dropout-prone students into inner-city black and Hispanic high schools. Educational triage Tracking of low-performing elementary schools to low-performing high schools Feeder system ensures failure Perpetuation of social inequality

Chicago School Reform Act: PA Established Local School Councils Reshaped the principalship Expanded influence for teachers Redirected fiscal resources Reduced line authority Central pull toward academic improvement

Early 1990s: Two problems 1. Schools were improving but decentralization was a capacity sorter. CCSR The Students Speak, (Sebring et al., 1996) Academic watch list schools (104) were characterized by: – weak leadership – a lack of any focus or impetus for school improvement – African American – Low-income – Economically and geographically isolated 2. Financial/labor crises. Strikes, early retirement: 2,200 teachers, 100 principals

CSR Amendatory Act: PA (&Paul Vallas) Paul Vallas appointed first CEO of CPS Mayoral appointment of board members Creation of CEO/CFO/CEdO positions Re-centralization w/in decentralized system Accountability – Schools on probation for low test scores (initially < 15% at national norms on the ITBS – Social promotion ended in 3 rd, 6 th, and 8 th grade (retaining approximately 20% of 3 rd graders, 15% of 6 th graders, 10% of 8 th graders)

Reform periods 1988 Decentralization: LSCs, local control 1995 Mayoral takeover/Accountability (Vallas) 2001 Arne Duncan & Barbara Eason Watkins – New schools development/turnaround 2008Ron Huberman – Performance management 2011 Jean-Claude Brizard – Portfolio strategy 2012 Barbara Byrd Bennett

School reform trends Pendulum- Centralization to Decentralization Reform evolving closer to instruction – Increasing importance of curricular materials – Greater use of instructional coaches, PD – Less focus on inputs (teacher credentialing) – Less focus on requirements (graduation criteria) Increased state intervention in schooling Increased federal intervention in schooling

Overview Chicago school reform context Changing demographics of CPS/segregation Achievement gap Influence on your work

According to the 2010 Census More than half of the growth in the total population of the United States between 2000 and 2010 was due to the increase in the Latino population. The Latino population increased by 15.2 million between 2000 and 2010, accounting for over half of the 27.3 million increase in the total population of the United States. Between 2000 and 2010, the Latino population grew by 43 percent, which was four times the growth in the total population at 10 percent. In Chicago, 10% point decrease in African American population, proportionate increase in Latino students.

Chicago Context In 1990 Chicagoland's Latino population center stood inside city limits. By 2000 it had moved out into suburban Cook County. The latest census results , show the center of Latino gravity continuing its westward march almost into DuPage, the next county over.

CPS Student Demographics Students Total : 404,151 (FY ) African-American: 41.6% Latino: 44.1% White: 8.8% Asian/Pacific Islander: 3.4% Native American: 0.4% Teachers total: 21,320 African-American: 29.7% White: 49.7% Latino: 16.1% Asian/Pacific Islander: 3.6% Native American: 0.9% Principals total: 529 African-American: 49.8% White: 30.8% Latino: 17.5% Asian/Pacific Islander: 1.5% Native American: 0.3%

Visualizing Race by Neighborhood

Overview Chicago school reform context Changing demographics of CPS/segregation Achievement gap Influence on your work

Achievement gap Refers to the disparity in academic performance between groups of students Most often used to describe gaps b/t Hispanic and AA students vs. Whites & high vs. low SES

Reason for achievement gap? The Bell Curve- gaps in student achievement were natural result of variation in students genetic make up Highly contested Experts charted that achievement gap result of race & class factors, not genetics

Reason for achievement gap? Differences in teacher quality/credentials in high vs. low-income schools Teacher expectations Race/Class as giving privilege and social capital; more demanding parents get better stuff Better working conditions for teachers in high SES schools

Strategies to address gap Reducing class size Smaller schools Early-childhood education Raising academic standards Improving teacher quality Encouraging students of color to take higher level courses

Overview Chicago school reform context Changing demographics of CPS/segregation Achievement gap Influence on your work

Outside partners… – Must recognize and work within the local control context – Must be prepared to work with/engage Latino students and families – Confront and challenge the low expectations that schools sometimes have for low income students of color – Work productively in a context of high accountability

Questions? I welcome your questions and comments…