|
SPECIAL SERIES:
June 2001:
Year end review:
Amid dismal
first-year results,
CPS plans
for year two
May 2001:
Bowen High Chronicles
April 2001:
Five school total:
7 teachers 'unsatisfactory';
25 vacancies remain
March 2001:
South Shore Chronicles
February 2001
Philadelphia offers lessons
Five national models
... at a glance
December 2000:
Collins Chronicles
October 2000:
South Shore Chronicles
September 2000:
Board scrambles to launch
new effort
Profiles: Team leaders
August 2000
Great principals needed to rescue intervention
 See also:
Why these schools?
Data and history:
* Intervention schools: The numbers: 1996-2000
* Individual profiles: Bowen | Collins | DuSable
| Orr | South
Shore
* High school accountability strategies 1996-2000: A
scorecard
Juarez dodges intervention, becomes
community academy
|
Since the mayor was handed control of Chicago’s public
schools five years ago, 42 high schools have been hit with some form of accountability
sanction. Few of those placed on probation have worked their way off. Those that
experienced reconstitution, the harshest penalty until intervention, have shown little
improvement. The Chicago School Reform Act of 1988 and the 1995 amendments provide for
these accountability measures but leave the details to the School Board. The chart
below shows the accountability status of each of the district's high schools since 1995,
using the following terms.
| RM |
Remediation |
| PR |
Probation |
| RC |
Reconstitution |
| RE |
Re-engineering |
| INT |
Intervention |
| OFF/OFF? |
Off or eligible to get off probation |
| NA |
Not applicable (charter schools) |
For full definitions, see the bottom of this page by scrolling down or
by clicking on the links above. At press time, the Office of
Accountability had not completed designations for 2000-2001.
* school is
being phased out
** special education school; may be placed on probation for reasons other
than test scores
Source: CPS Office of Accountability
| Terms |
Definitions |
| RM Remediation |
The ground floor of accountability sanctions. School must
either devise a new school improvement plan, apply to the board for LSC training funds or
mediate disputes that are hindering reform.
back to top |
PR
Probation |
High schools with fewer than 20 percent of their students
scoring at or above the national norm in reading may be placed on probation -- initially,
the number was 15 percent. (Schools for special education students have other performance
criteria.) The board may impose a school improvement plan. Without sufficient improvement,
the board may replace the principal, order new local school council elections, impose
reconstitution or intervention or close the school.
back to top |
| RC Reconstitution |
The board may replace principals and teachers as it sees
fit. The Chicago Teachers Union fought teacher dismissals when some 40 teachers who were
dropped from reconstituted schools could not find jobs at other schools in the system. The
union lost the legal battle, but won a temporary political victory when the board added
re-engineering to its accountability arsenal. There are no written criteria for triggering
reconstitution.
back to top |
| RE Re-engineering |
Negotiated with the Chicago Teachers Union, this sanction
provides for more teacher involvement in improvement planning and in teacher evaluation.
Teachers who opt out of peer evaluation will be given a year-long interim assignment at a
different school before having to win permanent appointment from another principal.
Re-engineering debuted in 1999-00 with 12 schools. Those schools that did not work their
way off probation will go into a Phase II involving possible teacher dismissal.
back to top |
| INT Intervention |
The most severe punishment the board has tried because it
allows for dismissal of any employee at the school. The board will spend the first
year assessing the school and making decisions on staff hiring and firing. It also will
bring substantially more money to the effort, $500,000 per school the first year. There
are no written criteria for triggering intervention.
back to top |
| OFF |
The school has raised its test scores above the threshold and is no
longer on probation. The designation OFF? indicates that the school is eligible to be
removed from probation pending final decision by the board in August.
back to top |
| NA |
Not applicable. If charter schools do not live up to their
performance goals, they can be closed.
back to top |
|
