Back in the days of Mayor Bloomberg and Joel Klein, the policy of the city was to close big high schools that had varied programs (e.g., music, the arts, advanced classes in math and science) and replace them with small schools. Almost every large high school in the city was closed. One of them was DeWitt Clinton, which had become a dumping ground for the small schools that did not want students with low test scores, English learners, and students with disabilities. In effect, the school–once known for its excellence–was turned into a graveyard.
Klein and his acolytes touted the New York City Miracle, built on testing, testing, testing, and small schools.
This high school is a hooky player’s dream.
At DeWitt Clinton HS in the Bronx, kids who have cut class all semester can still snag a 65 passing grade — and course credit — if they complete a quickie “mastery packet.”
Insisting that students can pass “regardless of absence,” Principal Pierre Orbe has ordered English, science, social studies and math teachers to give “make up” work to hundreds of kids who didn’t show up or failed the courses, whistleblowers said.
“This is crazy!” a teacher told The Post. “A student can pass without going to class!”
The 1,200-student Clinton HS is one of 78 struggling schools in Mayor deBlasio’s “Renewal” program. Last year, 50 percent of seniors graduated, but only 28 percent of the grads had test scores high enough to enroll at CUNY without remedial help.
The DOE’s academic-policy guide says students “may not be denied credit based on lack of seat time alone.” Passing must be based “primarily on how well students master the subject matter.”
Orbe has taken the policy to a absurd extreme, teachers charge.
Leonie Haimson of Class Size Matters says that DeWitt Clinton, which is part of Mayor de Blasio’s “Renewal Schools” initiative, has very large classes, some as large as 39. That’s one remedy that the mayor ignored.
By the way, if you want to meet Leonie (and me), we will be at the annual dinner of Class Size Matters tomorrow night in New York City. It is not too late to get a ticket.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
I’m sure one can find variations of this scheme in every large urban/suburban school district. It just takes teachers/whistleblowers to bring it to the surface. I’m glad that people are finally realizing that “doing the right thing” matters.
Thanks for this post, Diane. GOOD GAWD … are the deformers plain stupid or just evil? I suspect, BOTH stupid and evil.
This is so horrifying. Why do NYC voters still cast their ballots for DeBlasio?
My husband went to high school at Christopher Columbus and there was pride in your school at that time. They marched in the Columbus Day parade.
There is no longer any pride in graduating when anyone can pass and move on.
If NY cut off funds to testing it would be a good thing right now.
Where is a candidate that will run on Education First? Not Profits First???
There has to be one person willing to make NY the way it was before.
A time when learning really was about books, art, and writing, etc. Not about testing.
If you can sit tight and wait a few minutes, someone will be here to explain to you why Mayor De Blasio is the greatest thing ever.
Yes, but, hold onto your hat. It might get a bit windy….
joan,
I will tell you why I cast my ballot for Mayor de Blasio.
When I choose a candidate, I want to know whether that candidate believes in supporting public schools or whether that candidate believes in giving charters free reign to undermine them. There was a Democratic Primary in which it was abundantly clear that Christine Quinn, the supposedly “progressive” candidate, would continue Mayor Bloomberg’s rabidly pro-charter policies. It was also abundantly clear that Mayor de Blasio was the ONLY candidate willing to call out directly what was wrong with charters. de Blasio also promised to work for universal pre-k.
And on both those issues de Blasio has not disappointed. Now it is true that when he fought hard against charters and received not one bit of support from all the cowardly Democrats now lining up to attack him, it gave Albany free reign to shut him down and force him to give free space to charters.
But every time I see Betsy DeVos’ biggest cheerleader and one of the people who worked hardest for her confirmation — Eva Moskowitz –holding yet another “rally” attacking Mayor de Blasio for not giving her ALL the free space she wants, I know that de Blasio is still trying to do what is right and not what is easy. However, there are certainly people like FLERP! who believes Eva Moskowitz does nothing worthy of criticism ever. So if you, like FLERP!, are someone who believes Eva Moskowitz does nothing worthy of criticism but Mayor de Blasio does, you would naturally rabidly disagree with my point of view and you and FLERP! have every right to believe that Eva Moskowitz is the upright and honest person doing so much that is good for NYC public schools and de Blasio is the corrupt one who is undermining them. I just happen to disagree. (Cut to FLERP! attacking me for that statement, but if you read closely you will notice FLERP! will offer not a single critical word against Eva Moskowitz – except perhaps her personality – and I have no doubt FLERP! will once again reserve all attacks for me and de Blasio. I always say FLERP! can easily call my bluff by actually criticizing something Eva Moskowitz does and shutting me down! How about it FLERP!? Your unwillingness to ever criticize Moskowitz always astonishes me. )
FYI – that does NOT mean that everything that Mayor de Blasio does is perfect. It is reasonable to criticize his DOE for not doing a better job in managing what no one seems to acknowledge is an incredibly thankless and difficult task.
But it would be nice to see some context to this. Why aren’t class sizes at DeWitt Clinton smaller as Leonie wants? Is the union willing to sacrifice some raises or benefits for smaller class sizes? Do we blame the union as much as the Mayor?
I read a lot of innuendo on this blog every time there is something wrong with a public school — the assumption is because the evil and corrupt de Blasio is secretly trying to make that public school fail. Or that de Blasio is the most incompetent Mayor in history as proven by the fact that it took him two whole years to establish a universal pre-k serving over 60,000 students in full-day programs that is a model for other cities.
The judgements made about de Blasio remind me of the judgements made about teachers every time a teacher does something wrong. “It’s all the evil union’s fault”. I can do that too? “Why does ANYONE in NYC support the evil teachers’ union? – just look at what this awful teacher did”
So,to answer your question,I look at the ENTIRETY of what the Mayor did and is trying to do with regards to having more integrated schools and less segregated specialized high schools and I say “GOOD JOB.”
That doesn’t mean he is perfect. But it does mean that in terms of public education, he is a darn sight better than any Mayor in the last 20 years and much better than ANY of the NYC politicians that are standing up for charter schools and not public schools. In other words, almost all of them except the Mayor.
So that is why I voted for the Mayor. Maybe FLERP! or dienne77 can explain why he thinks one of the other pro-charter candidates who have run against him would have been better.
de Blasio doesn’t have to be “the greatest thing ever” in order to be better than the Mayors who did the bidding of Eva Moskowitz.
de Blasio is NOT “the greatest thing ever”. What politician is? But he has done a lot of good for public education and while his work with the Renewal schools has not been stellar, I am absolutely positive there is more to the story than “de Blasio is intentionally trying to make those schools fail”. Because it is clear from the entirety of the Mayor’s actions that he is working as hard as any Democrat to support public schools, teachers unions, and the most vulnerable students in NYC.
“However, there are certainly people like FLERP! who believes Eva Moskowitz does nothing worthy of criticism ever. So if you, like FLERP!, are someone who believes Eva Moskowitz does nothing worthy of criticism but Mayor de Blasio does, you would naturally rabidly disagree with my point of view and you and FLERP! have every right to believe that Eva Moskowitz is the upright and honest person doing so much that is good for NYC public schools and de Blasio is the corrupt one who is undermining them. I just happen to disagree. (Cut to FLERP! attacking me for that statement, but if you read closely you will notice FLERP! will offer not a single critical word against Eva Moskowitz – except perhaps her personality – and I have no doubt FLERP! will once again reserve all attacks for me and de Blasio.”
Would it count as “attacking” you to point out that FLERP! has said absolutely nothing like what you’ve accused him of saying? Would it be an “attack” to say that this is yet another (among dozens (hundreds?) of instances of you putting words in people’s mouths?
Would it count as attacking you to point out that it would be very easy for FLERP! to simply prove that I am wrong and show me up for the liar you claim I am?
All FLERP! has to do is strongly criticize Eva Moskowitz! All FLERP! has to do is condemn her many terrible actions — surely there are many to choose from, as I think you will agree.
Just think how easy it would be for FLERP! to make me look like a fool and a liar!
So why are you putting words in FLERP!’s mouth when FLERP! is perfectly capable of defending his/herself and showing me how wrong I am?
Either you agree with me that Eva Moskowitz is doing great harm to public education, or you think what Eva Moskowitz is perfectly fine.
I assume you think what Eva Moskowitz is doing is reprehensible and I assume FLERP! does NOT think that what Eva Moskowitz is doing is reprehensible.
But I’m sure that FLERP! will gladly post that I am wrong and he/she strongly condemns what Moskowitz does. IF I am wrong.
FLERP! doesn’t need you to tell me what it is he thinks.
But maybe he needs you to attack me because he doesn’t want to confirm that my statement is actually correct.
^^^But I notice that dienne77’s faux concern for “putting words in someone’s mouth” does NOT extend to insinuating that a certain poster believes Mayor de Blasio is “the greatest thing ever.” Hmmm…..
Sorry, NYCPSP, it doesn’t work like that. You are the one claiming that FLERP! believes that Moskowitz “does nothing worthy of criticism ever”. That’s your quote. It is on you, to provide back-up that that is indeed what FLERP! believes. It is not on me to prove that he doesn’t believe that. So I’m waiting for you to provide a quote from FLERP! saying any such thing.
BTW, how is it that you know what FLERP! believes anyway? Are you in his head? What a scary thought!
“If you can sit tight and wait a few minutes, someone will be here to explain to you why Mayor De Blasio is the greatest thing ever.”
Dienne, if you can sit tight and wait a few minutes, FLERP! will be here to explain to you why Eva Moskowitz is the greatest thing ever.
Normally I wouldn’t phrase comments in that nasty and snarky way, but I wanted to make sure I commented in the way that you approve. And not just approve of, but cheer on!
Was I properly wording my comment in the way that you approve? I know how strongly you feel about putting words in someone’s mouth. Or is only FLERP! allowed to “get into someone’s head” like that?
It truly stuns me that you don’t see the hypocrisy of your posts.
I could have responded to you and FLERP! by simply whining “you are getting in my head and you are wrong.” But that would do nothing to clarify exactly how I felt about Mayor de Blasio. So I wrote a long post clarifying. And I also returned the favor to FLERP!
Now FLERP! can whine (or you can whine on his/her behalf) or FLERP! can do what I did and clarify WHY you were wrong to imply that I think Mayor de Blasio is “the great thing ever”.
Please don’t be a hypocrite. You should be better than that.
You folks blew my hat off.
LOL
This is actually mainstream ed reform. The concept of not crediting “seat time” and instead crediting “mastery” (as measured with cheap computer programs) is ed tech 101.
They lobby to get rid of “seat time” requirements. It’s not about students or learning. It’s about cheap education. If there are no seat time requirements you don’t need schools or expensive teachers.
Read any of the ed tech promotions. Look specifically for when they get to class sizes. They’re using the online learning component to double class sizes. They brag about jamming 60 students into a class and putting half of them on a computer.
My son’s school put some of these ed reform credit recovery programs in but they’re phasing them out. Turns out 16 year olds actually need adult human beings and the most vulnerable kids were opting for credit recovery rather than school.
Another dumb ed reform gimmick. I wish they’d stop taking advice from these people. It’s expensive and it wastes time.
“This is actually mainstream ed reform. The concept of not crediting “seat time” and instead crediting “mastery” (as measured with cheap computer programs) is ed tech 101.”
Exactly, Chiara!
Yes this is just another prong in the attack to destroy public education and move “educational product”. Those SOBs care for nothing except profit.
ed tech 101. Coming to a state, city and district near EVERYONE.
It’s telling that the self proclaimed “reformists” steadfastly reject reducing class sizes and providing more emotional support (by also adding counselors) for students. Those students most at risk need skilled, caring adults, not endless testing, stigmatizing and the closing of their schools. Add to that no talk of curricular enrichment, which (especially music) has been demonstrated repeatedly to significantly enhance cognitive development. Instead, we get testing, privatization, public money spent on online “learning” and over-hyped technology. Clearly, these so called reformers embrace any idea that allows children to be monetized (Charter Schools) and vendors (campaign contributors) to be rewarded. The social, emotional and intellectual growth of children be damned.
Ed reformers at universities actively promote this cheap garbage:
“The disruption that educator empowerment and school choice create in systems designed for stability is real. Change is hard. It brings real risks but also new opportunities. For some ideologues, disruption is itself the goal. Others pretend that all would be well if only things could stay the same. But for children and families, and everyone who cares about whether all kids have access to a quality education, the question before us now is what comes next.”
Its the same baloney Silicon Valley sells. Kids can put together a menu of options from a playlist! Disruption! Personalized learning! In practice it means giant class sizes and kids sitting in front of screens for half a day. It is WILDLY oversold.
Public schools have a responsibility in this. No one is ordering them to swallow this nonsense. They have agency and discretion. How many times are they going to allow themselves to be flim flammed by these frauds?
“Public schools have a responsibility in this. No one is ordering them to swallow this nonsense. They have agency and discretion. How many times are they going to allow themselves to be flim flammed by these frauds?”
Again, spot on, Chiara.
Unfortunately, most boards do what the Supe Adminimal wants and then all the subordinate adminimals all tell the supe adminimal just how brilliant she/he is and then implement the malpractices that the supe adminimal wants implemented.
Take it from a NYC insider and I can tell you that the NYC public schools – middle through high school are a complete sham. At any given time you can peek into a classroom and you will find at least 10 kids with their heads down on the desk. When teachers try to wake up the students they can become violent – this has caused teachers to let them be.
Second, the administrators and principals of the schools – and I have been to 50 or more – are the most incompetent goons you will ever meet. Most principals are from the Mike Bloomberg Principals Academy – now closed – who became principals without any classroom experience. Many of the Assistant Principals have minimal classroom experience resulting in administrations that really are hysterical.
Imagine your a teacher, a good teacher with 20 plus years experience in the classroom and you have this AP trying to tell you how to teach. Mine you, this AP has maybe a year or two in the classroom yet this person is in a position to instruct a 20 year veteran in the classroom as to how to teach.
Mike Bloomberg and Joel Klein did so much damage to NYC schools and KIDS but the terd go away with it because of the ole mighty dollar. Joel Klein who was named chancellor of all NYC schools under Bloomberg was a complete a hole. Klein had zero education experience and it was sad to see him leading the way with blinders on his eyes literally.
So today we move on as the schools are in complete disarray. Many will post here that this is just a frustration post but its really sad what the billionaires are doing to this country let alone education.
“Second, the administrators and principals of the schools – and I have been to 50 or more – are the most incompetent goons you will ever meet.”
Don’t call those “administrators and principals” adminimals for nothing.
Take one large public high school of 4,000 students that has a 50% graduation rate. Make 4 schools that have 400 students in each school and near 100% graduation rate. The 5th school has 2,400 students and only 16.66% graduate. Voila! You have created 4 wonderful new schools to replace the big “failing” school and only one “failing school”.
Success! At least, according to the ed reformer/Mike Bloomberg definition of success.
All songs written by Jeff Levine, a DeWitt Clinton math teacher currently in arbitration fighting 3020-a charges brought by Principal Orbe for alleged grade falsification. Produced by Matt Clark, an excessed Clinton teacher, now an ATR, teaching U.S. History to adolescents on Rikers Island.
https://beijingband.bandcamp.com
Interesting band, social conscience lyrics, good stuff. Thanks for sharing.
In regards to the Chancellor’s policy, having some background in Ed Leadership, I see why they implemented it and also how it could be misconstrued.
On one hand, you want to have some standards for passing students. That being said, in NYC, there are VERY diverse populations in every imaginable configuration. There are some students who would be harmed by a strict seat time policy – the current policy actually gives schools maximum flexibility.
After all, if they haven’t been there X amount of time, it’s highly unlikely that they mastered the material and would still fail – it leaves it to the schools to determine mastery.
That being said, that level of flexibility can be an invitation to a race to the bottom as you look to juke your numbers and produce the evidence that says your school is a good, safe, school that will produce results for students that go there.
This thread has morphed a little in terms of focusing on ed tech and the small schools movement.
Really the conversation should be, at what number of seat hours should a student be held accountable and responsible for failing? Who gets hurt most by that number once you peg it down? How do you identify clearly what mastery means for every subject area and every grade level for the purposes of promotion? And what will the response of the system be once people on the very fringes of mastery get blocked out of being declared passing? Held back? Denied a diploma? More costs to the school system to remediate?
I think the policy was well intentioned and not nearly so nefarious, but the consequence of flexibility is someone can always take it too far and end up using it to hurt students. These policies are very damned if you do and damned if you don’t, and when dealing with a million students, a good number of people get hurt almost no matter what you do.
As it is though, it puts the onus on the school leadership to not fail and develop policies that meet the needs of their students rather than central being responsible for directing schools to fail students no matter what and that’s probably more where it comes from more than anything.
Clearly the approach this Principal used in no way demonstrated mastery and that was his decision as a school leader and where the policy falls apart and also becomes political.
I don’t remember who did the research and I am too lazy to do the legwork to find out. I do remember hearing that students who were missing 20% (1/day/week) were less likely to graduate. I don’t think that there a teacher who would disagree that students who frequently miss out on class time are less likely to complete quality work and are less likely to be able to contribute to class successfully. I think back to one of my sons who commented that his classes were really interesting when he did his homework. Imagine that!
M,
Thank you for this insight.
I think that mandatory schooling is a form of imprisonment. At least nowadays most states allow home schooling and Individual Study Plans (ISP). The latter allow to spend as few as just one day of week at school, and do all other schoolwork at home. ISP also allow completing school earlier, going faster than the glacial pace of a regular school.
I see nothing wrong in getting a credit for a course that may have at most two or three ideas and formulas in it for a whole trimester. Spending thirteen years of one’s life in school is a waste of time at best, and a punishment at worst. Seeing all these “hardened” schools with fences, scanners, peace offices, even dogs – this is not a friendly scholarly environment. Add to this incompetent teachers, lack of discipline, drug dealing, and you can see why one would want to avoid school altogether.
Being able to get a credit and a grade for a class by passing a test is one of the few benefits the existing system can offer.
OTOH, giving passing grade to someone who “did not show mastery” even having the benefit of doing the test at home, will all the resources available, is cheating. But then again, as we are told, tests are wrong and grades show nothing, and an F student can become an MD. Rock on.