US city's schools put in private hands

Furious teachers attack Philadelphia experiment.

The occasional gangland gun battle aside, not much has happened for decades in north Philadelphia - except decay. Around the Richard Wright elementary school, many of the houses have been demolished; hundreds more are boarded up. It is hard to imagine a more unlikely scene for a rightwing educational revolution.

From September, the school - 99% black, struggling, but battling hard - will be run by private enterprise. So will 41 other schools in Philadelphia, while a further 28 will be restructured. It is an experiment on an unprecedented scale. "We will give rise to the greatest urban school system in the country," crowed the governor of Pennsylvania, Mark Schweiker.

If he is correct, the Philadelphia revolution will spread across the country, and probably across the Atlantic. The only thing everyone agrees on is that the city's current educational setup is appalling. But parents, teachers and pupils are convinced it is about to get much worse.

Governor Schweiker is a Republican and has pushed through an agenda originally championed by his predecessor, Tom Ridge, now President Bush's homeland security chief. His party has also used its power to depose the school board and impose a school reform commission.

The commission picked 70 under-performing schools and have allocated most to a variety of private companies, universities and educational foundations. On Wednesday the commissioners were obliged to listen at a public meeting as speakers denounced them. They were met by demonstrating students and teachers.

"You have chosen to experiment on our kids," said Ted Kirsch, president of the Philadelphia federation of teachers. "This was not meant to fix our schools. It was about political retribution and paybacks."

The campaigners say the city's schools have been underfunded, while the white suburbs have been generously supplied. Supporters of the change are inclined to blame the teachers' federation, for insisting on restrictive practices. Most schools cannot pick their own staff: teachers are assigned on the basis of seniority. These problems are not unique, but in such a deprived city, they are magnified.

Much of the controversy centres on one company, Edison Schools, the country's largest operator in this field. Edison had hoped to take over the entire Philadelphia system. But the commission has back-pedalled in the face of opposition, and Edison has now been awarded less than half of those being privatised. Those who wonder how it is possible to make money running inner-city schools have now been joined by Wall Street investors. Edison has never made a profit and has seen its share price collapse.

Edison's educational recipe includes a longer school day and year, putting strong emphasis on literacy and numeracy. It employs more mobile and, it claims, more motivated teachers.

Thomas Toch of the National Centre on Education and the Economy in Washington DC is sympathetic to Edison. "There is no reason why individual schools can't do what Edison does," he said. "They have a very ambitious school design that can't be anything but good for children."

Anita Duke, principal of the Richard Wright School, said that she would jump off a bridge if her school was on the hit- list. It was there; but instead of jumping, she is bucking up her staff and saying their new masters, the private company Victory Schools, may not be that bad. "I've seen a lot of changes. The problem is getting consistency," she said.

Victory is also likely to impose an extra hour. "There are things that could be done with the extra time," said Ms Duke. "But it has to be well thought out. After the lunch recess the kids aren't as focused, and by 2.30pm they're getting pretty antsy."

It's the supporters of privatisation who are most antsy now. For them, Philadelphia is the start of something very big. "It's a big deal," said Mr Toch. "It could herald a fundamental change in public education. I think it's inevitable because the status quo is untenable."