Recently the School Reform Commission voted in approval of the Philadelphia Great Schools Compact which represents a handful of things for Philadelphia.

To be eligible to receive a grant from Gates, schools districts must agree to his vision of school reform and pledge cooperation by signing a compact which is essentially a contract.

In other words if the School District of Philadelphia wants money from Bill Gates it must follow his vision.

According to the official draft of the Philadelphia Great Schools Compact, the vision for Philadelphia is to strengthen its link between the School District and the charter school community in hopes to expand and simulate the best performing schools while eliminating the lowest performing schools (approximately 50,000 seats) by 2016-17. It will also align the District with the Pennsylvania Coalition of Public Charter Schools and the Philadelphia Charters for Excellence, two of the largest charter school umbrella organizations in the state of Pennsylvania.

I recognize that the Philadelphia School District is still trying come back from its $630 million budget deficit but is this really the path that they should steer Philadelphia education?

I would feel better if this process included more community voice. However this process was orchestrated without opportunity for Philadelphians to weigh in on the proposal and its decision. The plan was completed in a weeks time and was done behind closed doors.

Successful education reform in Philadelphia and abroad has to set aside time and input from the people most affected, the people that navigate through the education system.

We have to engage the entire community when taking measures on education.

For more information click here.

• Read More...

On Thursday, December 8th at 3:30pm there was a Senate briefing called “Student Access To Prepared & Effective Teachers: Understanding The Impact Of Federal Policy.” The briefing discussed the issues of teacher quality and equity and the role of the Federal Government.

This briefing was important because the re-authorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, also known as No Child Left Behind, passed the Senate committee and might soon reach the floor for a vote.

This was an opportunity to highlight the issue of the inequitable distribution of qualified, experienced, and effective teachers.

Shayla Johnson, a senior from Overbrook High School and a leader in the Philadelphia Student Union spoke at the briefing representing the perspective of students on the topic of teacher quality. Shayla was the only youth speaker amongst the panel of education experts and laid out the issue of teacher quality with precision.

There is a great inequity regarding students access to qualified teachers and it is continuing to grow. Namely, there is an abundance of inexperienced teachers disproportionately placed in low income high minority schools.

New teachers need training on how to interact with students on a positive level as well as be able to turn moments of ineffectiveness into moments of effectiveness so student stay receptive to the learning and don’t fall behind.

As Shayla said, “If its mandatory that students attend school why isn’t it mandatory for our schools to have qualified teachers? Education is a human right and students deserve a quality education from quality teachers. Our education certainly isn’t fit for the members of Congress’ children so why is it fit for us?”

Students deserve qualified and effective teachers along with a quality resource abundant education. Unless students are given quality teachers and the resources to achieve how are students supposed to go on to live successful lives?

You Can view the video here. Shayla Speaks around the 17:35 mark.

Written by Jaileah Gibson

This fall the Philadelphia student union has been working hard around our statewide funding campaign. So we have had multiple meetings with high school students from Reading, Pennsylvania.

So on November 1, 2011 a few students from the Philadelphia student Union took a trip down to Reading High School. Most schools in Philadelphia face the same issues that the students in Reading high school face. Like violence or having unqualified teachers. But the most common issue that students face is having our schools be underfunded.

• Read More...

On October 26th President Obama unveiled his answer to the growing student loan debt crisis.

Obama’s plan will expedite a law passed by Congress last year that lowers the maximum required payment on student loans from 15 percent of discretionary income annually to 10 percent for eligible borrowers. Discretionary income is the amount of an individual’s income that is left for spending, investing or saving after taxes and personal necessities have been paid. It goes into effect next year, instead of 2014. Also, the remaining debt would be forgiven after 20 years, instead of 25.

Obama will also allow borrowers who have a loan from the Federal Family Education Loan Program (FFELP) and a direct loan from the government to consolidate them at an interest rate of up to a half percentage point less.

In other words the plan will cut the payment costs by five percent for eligible students and any remaining debt will be wiped clean after 20 years instead of 25. In addition to that students with FFELP and a direct loan can combine them at a lower interest rate.

While I applaud President Obama for making huge efforts to lessen the burden on students I need him to clarify a few things. As far reaching as this plan is it falls short for many folks bogged down by student loans.

It completely marginalizes borrowers with private loans and the folks that in my opinion need the most relief, the people who are in default. Obama’s plan is geared mostly towards students that take out a loan in 2012 or later and who also took out a loan sometime between 2008 and 2012, according to the Education Department.

Students that don’t fit into that timeline are stuck in their current loan payment situations. In addition, for a student to get  the consolidated loan, they must have both a direct loan from the government and a loan from the Federal Family Education Loan Program.

What options are there for the students left behind in this plan? If I’ve been in student loan debt prior to 2008 who do I turn to? And how significant will the relief to the discretionary income be for students? Percentages are okay but they can often be misleading. Depending on a students level of debt, is a five percent decrease really going to keep more money in a student's pocket or are we just holding on to a few more pennies each month? I’m not saying his plan is terrible I’m simply stating that its scope is completely excluding many folks that need relief the most.

For more information click here.