As a Steelers fan I don't often go searching for reasons to praise Cleveland, but when it comes to education reforms they've got most other Ohio cities beat, especially Columbus.
Not to force comparisons, but we've said before that Columbus should take a page from Cleveland's charter school playbook as that district has worked hard to share facilities with charters, learn from their successes, and invite new high-performing models to open there. (Meanwhile, Columbus has denied facilities to charters ? including a Fordham-authorized one?because, to state it simply, they're better at providing a quality education to low-income kids.)
Columbus should also borrow a page from Cleveland's school turnaround playbook. Last week Terry lifted up one of Columbus's biggest turnaround failures- Champion Middle School ? which also caught the attention of the New York Times.? Terry rightly cited the need for better school leadership, innovative principal training models, and the role of leadership as the lynchpin for addressing chronic school dysfunction.
This weekend, two of the state's biggest newspapers featured school turnaround efforts in their respective cities and the differences are telling.
From the Columbus Dispatch, one learns that Columbus City Schools has taken a ?hunker-down approach? with federal School Improvement Grant (SIG) dollars.? The SIG program in the Capital City is stunning in its level of mediocrity, specifically:
- The district chose ?transformation,? the least rigorous turnaround model, for its schools.
- It didn't hire ?outsiders or turnaround experts? and is instead relying on...