Archives for the month of: May, 2013

The Edwin F. Mandel Legal Clinic of the University of Chicago and a major law firm sued the Chicago Public Schools in federal court on behalf of students with disabilities and African American students. The closing of their schools, the lawsuit claims, has a damaging and disparate impact on these students.

In one lawsuit, the lawyers state:

“In violation of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the defendants propose to carry out the closings of 53 elementary schools in a manner that does not permit a timely and orderly process either for the proper review and revision of the individualized education programs (IEPs) for the plaintiff children and over 6,000 other children in special education programs or for the extra services and counseling such children require to make the difficult transition to unfamiliar schools and unfamiliar teachers and students. By putting off their decision on the closings to the eleventh hour, or the very end of the school year – for the largest closing of public schools in American history – the defendants place the plaintiff children and other children in special education at far greater risk than their non-disabled peers. The late date makes it impossible to conduct the closings without significant disruption to the programs in which these children participate and without adequate provision for the special safety risks faced by children with disabilities. In violation of federal law, this late, ill-timed, and ill-prepared program for the closing of 53 elementary schools will have a discriminatory impact upon the plaintiff children and other children with disabilities, compared to their non-disabled peers.”

The second lawsuit charges the school board, Barbara Byrd-Bennett, and the city not only with violating the Americans with Disabilities Act, but engaging in racial discrimination:

“I]n violation of Section 5 of the Illinois Civil Rights Act of 2003 (ICRA), 740 ILCS 23/5, and by repeatedly selecting African American students to bear the costs of the closings, the defendants have unlawfully used “criteria and methods of administration” that have the “effect” of subjecting the plaintiffs’ children and other African American children represented by the plaintiff parents to discrimination because of race. In conducting closings since 2001, the defendants have used various shifting criteria that they allege to be race neutral but that always have the effect of singling out poor and marginalized African American children to bear the educational and human costs of the closings. For the 72 schools that defendants have closed to date, African American children make up more than 90 percent of the displaced children; and in currently proposed closings, they make up more than 80 percent of the displaced children. Yet African American children constitute only 42 percent of the children in the public schools.”

Eva-Marie Mancuso, chair of Rhode Island’s state education board, passionately defends the status quo.

Over the protests of parents, students, and teachers, Mancuso supports high-stakes testing. Despite overwhelming evidence from researchers that evaluating teachers by test scores is inaccurate, unstable, and demoralizing, Mancuso wants more. Despite the protests of student leaders across the state, Mancuso insists that standardized tests–the NECAP–should be a graduation requirement.

A recent poll of teachers found that 85% oppose a new contract for the state superintendent Debirah Gist. Mancuso doesn’t care. Gist is a member of Jeb Bush’s hard rightwing Chiefs for Change, which includes the most conservative, test-loving, privatizing superintendents in the nation.

Gist was the superintendent who wanted to fire every teacher and staff member at Central Falls High School in 2010 because test scores were low. No teacher or staff member had been evaluated.

Mancuso is prepared to stand and fight for the status quo.

The writer of this article, Colin Woodard, recently won the George Polk award, one of the highest honors in journalism.

The article is bout a sordid effort to promote technology as a for-profit enterprise in Maine schools. To introduce a Maine virtual charter school, to require online courses for graduation, and to follow a script written not by educators but by lobbyists.

This is a classic. Don’t miss it.

The NYC public is tired of Mayor Bloomberg’s policies of testing, school closings, and privatization. But for 12 years he has had the constant support of the city’s three major newspapers.

The editorialists have supported and cheered him at every turn.

But WOW, today the Néw York Times has an editorial today that agrees that the critics have a point. Will wonders never cease?!

The other papers regularly insist that any dissent from the mayor’s policies–no matter how ruinous to students they may be–comes from the teachers union or from paid shills for the union. The tabloids are quite certain that parents don’t have brains or ideas of their own.

The irony is that the tabloids continue to lambaste the quality of the schools despite the fact that Mayor Bloomberg has had total control of them for 11 years. If children don’t pass tests, the mayor is accountable. How do citizens hold our billionaire mayor accountable? As he once memorably said, you can always boo him at parades.

Here is an excerpt from the Times’ startling editorial:

“But after 12 years, this mayor’s ideas are due for a counterargument. The critiques the candidates are offering hardly shock the conscience, and their complaints about the Bloomberg administration can be heard from teachers and parents in any school in the city.

“The school system has indeed gone overboard in relying on standardized testing. Tests need to be a means to the end of better instruction, not the pedagogical obsession they have become. Yes, Mr. Bloomberg has shown disdain for consultation, as in his rush to close underperforming schools without the full and meaningful involvement of affected communities.

“The system needs to strengthen neighborhoods’ connection to schools and reconnect with parents who feel shut out. And while charter schools can be a path to excellence, they can also cause problems. Shoehorning them into existing school buildings over local objections can alienate parents and reinforce among students a harmful sense of being separate and unequal.”

Guess which schools in Connecticut have the highest suspension rate for children in kindergarten?

This year the city of New York will pick a new Mayor, after 12 years of Michael Bloomberg.

There were only supposed to be 8 years of Bloomberg, as the voters of New York City had twice endorsed term limits of only 2 terms. But Bloomberg decided he wanted a third term, refused to call for a referendum, and got his faithful friend City Council President Christine Quinn to twist a few arms, promise that the members of the City Council would also get a third term, and voila!, our mayor had the chance to drop another $100 million into winning a third term.

For some reason, he thinks that his legacy will be his education “reforms,” but the voters don’t agree. The last Quinnipiac poll showed that only 22% of voters want his autocratic style of governing the schools to continue. The rest want some form of shared governance, where other elected officials have a voice in choosing the city’s school board, and the school board treats parents and the public with a modicum of respect.

Despite the constant trumpeting of the Bloomberg PR machine, voters understand that the city school system has not improved and that it is highly inequitable. Leonie Haimson and I wrote an article in The Nation recently describing the elitist tone and consequences of the Mayor and his policies. The proportion of black and Hispanic students admitted to the city’s exam schools (Stuyvesant, Bronx Science, Brooklyn Tech, etc.) has dropped precipitously during the Bloomberg years. The numbers are in the linked article. Brooklyn Tech, for example, which had an enrollment about 23% black and Hispanic, now has only 10%. The admission of black and Hispanic children to the city’s coveted gifted and talented programs has plummeted since the Bloomberg administration decided that it would be determined only by a single test score, even for the youngest children. The city’s state test scores, once the mayor’s greatest boast, collapsed in 2010 when the state education department admitted that it had made the tests too predictable and lowered the passing score each year. The Bloomberg administration boasts about the rising graduation rate, but never pairs it with the fact that some 80% of the graduates who enter community college require remediation in basic skills. The mayor boasts about reducing the black-white and Hispanic-white achievement gaps, but the federal tests (NAEP) show the gaps unchanged over the past decade.

And so the mayoral election is underway, and the Democratic candidates have loudly criticized the mayor’s policies. I moderated a parent forum at PS 29 in Cobble Hill (every Democratic candidate showed up except Christine Quinn, who was attending a fundraiser, and none of the Republican candidates accepted the invitation). The entire event was videotaped and it is here on the website of Parent Voices New York.

The questions I asked were written by parents. They wanted to know (I am paraphrasing, you can watch and see the original):

1) what will you do to reduce class size to not more than 20 children in the early grades (class size in New York City is the highest in 14 years)?

2) what will you do to end high-stakes testing?

3) will you end Bloomberg’s policy of assigning letter grades to schools, which no one understands and which are highly misleading?

4) what will you do to make the governance system more democratic, so that parents have a voice?

5) will you end Bloomberg’s policy of closing schools based on low test scores?

Every candidate–Bill Thompson, Sal Albanese, Bill DiBlasio, John Liu–disagreed with the Bloomberg administration’s policies.

All promised to dismantle the heavy-handed reforms of the past dozen years. All agreed that schools should be helped, not closed; that class sizes, especially in the early grades, should be reduced; that the school-grading policy should be abandoned; and all promised a more democratic and more open form of governance when the mayoral control law expires in 2015.

The Bloomberg administration won’t let the critics go unanswered. They have nothing left to boast about, so they fall back on weary platitudes about “we can’t go back to the bad old days.” The mayor sent out Schools Chancellor Dennis Walcott to defend the Mayor’s sterling record. Walcott is the third non-educator appointed by Bloomberg to be chancellor. He was preceded by litigator Joel Klein and publisher Cathie Black. The mayor thinks that educators don’t know anything about education.

Dennis Walcott was once a civil rights leader. He was head of the New York Urban League before he went to work for Bloomberg as deputy mayor, largely as an ambassador to the black community. I don’t envy him. He has to defend an administration that has privatized the public schools across large swaths of black and Hispanic neighborhoods. He has to defend an administration that has made testing its major strategy. He has to defend an administration that cares not a whit that only 9 black students were admitted to Stuyvesant High School this year, in an entering class of 1,000. He has to defend an administration that has whitened the enrollment of gifted programs by making admission dependent on a single test score. He has to defend an administration that oversaw the gutting of arts in the schools.

The mayor called his program “Children First” when he announced it on Martin Luther King Jr. Day back in 2003. We now know that the children who come first are the ones whose parents are knowledgeable enough and have time enough to navigate a complex system of choices and testing. We know which children don’t come first.

Poor Dennis.

In this article, a Massachusetts blogger points out that it is time to do something about those unionized police and firefighters who have failed to stamp out crime and fires.

It is time to unleash innovation and turnaround the police precincts where crime is highest: close them down and allow the cops to reapply for their jobs.

America could be a perfectly crime-free, safe nation if only we turned public safety over to bankers and lawyers and entrepreneurs.

The initiative–which is known as No Citizen Left Behind–requires the investment of billions of dollars for data collection, data analysis, turnaround specialists, and retraining of the current workforce.

Unfortunately this is so close to the insane reality of federal education policy that it is easy to think that it is real, not satire.

The run-off for Los Angeles school board is Tuesday May 21.

As Howard Blume’s excellent overview in the Los Angeles Times shows, Monica Ratliff is clearly the better candidate. She is an experienced teacher who understands the needs of children and the schools.

She has raised $42,000.

Her opponent has great political contacts. He worked for Mayor Villaraigosa. His qualifications to sit on the city school board are nil, although it is true that he was once a student.

He has raised, with the help of the Mayor, more than $3 million.

Will money decide the election?

The choice is clear.

If you live in their district, please take the time to vote for Monica.

Tennessee charters have learned the secret to high test scores: push out low-performing students right before testing time.

That way, the charter keeps the money, and the public school gets the low score.

This is not a closely guarded secret, but it usually fools the media and the politicians.

Here is one journalist–Dennis Ferrier at WSMV–who was not fooled:

“When it comes to the net loss of students this year, charter schools are the top eight losers of students.

“In fact, the only schools that have net losses of 10 to 33 percent are charter schools.”

The KIPP school in Nashville has an attrition rate of 18%.

One of Governor Jindal’s “reforms” is called Course Choice. This is supposed to allow public school students to sign up with private vendors, using public school dollars extracted from their local school. Most of the vendors are online operators.

Course choice and vouchers were the centerpiece of Jindal’s plan to privatize public education, by funding these choices from the state’s Minimum Foundation budget. Unfortunately for the governor and his State Superintendent John White, the state’s highest court said that it was unconstitutional to spend the money dedicated to public schools on vouchers and Course Choice. The court decided by a vote of 6-1, which in the eyes of most people is decisive.

One of the state’s investigative bloggers discovered that some 1,100 students had enrolled— without their knowledge— in an online course offered by a Texas corporation.

How could this happen? Why were Louisiana dollars shipped to a Texas company when the students and their parents didn’t know they had signed up? How did the corporation get their contact information?

Will the legislature provide alternate funding for vouchers and Course Choice?

Will there be a legislative investigation of this curious “choice”?

An interesting detail. The state department of education is in a frenzy trying to identify the leaker of salacious details about their prized programs.