You have to know when to cut your losses.  That is something better not learned by experience –although sometimes it can't be avoided.  So why is it that the Chicago Public School system is going to receive additional money from the federal government and pass it on to the same teachers to tutor the same students who they're failing to educate in the first place?  Does that make any sense?  Even worse, Illinois continues to throw unreasonable paperwork obstacles in the way of private tutoring companies that could be offering Chicago families valuable, free tutoring options under NCLB.  But the first being to change should be the way the subjects are being delivered.   

Which students are in need of these supplemental services? The University of Chicago's Consortium on Chicago School Research study found that in 2004, only 39 percent of African-American males and 51 percent of Latino males had graduated by age 19.  These statistics seem to indicate some kind of systemic failure at work within the school system.  Tutoring under these circumstances is akin to putting a band-aid on a massive hemorrhage. 

It would be more practical to address the actual practices in the classroom.  In the case of Latinos, Lexington Institute education analyst Don Soifer suggests that in light of scientific evidence, "that younger children are able to learn second languages faster and more effectively than older children, Bilingual programs like Chicago’s that delay teaching English until children are older miss that valuable window of opportunity, holding back the very children they were created to help."  Why not change the way English learners are being taught in Chicago public schools to emphasize early English acquisition?  Wasn’t that the purpose of these programs in the first place?

Stephanie Banchero reported in the Chicago Tribune that recent ACT scores indicate our graduates aren't prepared for college. "Only in English did a majority of the students meet ACT standards for college readiness."  In Reading, 55% tested below standard; Math, 62% below standard; and Science, 75% below standard.  In the face of such abysmal reading scores, Beth Norman, a teacher at a Montessori school in Illinois, had this to say, "Seems like if you fail to meet academic standards the fall back should be 'pick one of the mandated Reading First Grant' programs!! And then hire outside certified tutors until district teaching staff can be retrained in intensive, systematic, multi-sensorial reading interventions."

In the 2005-2006 State of Our Nation’s Youth Report, 75% of the students surveyed suggested requiring Math and Science courses for all four years of high school.  They also indicated that if their teachers would raise the bar and expect more of them, they would be willing to do the work. Fuzzy Science and Math are clearly missing the boat. 

Many Chicago Public Schools have failed to make AYP, some as many as six times.   Granting these institutions a waiver from NCLB and allowing them to provide their own tutoring for their students sends the message that their product is acceptable.  Customers have the option to replace inferior products.   When it comes to education, poor teaching practices merit the same type of response.  Why is the silence so deafening when it comes to insisting on a better product for our children?  Bad reception?

Related Reading:

Chicago’s Bilingual Education Programs Show Poor Results
http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:8EHwg8p_RkIJ:www.lexingtoninstitute.org/education.asp?aid=138+English+Learners+IL&hl=en

Chicago Graduation Rates Reveal Crisis, Coverup
http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/education.asp?aid=531

Illinois students not up to test mark
ACT scores indicator of college readiness
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/content/education/chi-0508170025aug17,1,5194608.story?coll=chi-education-hed&ctrack=1&cset=true

Teens Willing to Work Harder and Expect More From Education
http://www.horatioalger.org/geninf/pressrel/html/05sony.htm