Archives for the year of: 2013

The following account of Delmont Elementary School was written by Jill Saia, who was its principal.

I have deleted the “Dream School” folder on my computer. I am hoping that enough time has passed since our school was closed that I can write about it clearly and rationally, even though what was done to us was neither clear nor rational. For the last ten years that folder on my computer has contained all our plans, hopes, and ideas for a school run by professional educators for children who need it most. We knew that if we could put the highest-quality team of teachers together that we could affect true change in the lives of children in an at-risk school.

Two years ago when I was given the opportunity to become principal of Delmont Elementary School, I cautiously accepted the position. You see, I never wanted to be a principal. My graduate work in Educational Administration and Supervision confirmed this for me: being a school principal was too stressful and too far removed from teaching and learning. So I finished my degree and became certified, although I was certain I would never use this credential.

After 28 years in public education, I was offered the chance to become the Instructional Leader of Delmont. This would give me the chance to put into practice everything I had learned about high quality instruction and ongoing professional development. The position had been very carefully designed so that I would have autonomy in decisions and would be able to focus my time on classrooms and instruction instead of administrative duties. I would never have accepted this position if those guidelines weren’t clear.

Those guidelines remained in place for about two months. I was able to hire a very skilled staff, six of whom were National Board Certified Teachers. But my request for an Assistant Principal and Dean of Students was denied, even though there was money in the budget for it. I very quickly encountered resistance at all my personnel suggestions, and it began to seem as though the district didn’t really want us to succeed. The next two years were the most rewarding of my educational career, but also the most disheartening.

A change in top-level leadership at the district caused the team that had written the plan for Delmont to be totally dismantled. The new administration did not seem to know or understand why we were designated a “turnaround school” and what that meant in terms of academic freedom. I started carrying the SIG plan around with me when I went to meetings so I could explain what we were trying to do and show what the guidelines spelled out. Yet I increasingly encountered resistance from the Director of Turnaround Schools, who was a former superintendent of the failing Recovery School District. Looking back on it now, I think that this was all by design; “leaders” in the Central Office really didn’t think we would be able to turn Delmont around, so they created obstacles to keep it from happening.

One such obstacle presented itself in our first year. After having spent the summer hiring a top-notch staff and building a collaborative team, the district swooped in on October 10 to move two teachers and one aide out of our building. My plea to stop this from happening fell on deaf ears, and I was even cited for insubordination when I tried to show them what the SIG plan said about staffing. (That we were entitled to additional staff because it was a turnaround effort). So we said goodbye to three valuable staff members, shuffled kids into new classes, and kept going.

We did not make tremendous progress on test scores in the first year. We did change the culture and climate of the school, increase enrollment, and foster a high level of parental involvement. At the end of our first year, we packed everything up and moved out, because the district had chosen to remodel our 60-year old building. It is hard work to pack up an entire school, but we hoped that the renovations would make for an even better learning environment.

We were allowed to move back in two days before school started. We began the move and the readjustment to new classrooms, then had to stop for a half-day district “convocation” called by our new Superintendent. After district officials, community leaders and politicians had all given us their “rah-rah!” speeches about what a terrific year it was going to be, we boarded our yellow school bus back to Delmont and got back to work getting set up for the first day of school. Office staff and I stayed until after 10:00 p.m. that night to make sure we had everything ready for kids and parents the next day.

What a joy when the kids returned on the first day of school! They were so excited to see all of us again, to know that we were still here, and now in brand new buildings and classrooms. Hugs and high fives everywhere, and all the hard work of the summer instantly paid off when we saw their smiles. These children had suffered through tremendous staff turnover in the past, and it took a toll on their academic achievement and emotional well-being.

There were still the usual battles with the central office, but we were finally granted our extended day program that was in the plan the first year, but that the district chose not to fund. In the second year we convinced them that it wasn’t really their choice not to do it – it was written in the federal grant. So after Labor Day (and after Hurricane Isaac, which caused us to lose a week of school), we began doing extended day four days a week, with half a day on Wednesdays for team meetings and professional development. This gave us extra time to do targeted interventions, and also time to meet with each other and plan collaboratively.

We began to turn the corner – more children were reading, asking questions, and flourishing. Less behavior problems, more time on task. Children were communicating with each other, with teachers, with staff. They understood what the parameters were for being a student at Delmont, and they rose to our challenges. We planted our vegetable garden, had choir concerts, and participated in the Kennedy Center for the Arts program to integrate arts into the curriculum. We partnered with the local hospital’s health program to host the “Big Blue Bus” every week, which provided medical and mental health care to children and families. We were awarded a sizable grant from a local foundation to adopt a parenting program, and worked with a local university to design a new playground.

Then in November things started changing. Our new Superintendent announced his “Family of Schools” plan, which restructured many of the schools in the district. He called me into his office for a meeting on the afternoon of the first community forum held to discuss the changes. He told me that he was going to close Delmont. I remember being so stunned that I couldn’t even react at first. We did not see this coming; we were on our way up. But Dr. Taylor didn’t want to hear that, didn’t want to be reminded of how much he loved our school when he visited earlier in the year, or how endearing the kids had been to him. This was a business decision, and he preferred to keep emotions out of it.

Much of our staff was in disbelief when I told them, and when they heard it later that evening at the forum. Many had been at Delmont for ten years or more, and had not planned on leaving. They loved the fact that Delmont was a true neighborhood school with a family atmosphere, and just couldn’t understand why or how that family could be disintegrated. And I had trouble explaining it, because honestly I still don’t know why this decision was made.

At the next set of community forums, the family of schools plan was tweaked, and Delmont was now going to remain open as a K-2 school. This of course would remove us from state scrutiny of test scores by getting rid of the high-stakes test grades. Then in the next proposal, Delmont was going to be a Pre-K center. This is the proposal that the school board voted for, which somehow changed before the next day to it being a PreK – K center.

The March School Board meeting had a packed agenda, and at around 9:00 p.m. they finally got to the item about Delmont. Several school board members spoke out about how much they supported our efforts, and knew that we were doing great work. But when the vote came, they all voted for the motion to turn Delmont into a PreK-K center. The Superintendent had successfully convinced them that we were going to be taken over by the state if they didn’t make this move. No mention was made of our 3-year SIG plan and the fact that we were only in year two…

The school board member representing the region Delmont is in declined to speak, and abstained from the vote.

On the Wednesday of state testing week, the district sent the deputy superintendent to Delmont to meet with parents and staff to tell them of the decision to close the school. Yes, in the MIDDLE of STATE TESTING WEEK! The insensitivity was astonishing. Parents who walk their children to school were the most upset, because the school that their children were now assigned to is three miles away. (It is also an “F” school), Teachers and staff members were assured that the district would do everything they could to find new positions for them, and that many of them would follow their students to the assigned school. No surprise here – not a single Delmont teacher or staff member has been hired at that school. They all found their own jobs, without help from the central office; many have moved out of state or at least out of the district.

As for me, well, because I stood up for my school and tried to keep it open, I was given another letter of insubordination. I was also rated “ineffective” at midyear because of my refusal to change my ratings of teachers to match their pre-identified quota in the value-added system. Their assumption was that if test scores were low, then the teachers must be ineffective. Therefore, I must not know how to evaluate teachers. I was placed on an Intensive Assistance plan. Two months later, I turned in four binders full of data, observations, meeting notes, mentor reviews, etc. My mentor was a local award-winning principal who was part of the original “Dream School” team. Needless to say, she loved Delmont and what we were doing there. She even brought her assistant principal with her on one visit so she could have another perspective. After looking at all of my documentation, the director said that it “looked complete”, but then a week later told me that I was still ineffective and would have to wait for his final evaluation.

I chose not to wait for that final evaluation. I began the job search, had several very promising interviews, but it soon became clear that no public school district in this area would hire me because of my track record in a “failed” school. I really wanted to stay in public schools, because it is where I have spent my entire career, and because I truly believe in them. But in this case the system let me down. After 29 ½ years in the state retirement system, I was looking at having to retire with less than full benefits – a sizable financial difference. And up until this last year, I have had a stellar record in public education. No blemishes, no letters, no confrontations.

I can’t begin to describe what this last year has done to both my physical and mental health. I have been bullied and blackballed, all because I stood up for the children and families that needed us most. I knew I could no longer work for a system that is so dysfunctional, whose superintendent has already threatened to quit a few times when he didn’t get his way. (He, by the way, does NOT have a stellar track record.) Our dream school turned into a nightmare.

I have now resigned from the district and accepted a position as Dean of Instruction at a public charter school about ½ mile from Delmont. Many of the parents have heard that I am here now, and have enrolled their children. This is a brand new facility with a young faculty and plenty of opportunities for me to build instructional leadership. Their test scores rose dramatically last year, and they have begun to stabilize after a few rocky starting years. I am looking forward to the challenges of this new school, but also can’t help but look back.

The two years at Delmont profoundly changed my life, and I would like to think that it changed the lives of some of the children. I cannot begin to describe the last week or day of school. It was a blur of tears, hugs, graduations, celebrations, and uncertainty. I moved through it on auto-pilot; no one ever trained me how to say goodbye to 400 students and families, not to mention a beloved staff. We are now all scattered – students to at least three different schools, and teachers and staff to many more. We vowed to keep up with each other, but I know that we will eventually move on.
By the way, test scores in year two were outstanding. While we don’t yet have a final SPS from the state, preliminary data from our chief of accountability show that we made AYP and would no longer be a “failing” school. Our fourth-graders had a 20% jump in the number of students rated proficient; the district average growth was 6%.

So, this is what “reform” has done; it has transformed our dream school into a nightmare. I hope that we all wake up from it soon in a better place, but I know that for a few years, there was no better place than Delmont.

From the NYC Parent blog:

Subject line: Join us Thurs 12 noon at City hall., July 18: No 4th term for
Bloomberg!

Dear Parents, grandparents and Education Activists,

I hope that you can come and help turn out fellow parents for an important
rally and press conference at noon tomorrow, Thursday, July 18, on the City
Hall steps to protest Mayor Bloomberg’s attempt to effectively have a fourth
term running the city’s schools.

The mayor is moving to cement plans for a dozen or more additional
co-locations that would start after he leaves office. We need to show that
the UFT and other city residents, parents and community members will not
allow a fourth term for Bloomberg.

We know it is the middle of summer and it is hot. But the Mayor and DOE are
busy now laying the groundwork for co-locations to start in 2014 after a new
mayor takes office. We must act now!

We will be joined at this rally and press conference by UFT President
Michael Mulgew , public officials and community organizations, opposed to
the mayor’s attempts to illegally impose his will on our students, schools
and city after he is out of office.

Join us! Spread the word! Let’s show our strength.

WHEN: 12 p.m. noon, Thursday, July 18, 2013

WHERE: City Hall steps

Sincerely,

Fran Streich
UFT Manhattan parent-community liaison

__._,_.___
.

__,_._,___

This reader says that reformers almost never protest budget cuts.

Another word for reform these days is……….neglect.

“I think the “abandonment” idea is really powerful. As the parent of a public school kid in Ohio, I really do feel abandoned by both my state government and the federal government. Ordinary local public schools need not apply!

The crazy state and federal focus on the 5% of schools that conform to the rigid “reform” recipe is something we’re going to regret.

Besides Arne Duncan’s one statement on Philadelphia schools, a statement he made only after being pushed, has one single national “reformer” advocated for a restoration of pubic school funding?

We could use less “innovation” and more simple, competent stewardship of the schools that MOST children attend, existing schools, but I suppose “stewardship” isn’t nearly as exciting and media-friendly as “cage-busting.’

It’s neglect.”

As we learned in earlier posts (and see here), Chicago Public Schools cuts the central office budget every year. It is ruthless with the central office budget. No one works at headquarters except possibly Barbara Byrd-Bennett.

This reader has studied the budget and offers an overview:

“Since 2008, CPS has claimed $1.3 BILLION in central office budget cuts. That’s based on an annual budget of somewhere between $5 billion and $6 billion.

To think of it another way, CPS has lowered total budget expenses at least 22% by making cuts to central office. Central office accounts for only about 5% of the overall CPS budget.

Or, think of it like this: in the last six years CPS has completely eliminated central office 5 times over.

Still, according to CPS, “The General Operating Fund ended FY2012 with a surplus of $328 million, which compared favorably with the budgeted deficit of $241 million.” Amazing!

The rough numbers I came up with are based on a quick and dirty review of CPS budgets, press releases, and mainstream news media reports.

FY2013: $600M
FY2012: $107M
FY2011: $161M
FY2010: $100M
FY2009: $90M
FY2008: $114M

It was only six years ago the Board of Education said this in the FY2007 final budget report: “CPS ended last fiscal year in strong financial condition, with revenues moderately higher and expenditures less than budgeted.”

Oh, wait. That’s not old news. CPS finished the most recent school year with a surplus of $344 million. And then closed 50 schools and laid off thousands of teachers because they couldn’t afford them.”

Wendy Lecker, civil rights attorney and director of the Campaign for Fiscal Equity, read an opinion article in the New York Times and was outraged by its recommendations. Here is her analysis:

 

It seems like these days, one has to be wary of anyone claiming to “help” poor neighborhoods.

An oped in the New York Times on July 13 by Michael Rubinger extolled the virtues of federal “new market tax credits” to “fix” neighborhoods in decline. Among the “valuable” neighborhood investments Rubinger mentions are charter schools.

Anyone paying attention the past year knows that expanding charter schools has been a weapon to destroy neighborhoods, not revitalize them. In Chicago, officials funneled public money to charter schools while defunding public schools. Then, declaring public schools “underutilized,” Mayor Rahm Emanuel closed an unprecedented number of neighborhood schools. These neighborhood schools were the anchors of their communities and parents and children vigorously protested their closure. A similar tragic story played itself out in Philadelphia, another city and state that starved the city’s public schools while funding charters, then closed a record number of neighborhood schools, despite strenuous protests by parents and children.

These new charters very often fail to serve all the children in those neighborhoods, regularly excluding ELL students and students with disabilities.

Not much of a neighborhood revitalization plan.

Although I am not much of a tax maven, I heard that term “new market tax credits” before. In 2010, Juan Gonzalez of the Daily News wrote about their connection to charter schools. It turns out these federal tax credits are a vehicle for banks and hedge funds to make enormous profits on the public dime. As Gonzalez explained:

“the investors who put up the money to build the charter schools get to basically virtually double their money in seven years through a 39 percent tax credit from the federal government. In addition, this is a tax credit on money that they’re lending, so they’re collecting interest on the loans, as well as getting the 39 percent tax credit. They piggyback the tax credit on other kinds of federal tax credits, like historic preservation or job creation or Brownfields credits. The result is, you can put in $10 million and in seven years double your money. And the problem is that the charter schools end up paying in rents the debt service on these loans.”

And that debt is paid, of course through taxpayer funds.

These credits help destroy neighborhoods but they certainly revitalize the balance sheets of these crafty banks and hedge funds!

And surely Michael Rubinger knows it. Just last week, he was a featured speaker in a symposium instructing Wall Street how to cash in on charters, entitled: Bonds and Blackboards: Investing in Charter Schools (New York, NY).

If the wealthy want to make a difference, they should pay their fair share in taxes so that public schools and communities can have the resources they need to provide the supports to combat the effects of poverty, help overcome the challenges of language barriers and provide the special education services to ensure that every child is provided the education they deserve and need to achieve her greatest potential.

The return on investment for those children and our society would be greater than the hedge fund managers could ever achieve.

An earlier post described efforts by then-Governor Mitch Daniels to make sure that Howard Zinn’s leftist history of the United States was not taught in Indiana’s public schools.

But even more alarming is his attempt to shut down Professor Chuck Little of Indiana University, a vocal critic. Little had the audacity to defend public education, which Daniels did his best to privatize.

When government officials use their awesome power to harass and silence those who dare to challenge them, democracy is in trouble.

Keep your eyes on academic freedom at Purdue. That’s where a board appointed by Mitch Daniels selected Mitch Daniels as president, despite his lack of any any academic credentials.

A colleague at Indiana University writes:

“While I appreciate that the original AP story and others like this one focus on the former governor’s desire to censor Zinn’s text, the more disturbing aspect related to public education involves Daniels’ apparent intention to target Chuck Little and the Urban Schools Association through audits and funding cuts. The Association is a non-partisan group for metropolitan school districts that advocate for the interests of urban students and teachers. To target the group would be akin to silencing advocates for poor, often minority students who have been more deeply impacted by Indiana’s education reforms than their suburban or rural counterparts. In a state where school choice programs and groups like DFER and Stand for Children are making unprecedented headway, Dr. Little and the IUSA are often the only voice before the legislature for Indiana’s urban students and schools.”

Rudy Crew left his job as czar of education for the state of Oregon after one year. He is the former chancellor of public schools in New York City and Miami. Crew will return to NYC to become president of Medger Evers College, part of the City University of New York.

As he left Oregon, officials there complained about his travel expenses and vacation time. As czar, he had some good ideas, but the legislature refused to fund them.

June Atkinson, the state superintendent in North Carolina, can’t remember a worse time for public education or a te when teachers were so disrespected.

NC ranks 46th in the nation in teachers’ salaries. Teachers must teach 15 years to reach $40,000 a year. What a disgrace!

It started, she says, 3-4 years ago at the national level. Let’s see, that would coincide with the launch of Race to Top. This is a bipartisan disaster.

As Rahm Emanuel once memorably said, when he was President Obama’s chief of staff, never let a crisis go to waste. Naomi Klein surely agreed in her book “Shock Doctrine,” which showed how crises, both natural and man-made, are used to achieve other goal unrelated to the crisis. Hurricane Katrina made it possible to wipe out public education and the teachers union in New Orleans. The budget cuts and imposed austerity will soon make it possible to crush the teachers union and privatize Philadelphia’s schools.

A teacher in Philadelphia writes, challenging an earlier post that called Los Angeles ground zero for corporate reform:

“Sorry to contradict, but Los Angeles is only at the forefront of the push-back (and a fine thing that is too.) The next big front in corporate “reform” will be in Philadelphia in a little over a month.

“The contract for the PFT is up and we are facing demands from the state-controlled School Reform Commission and their hand-picked Superintendent William Hite, a graduate of the Broad Academy. I and my fellow teachers are facing a demand that we give up $133 million in salary and health benefit concessions, which is bad enough. But we’re also looking at proposals to eliminate seniority, institute performance pay, eliminate contractual caps on class size, and virtually every other fond wish of the “reformers”.

“State and city leaders have engineered a budget crisis and passed only sham fixes, all to set up the PFT to be broken no matter how we react. If we give in to the concessions, we will have lost almost everything the PFT has gained for the schools and teachers since 1968. If not, we will either have a contract imposed on us or we will be forced to strike, but that in itself is illegal according to the law that allowed the state takeover of the district in 2001. The no-strike clause is unique to Philadelphia within the state, so we may be able to successfully challenge it in court, but any way this plays out the SRC and their political masters seem to think that it will give them a free hand to go full bore with every kind of corporate reform. If they succeed, they will have remade the 8th largest school district in the nation into a goldmine of corporatized “education”.

“Unfortunately, they are probably right.”

Read EduShyster as she takes you to the Lake Wobegon Academy of Excellence and Innovation.

That is a school where every single student is excellent!

Why?

Because every single teacher is excellent!

No more Bad teachers. No more “good” teachers.

And that is why every student is excellent!

No more median. At last, a school where No Child Is Left Behind, where every child Races to the Top and wins!

Don’t just take EduShyster’s word for it.

President Obama says it can be done. Secretary Duncan agrees. So does Jeb Bush. And Bill and Melinda Gates. And Eli Broad. And the Walton Family.

And they know, right?