Talk:Chicago Public Schools

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

CEO ?[edit]

I know Chicago calls their superintendent a "CEO", but a CEO is a corporate officer position with specific fiduciary responsibilities to shareholders (maximizing shareholder value). This should be further qualified in the article. Of course they will argue the children are the shareholders or some nonsense like that - but clarify is important. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.201.24.3 (talk) 16:23, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Preferential Treatment[edit]

Whoever has a problem with this section, please articulate why. When I first saw the page, I was shocked at how pro-CPS it was. It seemed like a brochure that CPS could pass out. The different treatment that magnet schools receive relative to community schools, is very important and should be acknowledged. The fact that a Chicago newspaper decided that it was important enough to print on page 2 of its paper, should be an indicator of the issues significance.

  • I know this is probably years later, but if you talk about "different treatment" you need to back it up with refs. Supply the article name, page numbers, etc. WhisperToMe (talk) 21:00, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Deletion[edit]

Whoever deleted the section about preferential treatment of magnet schools, please articulate a reason if you are going to delete it.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Drabin23 (talkcontribs) 22:14, 22 February 2007 (UTC).

Suggestions[edit]

I would like to suggest the addition of academic scores, indexed by class and year, to expand this article.

Also further information on why Daley made a power grab for CPS in the late 1990's

The effects of No Child Left Behind on CPS —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ekasprzycki (talkcontribs) 16:27, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Also, wasn't there a time when people were collecting paychecks without going to work, then they instituted a program to put them in a classroom or let them go?

69.80.41.167 (talk) 05:09, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

POV Subsection on Teacher layoffs[edit]

I've taken out the following subsection on the 2005 teacher layoffs on the gounds that it's not NPOV. There's one reference for it at the bottom of the page (that I've left in, but I can't even get to) which isn't sufficient to blame specific leaders in the union. Similarly, without any idea how many teachers were dismissed without a reason being disclosed, it's not appropriate to assume (in this context, anyway) that they were let go in bad faith.

Anyway, I'm holding it below pending a more rigorous treatment, more thorough research, or at least some context to put it in.

===Untenured teachers lose their jobs===
School administrators issued advanced dismissal notices to approximately 1,116 untenured teachers between March and April 2005. Apparently the leadership of the Chicago Teachers Union under Deborah Lynch overlooked a discrepancy in the 2003 contract, giving principals the power to dismiss untenured teachers without due process. Principals can simply login to a website, select a reason from six items listed on a drop-down menu, and click a submit button. At least fifty-percent of the dismissed teachers experienced difficulty controlling their classrooms, granting justification. Other reasons for dismissal include poor communication skills and rapport with fellow teachers and parents. Controversially, principals can simply choose "other" from the drop-down menu concealing any reason for a dismissal. This is a questionable practice on the basis that it conceals reasons, which may include budget cuts, and even personal vendettas.

Emphasis added. Johndodd 02:26, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I've restored the subsection on the 2005 teacher layoffs on the basis that information regarding CPS's hiring practices was retained (e.g. housing incentives, etc). Retaining the section pertaining to the housing incentives while removing the school district's questionable practices appears biased. If we're going to say that CPS gives out free ice cream to children, then we should also talk about how they fire the ice cream guys for no reason, metaphorically speaking. User:Voice of Reason 12:17 3 April 2006 (CST)

more Pov in 2005 Teacher layoffs[edit]

School administrators issued advanced dismissal notices to approximately 1,116 untenured teachers between March and April 2005. Apparently the leadership of the Chicago Teachers Union under Deborah Lynch overlooked a discrepancy in the 2003 contract, giving principals the power to dismiss untenured teachers without due process. Principals can simply login to a website, select a reason from six items listed on a drop-down menu, and click a submit button. At least fifty-percent of the dismissed teachers experienced difficulty controlling their classrooms, granting justification. Other reasons for dismissal include poor communication skills and rapport with fellow teachers and parents. Controversially, principals can simply choose "other" from the drop-down menu concealing any reason for a dismissal. This is a questionable practice on the basis that it conceals reasons, which may include budget cuts.

Sounds like who ever wrote this was a teacher who got fired lol its Way POV 67.162.66.69 02:51, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

LOL! Learn to write so it makes sense, lol! Don't make assumptions about people you don't know, or else you'll find yourself in trouble, lol!

Shootings, Gregory Robinson rip[edit]

Today, 28th victim of chicago mafia, cps student died, we should include names of all killed, this boy was 15 & one month, saved lives of 2 kids by shielding them with his body, these things dont happen too often, cps chicago public schools need better security, they are worse in usa! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Unitwiki (talkcontribs) 02:56, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Neutrality still controversial[edit]

If you are still disputing the neutrality please add the tag again. It is outdated at this time. Chadbailey (talk) 23:47, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Class Project Page[edit]

This page has been selected by one of my students as a class project. Please be polite and constructive when editing or giving advice and be aware that the students involved in this project are learning Wikipedia along with learning research and writing skills. If you have any questions, please contact me. MrSilva (talk) 17:37, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Sex Ed[edit]

An editor added the following and it's been removed by two other editors. If it's a controversial issue and is reliably sourced I think it is worth including (not attached to this wording, however:

"In the year 2013, the Chicago public school system introduced sex education for kindergartners. There is some controversy over the curriculum. When the students are being taught about families, teachers are instructed to tell students about homosexual couples."CBS Chicago". Local CPS Mandates Sexual, Health Education For Kindergarten. CBS. Retrieved March, 3, 2014.  Check date values in: |access-date= (help) Candleabracadabra (talk) 19:31, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

The problem is twofold: first, the article is about the CPS as a a school system, not its curriculum. If this were to be included, then every single aspect of the school's curriculum (from K-12) should be included in the article as there is no justification in mentioning a random fact due to its potentially controversial nature (e.g. there are those who believe teaching biology is wrong -- and ergo controversial -- due to its conflicting with creationism). Second, the 2013 CPS decision (as per the article) was to add it to the health curriculum and (again, per the article) was left as a consensual 'opt out' if parents didn't want their children to be exposed to it -- which eliminates the controversy in any case given that no one is forcing it upon anyone's children whose parents are in opposition. Ryecatcher773 (talk) 22:01, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
Is there a common curriculum for CPS schools? If so it should ABSOLUTELY be covered. I suspect that the curriculum varies depending on the school. What we do know is that CPS has Health/ Sex Ed curriculum from Kindergarten through high school and it has widely been reported and and also controversial. Here's coverage in the Chicago Tribune.Here's another story on it. Here's an Op-Ed discussing it What age?. It should be covered because it's significant and important. The Tribune noted that it was the first school system to implement a policy beginning at a young age. I have no opposition to appropriate clarifications and NPOV wording. But we don't omit significant and important and controversial content that's been widely reported on. Wikipedia is not supposed to be censored. Candleabracadabra (talk) 22:39, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Actually, my son is a 2nd grader in a large CPS elementary school on the South Side and they don't have Sex Ed in the curriculum, so I don't know where you are getting that info from, and I would question it even if the Trib reported it -- newspapers manipulate info to sell newspapers all the time.. Ryecatcher773 (talk) 23:40, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Shool listings and other issues[edit]

Why are selective entrollment schools listed but not regular schools, charter schools? THis seems very weird. Is there a List of CPS schools article? It seems to me that the inclusion should be standardized. If it's high schools then all of them should be included. If it's all schools than they should all be included or perhaps a separate linked article should be created or linked to. This article is not in great shape. How many charter schools are there? How many students are in the respective school types? I've read that enrollments at CPS generally are falling. Shouldn't this be covered? How much has it declined and how fast is it declining? I added some basic information on student demographics and graduation rates. Candleabracadabra (talk) 23:12, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Guardian article[edit]

Here's a new source:

WhisperToMe (talk) 08:23, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Power grab[edit]

As the person writing from Dominica (69.80.41.167) has appropriately suggested, I think there is a need to include more information about how, why and when the Chicago School Board ceased to be elected, and became the current entity, whose membership is the sole prerogative of the mayor.

A web page from the U.S. Conference of Mayors describes this "power grab" as an "extraordinary measure" which happened in May of 1995.

However in a World Bank publication from 1996, "Decentralization of education: Politics and consensus," E. B. Fiske, writing about school decentralization, says:

It takes forms ranging from elected school boards in Chicago to school clusters in Cambodia to vouchers in Chile.

suggesting that Chicago had an elected School board, until at least sometime in 1996.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Chicago Public Schools. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:27, 29 February 2016 (UTC)