This story originally appeared on Chalkbeat Philadelphia.
In the Philadelphia school district, teachers typically are allocated based on student enrollment and assigned based on seniority. Class size limits are the same everywhere, with 30 students in kindergarten through third grade, and 33 students in other grades, regardless of a school’s needs or demographics.
These are among the assumptions that have governed how the school district has operated for decades.
It may be time to throw those assumptions and some others out the window, according to the board of education. Rethinking everything about how the board does business, including long-held practices, is the impetus for the board’s new “goals and guardrails” initiative that was announced last month, with all the board members expressing support. They said it is meant to focus their efforts on what really matters — student achievement — and hold themselves and Superintendent William Hite more accountable.
To do that, Joyce Wilkerson, board president, said members of the board are ready to upend accepted norms and practices if they have to, such as the formula for allocating teachers to schools and the method for determining where individual teachers are assigned.
“What we’re doing now isn’t working for too many children,” Wilkerson said. ”We’ve got to start thinking differently.”
For instance, the least experienced teachers often end up in the most high-poverty schools, a result of decades of practice and now codified in hard-fought teachers’ contracts. Historically, that’s because teacher placement has been largely based on seniority and personal choice.
More recently, a site selection process has given principals and other school leaders the ability to recruit for vacancies, but the overall problem remains.
“We can’t say ‘It has always been that way,’ because the outcomes aren’t acceptable,” Wilkerson said. “We want our children to learn and we’re not willing to accept a whole lot of adult behavior as the excuse. We will be tackling tough issues that have resulted in hugely disparate outcomes for kids.”
She said the district should consider student needs, achievement levels, and the degree of poverty in a school when allocating teachers and resources. Some high-need schools also could have smaller class sizes.
“It’s going to be moving resources around. You don’t get equity without moving resources from schools that have more to those that have less,” she said.
Some of the changes would need to be negotiated with the labor unions.
Jerry Jordan, president of the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers, said he favors schools having more resources. But, he added, all Philadelphia schools should have them. “Teachers have always said, ‘Get us what we need for the kids, and we’ll be able to do a better job,’” he said. “When buildings are under-resourced, teachers leave them, and they go to a building where there are more resources. You have to look at the whole picture.”
Jordan said the union would be happy to discuss some of the changes Wilkerson mentioned. But “this is not as simple as just wishing for it.”
For instance, differentiating class size based on the school would need to be studied. “If too many variables occur, it can cause a ripple effect.”
Wilkerson and the board are determined to open this kind of dialogue. “I understand there’s a contract impediment,” she said. “Rather than accepting the problem, we’re creating the expectation that we want to see a solution.”
One of the things she said the board intends to track closely is whether students “are making progress, who’s making progress, and why.”