Comments on: Pittsburgh schools drop ‘public’

By: Cass

Cass — Fri, 20 Jul 2007 15:30:59 +0000

Ok, I find all of this hype over a simple name change ridiculous. If parents and the media put as much time and effort into the much needed changes within the school system, something would have been done years ago. Change involves time and patience; you have to take care of the small problems first before you even attempt to attack the larger ones.

By: Mike

Mike — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 01:10:32 +0000

Ah yes. This sort of thing brings up a question I often ask regarding my district administrators when such world-changing new educational concepts are foisted on unsuspecting teachers and students: “Don’t these people have any real work to do?”

By: KauaiMArk

KauaiMArk — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 16:38:30 +0000

If ADman image weasels think that “Image” equals “Quality”, why not change the name to: “Pittsburgh Premium Schools”

By: Andy Freeman

Andy Freeman — Mon, 16 Jul 2007 15:20:31 +0000

How about they fix the schools THEN fix the name?

Changing names to deceive is fraud – the old name earned its bad rep.

By: Larry Strauss

Larry Strauss — Mon, 16 Jul 2007 06:29:06 +0000

Here’s a stupid question: how much is all that new stationary going to cost?

Enough to maybe improve those schools just a little? (another stupid question)

Slogans of optimism might produce confidence and even self-confidence in students but if the school doesn’t live up to the hype really quickly then the only usefulness of such slogans is in the teaching of irony — and skepticism and mistrust and cynicism.

By: Lou Gots

Lou Gots — Sun, 15 Jul 2007 20:13:06 +0000

I don’t know; this sounds pretty gay.

By: Tom West

Tom West — Sun, 15 Jul 2007 12:19:23 +0000

Obviously, when parents who have a choice (many donâ€™t, so they wonâ€™t be influenced by rebranding anyway) look at a school, the most important thing is the name.

Well, in fact product name *is* critical in consumer decisions.

Quite frankly, if Pittsburgh public schools feel that they need to be competitive to their customers, I’d say this is a *good* thing. The next step (which they may or may not be taking) is to make internal changes to improve the product.

By: superdestroyer

superdestroyer — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 15:05:50 +0000

A side comment to the naming of schools.

In Texas, the media always refers to a school by its city and then its name. It is Dallas Carter, Southlake Carroll, or Odessa Permian. However, the students nor the school itself would ever refer to it the same way.

I have not seen many other states where this occurs. I guess it is due to the way that the football teams are referred to by the media.

By: Deirdre Mundy

Deirdre Mundy — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 14:06:48 +0000

Obviously, when parents who have a choice (many don’t, so they won’t be influenced by rebranding anyway) look at a school, the most important thing is the name.

Not the curriculum,the test scores, the staff and the other students already enrolled there.

Because the name is what REALLY influences school quality.

Maybe they should rebrand the worst school in the city “Exeter” and make its motto “An uppercrust New England Education at Rust-Belt Prices!” –I’m sure that would IMMEDIATELY make it a more successful school! =)

By: david foster

david foster — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 03:46:49 +0000

“A rose by any other name would smell as sweet”

It works in reverse, too.