Parents find school picks slim

A day after her children entered the halls of their fifth public school in five years, New Orleans artist and parent Anika Watson received two letters detailing something that came as no surprise: Two of her children had just begun a new school year in one of the city’s 32 failing public schools.

The state-run Recovery School District informed Watson that children attending McDonogh City Park Academy, an F-rated school, were eligible to transfer to a higher-performing school.

That’s a requirement of the federal No Child Left Behind Public School Choice program: Local school districts must allow students in academically unacceptable schools to transfer to higher performing, non-failing schools in the district — if there’s room.

For Kaleb, Watson’s third-grader, the transfer options were slim: Four D-rated schools, one newly authorized charter that hasn’t been graded yet, and another school with a lower academic performance score than City Park Academy.

The 10 transfer options RSD offered her fifth-grader Kaliyah included one B-rated school, seven D-rated schools, one new charter school with no assigned letter grade and two schools that, like City Park Academy, have been labeled “academically unacceptable” by the state.

The notices from RSD didn’t disclose the transfer schools’ letter grades, but when Watson looked at her options, she said, “I knew immediately that most of them were bad.”

Watson’s experience points to a key failure in New Orleans’ lauded landscape of choice-based educational reform: In a city where parental options abound, how many of the choices are reputable ones?

In the RSD, it seems, not enough.

More than seven years into the New Orleans choice experiment, documents and interviews reveal the schools are so academically anemic that the RSD didn’t comply with federal policy requiring school districts to offer higher quality alternatives to students in failing schools.

“If every student in a failing school wanted to transfer,” said Gabriela Fighetti, RSD’s executive director of enrollment, “we would not be able to guarantee them a slot.”

RSD records show that officials last summer grossly underestimated how many of its schools were failing. One week, City Park Academy was offered as a destination for countless students eligible for transfer. The next, it was identified as a failing school required to offer alternatives to its own students.

And when officials sorted that out, the options they provided to families still included schools labeled “academically unacceptable” by the state.

“Fundamentally, the letter of the law is that if they’re in a failing school, then parents ought to be given the option of a better school for their child,” said Adam Emerson, director of the Program on Parental Choice for the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a Washington, D.C., education think tank. “If parents are getting options that aren’t doing any better than what their child is currently in right now, that’s a problem.”

On July 18, the RSD notified parents of students at six New Orleans schools that their children were enrolled at a failing school and were eligible for transfer through the No Child Left Behind Public School Choice Program.

Almost every parent who received a letter was given at least one F school from which to choose.

Six days later, the state Department of Education released data that showed RSD had underestimated how many of its schools were failing. Thirty-two New Orleans schools were on the list; 31 of which are directly run or overseen by the RSD.

Fighetti said the district initiated the choice program ahead of the state’s directive so students could enroll in their respective schools by the start of the new school year.

“The (school letter) grades are released quite late, she said. “It’s tough to balance that.”

The second set of letters from RSD, sent after the state had released its list of anticipated failing schools, were dated Aug. 6 — the first day of school for RSD-run schools.

Students at Cohen High School, an F school that serves 11th and 12th grades, were unable to participate in the choice program, RSD spokeswoman Zoey Reed said, because the district “had no seats in non-F schools.”

In the second round of letters, none of the transfer options were F schools. But it appears that’s due largely to a technicality in the state’s grading system. Most parents got letters offering at least one of four schools with a “T” rating. The threshold for a “T” grade is the same as an F, but those schools given “turnaround” status have recently been taken over by new charter management.

In the end, 739 of 7,831 students offered transfers chose to do so. Fighetti maintained that none of them enrolled in another failing school.

Records show that 30 students of those students ended up at Gentilly Terrace Elementary, a T-rated school with a performance score of 74.9, just below the threshold of what the state considers academically acceptable.

The records show that about 40 percent of them chose a D school. About 10 percent switched to schools that were not graded in 2012 or had a T. And almost 12 percent transferred to three schools with F grades but were under new management.

“If you look at the progress, we are very proud of the gains we’ve made,” Fighetti said. “In the future, we hope to get to that point where a student who wants out of a failing school can have the option to do so. We are not there yet.”

The district’s mishandling of the federal school choice program is notable in a choice-based system, said Karran Harper Royal, who’s been following RSD’s implementation of federal school choice law for the past several years.

“How could they really be serious about choice and offer this to a parent?” she asked.

Emerson said the district’s failure to list school letter grades next to the choice transfer options defies the most basic elements of the school choice movement.

“Even if they don’t meet the (academic) requirements, parents should be told everything about their options,” Emerson said. “Parents need to be able to make an informed decision, and I wouldn’t want to find out too late in the process that I’m leaving a bad school for another bad school.”

Reed said the district agrees it’s critical to give parents such data. The district did include letter grades in its school application materials for this fall.

After sorting through the options for her own kids last fall, Watson decided to keep her children at City Park Academy this year.

That decision didn’t come without some frustration. She’d selected City Park after doing considerable homework — attending a school choice fair, completing a districtwide

application process and interviewing the school’s principal.

By the time the August notices came, school had started. Kaleb and Kaliyah had their uniforms, their teacher assignments, their books.

“Of course, I was insulted,” Watson said. “Not only did I receive letters, I got a phone call from another school telling me my kids’ school was failing and there were openings at this school.”

In the end, Watson kept her kids in the F school for the same reason she chose it at the outset: She believed in the school’s principal and her vision for her kids.

“I don’t think choice indicates quality,” she said.

Asked what she will do if City Park Academy gets another F this year, Watson said she’s hopeful that won’t happen. As long as the current administration sticks around, she said, she will, too.

This story was reported by The Lens , an independent, nonprofit newsroom serving New Orleans.


Please log in to comment on this story

Comments (8)


1) Comment by Being_Stupid - 20/03/2013

You cannnot blame the parents. The parents are a product of the current school system. Blaming the parents is like blaming the problem. You must solve the problem, not just complain about the problem, but solve the problem.

2) Comment by Being_Stupid - 20/03/2013

An education system based on vouchers would minimize inefficient government spending while giving low-income Americans, who are traditionally stuck in the very worst public schools, a better chance at receiving a good education. Vouchers will bring a healthy increase in the variety of educational institutions available and create competition amongst them. The answer is simple economics, choice, and competition. The tax money for public education needs to be given to the consumer of education, not the producer of education. Only the consumer of education can ensure quality performance for their voucher, much like a consumer on food stamps or food vouchers ensures quality product from a private grocery. Note, the Government does not fund public grocery stores. Government only funds food stamps or food vouchers and leaves it up to the low income consumer to ensure quality product from that private grocery via their government food stamp. See www.edchoice.org.

3) Comment by tradewinns - 20/03/2013

just curious, why is this the 5th school in 5 years for these children? the implication is all the schools are failing and the mother moves them to find a successful one. highly unlikely.

4) Comment by tradewinns - 20/03/2013

the problem with the failing schools is the failing parents. that line of bovine extraction that poverty is causing the failing is just that, Bovine droppings. poverty is caused by parents NOT TAKING RESPONSIBILITY for their parental/adult duties, the first of which is taking care of the children. the parents are losers due to their own personal choices in their life. however, they have learned to "milk" the system without having to work and if it is good enough for them, it is good enough for their children. noone does ANY indepth studies because it would embarress the "poor" (and show the rest how stupid they are to allow what is currently happening to continue). no, they look at statistics which by the way do NOT show "why, how or any other answers" but a point in time.

5) Comment by Being_Stupid - 20/03/2013

The only answer is to convert to voucher system. Charter Schools are not a solution. Public Education Tax Dollars needs to be given directly to the parents and students (the consumers of education) via VOUCHERS, not the Government / Teacher Union Monopoly. Once the consumer has the power to afford and decide which schools will stay in business and which schools will go out of business, will we begin to see improvement in Public Education.

6) Comment by Being_Stupid - 20/03/2013

This is unacceptable. Children under the age of 18 should be given a chance to attend a decent school. Abolish the Teacher Union Monopoly on Public Schools and CONVERT TO VOUCHER SYSTEM, NOW, before another generation of kids grow up without proper education.

7) Comment by squiggly - 19/03/2013

Teacherguy, you are correct that poverty is the primary factor in "failing" schools. The whole "failing schools" notion is a false. If you take the poverty stricken children to another school, their test scores will not improve very much. From my research into the subject, having smaller class sizes and longer school days in poverty stricken areas would be a step in the right direction. I like the idea of getting the kids up to speed in the pre-K years. Improving school performance will be achieved more from the sociological angle than from these draconian practices that they are using now.

8) Comment by teacherguy - 19/03/2013

My point exactly...if the charter/voucher "scheme" doesn't provide a better option to parents...where do you send your kids then? Especially when you have allowed the charter/voucher/choice course providers take enough public school money to shut down the public schools. Many charters simply close their doors when they decide they have either made enough money, or can't improve to the level of expectation...and those choosing this option for our education system are idiots! At least the public schools can't close up shop...and kids HAVE A PLACE TO ATTEND...so trash the charter/voucher scenario and actually improve public education. The problem with improving public ed in LA is our poverty level, as a state, is worse than most other states...poverty is the number one direct link to poor school performance. However, instead of embracing the modest gains over the past few years...our legislators threw in the towel...