Declaration of Beliefs and Visions in Philadelphia

July 25, 2004

We're not usually fond of mission statements, especially for groups like schools where the mission should be painfully obvious without all the hype. Mission statements in the wonderland of modern education tend to focus on blather such as "all children will become life-long learners" and at least one gratuitous reference to "Diversity."

But mission statements can help to clarify an organization's direction, when its course has foundered.

The School District of Philadelphia is one such organization.

Two years ago, when the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania took over authority of the School District of Philadelphia from the city, the new folks in charge decided to do something a little different than previous management. The new School Reform Commission, helmed by James Nevels, started to focus on education, and set forth its four principles for reform (which we reprinted in December).

We noted that what was missing from the principles was the usual high-sounding rhetoric and tenets of Progressive Education, which we considered a very good sign. The School Reform Commission hired Paul Vallas as Superintendant, who promptly sacked the status quo, another good move. Our favorite Vallas quote illustrates his approach:

We accept no excuses. Excuses do children no favors. We refuse to accept that a child is too poor to learn. We refuse to accept that a parent is too detached to participate. We refuse to accept that a school system is too poor to demand high standards from its students.

It is now two years later, and scores have been slowly rising. But it's been--and will continue to be--an uphill battle. It is necessary that all the troops have the right marching orders for the campaign to be a success.

To this end, the good folks running the school district have published a "Declaration of Beliefs and Visions" which melds the pragmatism of Mr. Nevels' principles for reform with the no-nonsense approach of Mr. Vallas.

Today's Philadelphia Inquirer printed it in full, and we'll address the Declaration's five points here. We were pleasantly surprised with their frankness.

The School District of Philadelphia's Declaration of Beliefs and Visions

"1. We believe all children can learn at high levels."
While this may sound like rhetoric, there have been a great many people in the School District of Philadelphia who have not believed this simple concept. (They usually blame the parents or the neighborhood or the kid's previous schooling.) So a necessary step is simply saying all kids can learn.

"High levels" doesn't neccessarily mean everyone becoming a Rhodes Scholar, but it can mean that we're going to do a much better job than we have been. We've seen enough success stories about what can truly be done with high-poverty at-risk kids when schools set their unflinching minds on success.

They write: "The School District of Philadelphia has the responsibility to provide the quality of education and a safe environment that allows every child to learn at high levels." (Emphasis ours.) They're saying responsibility for teaching kids doesn't lie anywhere else. It lies with us. Bravo.

"2. We believe all children can reach their learning potential and that the achievement gap can be eliminated."
Eliminating the achievement gap will be hard. But they write more: "Providing equal access to high quality education for every child may require the investment of unequal resources to ensure an equitable outcome." This is very politically incorrect, but necessary if they're serious about getting the job done. You don't give everyone a defibrillator, you give it to the fellow having the heart attack.

"3. We believe schools have an enormous impact on children's lives."
Big-city schools historically never admit this simple truth. They usually hide behind some statement that "parents and schools must form a partnership," which usually means if there's failure, schools have a handy fall-guy: "It's the parents! It's the neighborhood!"

In the foreward to No Excuses: Lessons from 21 High-Performing, High Poverty Schools by Samuel Casey Carter, Adam Myerson points out a common misconception:

As the New York Times Magazine put it in a recent cover story, entitled, "What No School Can Do": "A child living in an inner city is in the school for only so many hours. It's the rest of the day--as well as the rest of the neighborhood--that's the big influence, and the big problem."

Actually, it isn't. The dirty little secret is that if Johnny can't read, it's not the parents, it's not the neighborhood. Johnny's school failed to teach him to read.

What is amazing is that here the School District of Philadelphia is going on the record and admitting this universal truth. Parents are important, but they write that "the School District is responsible for educating all children regardless of family support or involvement." Emphasis ours.

What about the children? Do they not have responsibility as well? The Declaration continues, "Children have an obligation to come to school ready to learn, but the District cannot abandon those who do not and must search for ways to reach them."

We've complained about the bitter joke of "certification," where the only qualification needed for a position as a teacher or principal is a piece of paper called a "certificate." They write: "To improve educational outcomes for all students, a qualified teacher must be in every classroom, and every school must have a qualified principal who is an instructional leader."

We feel it very significant that they didn't use the word certified. In our experience a "teaching certificate" isn't worth the paper it's printed on. What counts is that the person be qualified, a far different matter, and good for them for knowing the difference.

"4. We believe the School District of Philadelphia can become a high performing organization."
We agree. One way that this can happen is competition. It's one thing to have a clarion call to the troops, but another thing entirely in motivating them to action. One motivating force is giving parents choices. They write, "Sustainable reforms are possible only if parents have meaningful choices." Emphasis ours.

When's the last time you heard a big-city school district admit that choice can drive public schools to reform? When have you heard a district talk about giving parents meaningful choices? Yet two more very good signs.

"5. We believe that all children should be educated in a safe and orderly environment."
Our only criticism here is that this point should be first in the list. We've taught in schools that were veritable zoos, and taught in schools which have a measure of decorum. Real teaching and learning can only happen in the latter.

As they write, "Success is the only option."