  News950 Member Username: News950 Post Number: 49 Registered: 03-2008 |
Bi-partisan effort in Lansing to break up DPS into several smaller districts. Idea is, at least in part, from State Representative Bert Johnson, Democrat from Highland Park, who has two kids in DPS. State supt. supports the plan. http://www.wwj.com/Lawmakers-W ork-To-Reform-Detroit-Schools/ 3838844 | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 4475 Registered: 02-2004 |
That's a sharp ideal. That way management will improve. | ||
Andylinn Member Username: Andylinn Post Number: 1073 Registered: 04-2006 |
Better or worse it would create district service differentials. Some districts (downtown / midtown? sw?) might be half decent, while north of BE up to Palmer Woods would be a desert. | ||
Detroitstar Member Username: Detroitstar Post Number: 1422 Registered: 01-2006 |
This would be good and bad,but certainly not worse than what we have in place right now. This would streamline services and improve district communications. However it would likely hurt long standing relationships between various long-time affiliated schools. However, this is a small price to pay for improved education. | ||
Eastsideal Member Username: Eastsideal Post Number: 309 Registered: 10-2007 |
We've been down this road before. Doesn't anyone remember the disasters of the regional school board era? | ||
Crumbled_pavement Member Username: Crumbled_pavement Post Number: 684 Registered: 08-2007 |
No, refresh our memories . . . | ||
Fury13 Member Username: Fury13 Post Number: 2066 Registered: 10-2003 |
Regional areas within the same district is a totally different concept than separate districts. I think that smaller, separate districts is a great idea. Much more manageable, more accountability, less opportunity to hide mismanagment due to more transparency, and more opportunity for residents to get closely involved. I've often wondered why DPS wasn't broken up into smaller districts; now, it may actually happen. | ||
Eastsideal Member Username: Eastsideal Post Number: 310 Registered: 10-2007 |
Those are all the same arguments that were made in favor of the regional school district concept back in the late '60s and early '70s. What ended up happening is that the regional school boards, their offices, and the schools they controlled ended up being money sinks for all sorts of political patronage and sweetheart deals for friends of the board members and regional superintendents and staff members. This went almost unchecked, because little attention was paid downtown or in the media to what was going on, say, way over on the northwest side. The people who were involved in schools in the regions, rather than gaining greater say in school operations, mostly found themselves dealing with another intractable layer of bureaucracy, corruption, and larger manipulated political interests between them and any improvements for their schools. Positions on the boards themselves ended up being political perks for all sorts of neighborhood hacks and favor-doers running in elections that had little or no competition and very low voter participation. These positions became launching pads for potential political careers, as places where people could make the profitable connections that helped them fund runs at higher offices. A number of the Detroit politicians that people here love to hate rose through the regional school boards and the connections they made there, most notably the amazing Lonnie Bates. Eventually though, the the attraction of these regional board seats declined as the central board took back more and more control over the purse strings, and some regions couldn't even fill all their board seats. All that was left was massive duplication in staffing and a significant amount of money going to fund many people around the city all doing essentially the same jobs. After 8+ years of this madness the people of the city wisely voted the regional concept out of existence in 1981 by a 3 to 1 margin. However, the regional staffs had become entrenched enough to resist abolition for another 2 years until superintendent Arthur Jefferson finally abolished them himself in 1983. | ||
Eastsideal Member Username: Eastsideal Post Number: 311 Registered: 10-2007 |
In my mind the last thing Detroit schools need is MORE administration. What they badly need is a more professional and responsible administration that actually has some interest in the children they're charged with educating. I'm actually strongly in favor of a more centralized and streamlined authority, much like NYC has with Joel Klein. But multiplying the hacks it seems to me will do little but multiply the existing problems, and take even more money away from actual education. | ||
Iheartthed Member Username: Iheartthed Post Number: 3761 Registered: 04-2006 |
I don't like it. How will they break the district up? I'm guessing it will be done along neighborhood boundaries, meaning more affluent families send their kids to certain districts and poorer families send their kids to poor districts. This will just shift the burdens on the district at large to those smaller districts and leave them with even less funds to operate. I don't see how this will make the district more "manageable". | ||
Foxyscholar Member Username: Foxyscholar Post Number: 274 Registered: 12-2007 |
I think I was in Region 4 (northwest side...Fenkell/Greenfield area). I remember waiting in line (w/my parents) to get into Ludington. Breaking up the district back into regions could work...but doesn't get at the root of the issue that the district needs to be drastically downsized, period. | ||
Newport1128 Member Username: Newport1128 Post Number: 264 Registered: 05-2007 |
"Let's split up. That way we can do more damage." - Bill Murray in "Ghostbusters" | ||
Gnome Member Username: Gnome Post Number: 2355 Registered: 08-2007 |
Eastsideal, excellent post. You're spot-on with your historical perspective. The previous decentralized system was a mess that eventually blew up when the voters finally got tired of the school board members taking chauffeured limos to the grocery store. Don't think that's hyperbole, it was as sad as it was true. | ||
English Member Username: English Post Number: 439 Registered: 10-2003 |
And after the regions were the Areas of the 1980s and 1990s... We need someone from the outside to come in, kick butt and take names... | ||
65memories Member Username: 65memories Post Number: 452 Registered: 10-2003 |
And to add to Eastsideal and English's posts, the system as been over-administered with Regional Superintendents, Area Superintendents, Executive Directors and now Assistant Superintendents. One point though about the the Regional system...it is not the same as being proposed currently. The regions were never autonomous...they were always tied into the Central Board. Breaking DPS up into smaller districts would be like the city of Warren which has Warren, Warren Woods etc. The smaller districts would be completely independent. For example, the Mumford constellation, with Mumford (2300 students), Renaissance, Randolph Vocational and the feeder schools could be one district. Whatever is the answer, the status quo ain't. | ||
Fury13 Member Username: Fury13 Post Number: 2069 Registered: 10-2003 |
Maybe a better idea would be to break up the city of Detroit into five or six municipalities, and then each one could have its own school district. | ||
65memories Member Username: 65memories Post Number: 454 Registered: 10-2003 |
School districts are independent of cities and their boundaries. You can do that without breaking the city up (although that's another idea worthy of discussion) | ||
Fury13 Member Username: Fury13 Post Number: 2072 Registered: 10-2003 |
I was pretty much being facetious. Pretty much. | ||
English Member Username: English Post Number: 441 Registered: 10-2003 |
The only way this works is if each smaller district has magnet options K-12. Under this system, I wouldn't have been eligible for Bates Academy... Still an idea worth playing around with IMO. | ||
Brownfieldguy Member Username: Brownfieldguy Post Number: 22 Registered: 02-2009 |
Bad idea. Yes, let's decentralize everything so now we will have five, six, four, or whatever different groups to deal with. Give it two years and little kingdoms will be set up and all will be the same. Its a Dilbert comic strip if I ever saw one. First we one district, then we break it up into regions, etc. Then we get to the early 1980s and see that this does not work and eureka, a new idea! Let's centralize everything. Well that does not work, so now let's break it up into little districts. What is the difference? How about gut the hell out of the existing district and destroy the entire administrative management of the whole thing. I mean kill it. The damage wrought on the citizens of this city has been huge. I do not really care one iota that some career fools may end up with no job or future in this city as it pertains to public education. How about admit defeat and go to the feds and ask for a federally controlled intervention team to reestablish a new school district that can then be slowly integrated back into the fabric of local control over the next 10, 12, or 15 years. Yes, absolutely drastic and not appealing because local control will be gone. But the local administrative control by those that we have in charge now or from Lansing is not the answer. Look at the track record. I say if the President of the United States wants to make a mark on education in this country, then establishment of a federal intervention program to cleanup and revitalize the urban education system in this country could lead to a wonderful legacy. Newt Gingrich is right (and I am no fan of this guy), but when he uses Detroit as an example of if we can't get it right here, then we can't get it right anywhere. Use Detroit as a test case, an example. If it works, then push this option elsewhere in the country where similar conditions exist. I guess I want a hard nosed czar who will kick ass and take names. Somebody who has Administration level authority who can hammer through the entrenched interests who do not want change to occur. Sorry, for the venting, but I feel a huge level of frustration on this issue. Education is one of the most basic and single important rights we have that dictates our future. You show me a child with a poor education and I will show you a child who has less opportunity for a successful and prosperous life. | ||
Professorscott Member Username: Professorscott Post Number: 1786 Registered: 12-2006 |
I don't know, brownfieldguy. I look at it this way: 1. DPS is unarguably badly managed, and most schools do a poor job educating students. Overhead for administration is high to a bizarre degree. 2. If you break up DPS and create smaller districts, some of them will be just as badly run, but perhaps some of them will be run better. 3. If you allow parents to choose their district, people will flock to the better-run schools. At the end of this, it's quite likely some of the more poorly run districts will utterly fail, and close up shop. But if you have two grocery stores in your neighborhood, and one is much better than the other, eventually the worse one closes and nobody misses it. Also, the well-run districts, since people will want to send their children to those schools, might see (gasp) increased populations in their neighborhoods. I certainly think this is worth a try; we could hardly do any worse than we're doing right now. | ||
Firstandten Member Username: Firstandten Post Number: 659 Registered: 05-2006 |
Here's the problem as I see it, you will have 5 or 6 most likely poorly run smaller district than 1 large district. A couple of reasons the district is so poorly run is due to mismanagement in procurement/contracting and personnel. Couple with multiple school boards I see the same problems only multiplied. I think what would be a better solution is having the mayor take control of the district and hire a tough-as-nails school reformer to report to that mayor. Either get rid or greatly reduce the power of the school board. | ||
Eastsideal Member Username: Eastsideal Post Number: 312 Registered: 10-2007 |
Don't worry about venting Brownfield, you're on the right track. The state of urban schools in this country is a national disgrace, and no other wealthy country on the planet stands for such things. Detroit may be a worst case scenario, but that makes it all the more compelling as a place to try out a new way of doing things. At the very least we should do as firstandten recommends, which is basically what was done in New York City. There the mayor was given control, shut down the whole old administration, appointed his own guy in full control, moved the administration to a building right behind city hall. The NYC schools are far from perfect, still overcrowded (not a Detroit problem...)and underfunded with far too low a graduation rate, but things there have very definitely improved significantly over the last 8 years. | ||
Townonenorth Member Username: Townonenorth Post Number: 812 Registered: 10-2007 |
Just a quick question, if I may. How much does a DPS school board member get paid? Who authorizes (as in a post above) use of limo's to drive anywhere? | ||
Professorscott Member Username: Professorscott Post Number: 1790 Registered: 12-2006 |
Here's my question: how many people work for DPS who do not work in a school serving children directly? So this means I'm not counting the teachers, lunch aides, custodian or principal, guidance counselor or people like that. I also don't count school bus drivers. Small school districts are managed by a very small central office staff, and almost everybody working for the district works in a school. My guess is that DPS has a very oversized central bureaucracy, which it could completely do away with and cause no harm. A set of smaller districts, built from scratch, would never grow such a ridiculous bureaucracy. | ||
Firstandten Member Username: Firstandten Post Number: 661 Registered: 05-2006 |
Just a quick question, if I may. How much does a DPS school board member get paid? Who authorizes (as in a post above) use of limo's to drive anywhere" quote They get paid a per diem rate for meetings and mileage but more importantly they use this position to build a political base and eventually run for a paying political position. The super not the board members get use of the limo and driver. | ||
Mwilbert Member Username: Mwilbert Post Number: 504 Registered: 11-2007 |
Why do we need a city-run school system at all? It seems to me like it would be quicker and easier just to get rid of the DPS altogether and let the parents find schools for their kids--think of it as breaking the DPS up into 90,000 school districts. It isn't like there is a lot of positive stuff to preserve in the existing system. | ||
1953 Member Username: 1953 Post Number: 1020 Registered: 12-2004 |
I saw a presentation of this same idea by a guy from Mayor Kilpatrick's team a few years ago. He made a compelling case for the breakup. His name was Sreeni, I think. | ||
Scooter2k7 Member Username: Scooter2k7 Post Number: 210 Registered: 10-2007 |
Anything would be better than what they already have. But really, they need to get away from the schools of choice. A lot of parents are crossing 8 Mile and sending their kids to suburban schools that are school of choice. Eliminating school of choice will put more Detroiters into Detroit schools. | ||
Mwilbert Member Username: Mwilbert Post Number: 505 Registered: 11-2007 |
I think the last post is an example of cognitive dissonance. If "anything would be better than what they already have", why would it be good "put more Detroiters" into that situation? Schools of choice aren't the problem (nor the solution, probably); they are a reaction to the problem. | ||
Firstandten Member Username: Firstandten Post Number: 664 Registered: 05-2006 |
Some people say let the free market reign. Lift the cap on charter schools and let the parents decide. Personally I don't like it but some people say it could work. | ||
Crumbled_pavement Member Username: Crumbled_pavement Post Number: 689 Registered: 08-2007 |
quote: I thought the cap was automatically lifted once DPS fell under 100K students? |
