Archives for category: Chicago

This reader is grateful to the 88 education scholars who protested the misuse of test scores in Chopicago. They told Mayor Rahm Emanuel he was wrong. That takes guts. And it matters. It’s important for teachers to know they are not alone. And they are not wrong.

The reader writes:

Let’s not forget the CReATE group of 88 professors who sent a letter “to Mayor Rahm Emanuel, CPS CEO Jean-Claude Brizard and the Board of Education signed by 88 faculty members from 15 local universities warning that using student test scores in teacher evaluation could do more harm than good. The universities included the University of Illinois Chicago, DePaul University and the University of Chicago.” (http://www.catalyst-chicago.org/notebook/2012/03/26/19951/professors-caution-cps-using-tests-evaluate-teachers )

I think it is no coincidence that Chicago is now the epicenter of the fight against corporate education reform.  With teachers, Ed professors, community groups, and parents all united…it is a powerful force loud enough to actually change the conversation!

I hope other ed professors around the county unite and speak out like our activist profs here in Chi-town did!  It makes a difference.

When students begin to understand and talk about the conditions in which they live and work, the national conversation will change.

Here is a column written by a Chicago student and published in Anthony Cody’s great blog, Living in Dialogue.

She asks a simple question: Why are certain schools given preferential treatment and others (like hers) shunned and neglected?

This post was sent by a reader in Chicago.

For the graphics, open the original posting.

Education Apartheid: The Racism Behind Chicago’s School “Reform”
by OCTRIB_ADMIN • SEP 12, 2012 • PRINT-FRIENDLY

Teachers, parents, students and other allies rally downtown in Chicago on September 10, Day 1 of the Chicago Teachers Union Strike. (Photo by Ryan L Williams, used with permission.)
Dyett High School students are not allowed to enter the front door of their school. Instead, the more than 170 students at the Southside high school enter through the back. From there, they must spend their day pushing through other students in the one open hallway, after half of the building was placed off limits.

“Just imagine, all these students in one hallway trying to get to where they’re going … everyone’s just trying to get through each other,” says Keshaundra Neal, a junior at Dyett and a student organizer for the Kenwood Oakland Community Organization (KOCO).

The phasing out of Dyett, one of 17 schools that the Board of Education voted to close or turn around last winter, highlights a process being played out across Chicago—the dismantling of neighborhood public schools, the ushering in of corporate-controlled charters and, in many cases, the gentrification of predominately African-American and Latino neighborhoods. Closing schools, like tearing down public housing, has proved an effective way for Chicago’s rich and powerful to push out and further segregate people of color.

The “global city” that Chicago’s elite have been crafting for decades is a racially and economically segregated city—gleaming downtown office towers for the upwardly mobile, and blighted neighborhoods of low-wage or would-be laborers, tucked away, out of sight. A 2012 study of census data by the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research found that Chicago is the most racially segregated city in the United States. And how could it not be? While corporations receive TIF money to subsidize their largesse, and billionaires like the Board of Education’s own Penny Pritzker evade paying their full share of property taxes, the seeds of the city’s inequality are re-sown every year in our segregated school system.

A Corporate Renaissance

In Bronzeville alone, where Dyett is located, 19 schools have been closed or turned around since 2001, often replaced by charter and selective-enrollment schools that admit students from anywhere in the city, further displacing neighborhood students.

Renaissance 2010 institutionalized the idea that closing public schools and pushing their students into selective-enrollment or charter schools would solve the problems afflicting urban education. The 2004 project, started by then-mayor Richard J. Daley and CPS CEO Arne Duncan, planned to close up to 70 of the worst performing schools in the city and reopen 100 new schools, with two-thirds as charters or contract schools.

Renaissance 2010 was called “perhaps the most significant experiment in the US to reinvent an urban public school system on neoliberal lines,” by education academic Pauline Lipman. She places the education changes in the context of Chicago’s push to become a Global City: “Ren2010 is a market-based approach that involves a high level partnership with the most powerful financial and corporate interests in the city.”

Eight years after Renaissance 2010 was launched, Chicago has 96 charter schools, 27 turnaround schools, and a record summer of gun violence under its belt.

The numbers show a stratified society. More than two-thirds of all African-American students in Chicago, and more than 40 percent of Latino students, attend schools where more than 90 percent of all students are of the same ethnicity.

These schools are the first to be closed or turned around, and the last in line to receive extra resources. Of the 160 schools in Chicago without a library, 140 are south of North Avenue. Predominately white and affluent schools receive the majority of capital improvements. Often, as with Herzl Elementary School this past year, students at underserved schools see sorely needed construction begin only after CPS has decided to give away the building to a charter network or AUSL.

With black and Latino communities facing the brunt of the recession, and the poorest residents among them living in a state of permanent depression, students from these communities bear the results of economic segregation. In 188 schools in predominately black neighborhoods, 95 percent or more of students qualify for free and reduced lunch. One-third of Latino students go to schools where more than 90 percent of students qualify. Only 3 percent of white students can say the same.

The racial inequalities in school funding affect teachers as well as students—school closures and turnarounds, where a targeted school’s entire staff is fired, have been forcing African-American teachers out of their jobs. In the schools closed this year, 65 percent of their teachers were African American. Since the era of reform accelerated, the number of African-American teachers has declined by 10 percent, while that of white teachers has increased 5 percent.

The quality of education that Chicago students receive varies greatly by which school they attend, and on the resources provided to those schools. Here’s a breakdown of two very different, but typical, school environments:

Fighting Back in Rahm’s Austerity Fiefdom

Mayor Rahm Emanuel has thrust austerity upon other public services, primarily targeting those used by the poorest Chicagoans. He cut library hours in early 2012, and closed half the city’s mental health clinics. The projected savings of the clinic closures was only $3 million dollars—a paltry sum compared to the estimated $55 million spent on the three-day NATO summit.

The fight over education in Chicago contains these same glaring disparities—while 675 schools are forced to share 205 social workers, psychologists, and school-based counselors, $29.5 million in Tax Incremental Financing (TIF) money is granted to build a West Loop office building. In total, this year’s TIF intake is estimated to be worth $454 million, according to Cook County Clerk David Orr. That’s money that, if Emanuel had different priorities, could be spent on education and other social services.

Community groups, activists, and organizers have come out strongly against such unequal policies. Students at Dyett High School, after witnessing CPS set up their school to fail, have taken their fight against this broken agenda to Washington D.C.

As Dyett students and KOCO student organizers Pierre Williams, Diamond McCullough, and Keshaundra Neal tell the story of their school, the city has been disinvesting from it for years in preparation for closing it down. After then-CPS CEO Paul Vallas turned it from an elementary school to a high school in 1999, he didn’t give the “money or resources necessary for a high school—no library, no AP classes, no honors classes,” says Neal. That same year, “King was turned into a selective enrollment school, and given $25 million, so they knew how to make good schools,” added McCullough.

After CPS closed Englewood High School in 2005, “they sent most of their students to Dyett,” says Williams. “So our violence increased, scores dropped, and a lot more things happened that changed the environment at our school. During our sophomore year [last year-ed.], that’s when we heard the news that they were trying to phase out our school.”

Williams, McCullough, and Neal joined other classmates and community members to testify against closing Dyett at this winter’s school board hearings, staged a four-day sit-in outside Mayor Emanuel’s office at City Hall, and helped to shut down board meetings in protest. The board didn’t listen. But these students didn’t let up.

“After all that, other states and cities found out what we were doing,” says Neal. “So we hooked up with 16 states and we filed a civil rights complaint, because we realized our rights were being violated by CPS and no one cares.” Neal met with officials at the Department of Education along with other education organizers and student leaders from across the country.

They came with a list of demands—including a moratorium on all school closings nationally, a meeting with the president, tours of their schools, and a sustainable school model, in which school boards would be required to work more closely with a school’s community before taking actions against it.

Although the DOE didn’t agree to the moratoriums, nor grant a meeting with the president, they did agree to tour the schools and look into the sustainable school model. But most significantly, the DOE’s Assistant Secretary of Civil Rights Russlynn Ali told the students the department has listened to their original civil rights complaint, and has opened an investigation into the racial discrimination of school closings.

In 2008, Dyett had one of the highest rates of college-bound graduates among CPS schools and was recognized nationally for its restorative justice program. Just three years later, the college-bound rate was below CPS average, and the restorative justice program was defunded.

As the teachers’ strike loomed, Michael Brunson, recording secretary for the Chicago Teachers Union, told supporters that a socially just school system may be visionary, but it’s attainable.

“To imagine that is not to create something new,” he said. “It’s to take back what was lost.”

By Joel Handley and Rosa Trakhtensky

It became commonplace in he media to say over and over that the average salary for Chicago teachers is $71,000-$76,000.

I heard this and didn’t question it. I didn’t think it was inappropriate or extravagant as compensation for a professional.

But it seems the number is hugely inflated.

According to this post, the actual average salary for teachers in the Chicago metropolitan area is $56,720.

Maybe this will make the teachers’ cause somewhat more tolerable to the pundits in the media who can barely get by on four times that much.

Michael Klonsky in Chicago disagrees with Pedro Noguera’s views in the Nation about the Chicago teachers’ strike. Here Klonsky sets the record straight:

Pedro Noguera claims that the CTU, “has not been willing to acknowledge that more learning time and a clear and fair basis for judging teacher effectiveness are legitimate issues that must be addressed.”

I’m a big fan of Pedro but his latest criticism of the union is not only ill-timed, but dead wrong as well. The union doesn’t oppose “more learning time” for students as Pedro Claims. From the start, they supported the idea of a longer, better school day (see the Ward Room (http://www.nbcchicago.com/blogs/ward-room/CTU-Contract-Longer-School-Day-163588976.html) including more art, music, physical education and recess, similar to the school day at the private school where Rahm and board member Penny Pritzker send their children.

The union’s approach to a longer school day moves well beyond and improves upon the mayor’s top-down imposition of more seat time on teachers, students and parents. It is true that union has opposed the idea of a longer school day and year without any added compensation for teachers as mandated by the board.

Pedro’s other poke at the CTU for supposedly not offering an alternative approach to improving “teacher effectiveness” is also misleading. The union, with research support coming from the CReATE group of researchers, has put forth important ideas for transforming the current inadequate evaluation system (See CReATE member Isabel Nunez’ commentary in the Sept. 12 Sun-Times http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/15107882-452/standardized-test-scores-are-worst-way-to-evaluate-teachers.html).

What makes Pedro’s criticism so unfair, particularly at this time, is that the union has taken on both the more-seat-time issues as well as new approaches to teacher evaluation at great risk during the current contract negotiations. Perhaps he isn’t aware that since the passage of Sen. Bill 7, Chicago teachers are legally barred from negotiating over anything except wage/benefit issues.

Pedro would do well to read the union’s excellent document, “The Schools Chicago’s Students Deserve” to better understand where the CTU is coming from. The report can be found at http://www.ctunet.com/blog/text/SCSD_Report-02-16-2012-1.pdf

Pedro Noguera knows that closing public schools and shifting kids to charter schools is not a remedy to the huge economic and social problems of Chicago.

What else is needed?

Mayor Rahm Emanuel boasts about the “success” of charters in Chicago. He plans to close more neighborhood schools to open another 60 charter schools.

But there is another side to the story.

Karen Lewis tells the other side here.

This post is very provocative. It may or may not have relevance to the readers of this blog, because so much of it refers to a British context and pertains to higher education. But what is relevant is the discussion of the conflict between democracy and free market efficiency.

As I read it, I thought about the argument for mayoral control: “It may mean giving up democracy, but it is more efficient.” Look to Cleveland, Chicago and New York City, and what you see is that democracy has been abolished with no increase in efficiency or effectiveness. What we have instead is one-man control, no-bid contracts, school closings, indifference to the views of constituents, and no improvement in educational quality.

Here is the heart of the matter:

…the nub of the matter is captured by his analogy with democracy — “the worst system except for all the others”. The ‘problem’ with democracy (as Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore might have put it) is that it’s inefficient. Much simpler, cheaper and more efficient to have a benevolent dictator (like Mr Lee and his successors). Likewise, our justice system is mightily ‘inefficient’ — all those lawyers, trials, juries, assumption of innocence until proved guilty, etc. Much simpler to be able to lock up baddies on the say-so of a senior policeman.

But in both cases we tolerate the inefficiencies because we value other things more highly: political liberty and freedom of expression in the case of democracy; the belief that a system of justice should be open, impartial and fair in the case of our court system.

Like democracy, public universities are also ‘inefficient’ — often, in my experience, woefully so. And only some of that inefficiency can be defended in terms of academic freedoms; much of it is down to the way university culture has evolved, the expectations of academic staff, poor management (rather than enlightened administration), and so on — things that could be fixed without undermining the really important values embodied by the idea of a university. The advent of serious tuition fees in English universities will have the effect of highlighting some of the more egregious deficiencies — poor (or at best uneven) teaching quality, little pastoral care, archaic pedagogical methods, etc. But any attempt to remedy these problems is likely to be seen as interference with cherished academic freedoms, and resisted accordingly. Already, however, students are beginning to ask questions: why, for example, should they pay £9,000 a year for crowded lectures, ‘tutorial groups’ of 50 or more, zero pastoral care and — in some cases — lousy social facilities? Why should complaints about the crass incompetence of a particular lecturer be ignored by the Head of his department? (These are gripes I’ve heard from students recently, though not at my university.)

The problem isn’t helped by the crass insensitivity of many of the new ‘managers’ in UK universities — people who may know how to run a business but haven’t the faintest idea of how to run a university. There’s no reason in principle, though, why one cannot have universities that, on the one hand, function as liberal, critical institutions which cherish and protect freedom of thought and inquiry while at the same time providing excellent ‘customer service’ to their paying students.

I received an email from a parent who is also an educator in Chicago. She wondered about the identity of a group called Education Reform Now, which placed ads in the local media undermining the teachers’ strike. ERN is part of a group called Democrats for Education Reform. DFER is funded by Wall Street hedge fund managers who support charter schools, privatization, and using test scores to evaluate teachers. It is interesting that the charter schools they promote are often (depending on state law) exempt from test-based evaluation. Oh, and 88% of all charters are non-union.

She writes:

Greetings Ms. Ravitch,

I write this letter to you with both excitement and disappointment in my heart. I am sure you are well aware of by now of the strike/battle over the fate of our children and public education that is currently taking place between the Chicago Teachers Union and the City of Chicago. I write this letter not as an educator, but as a parent with children in the public school system here in the city who is infuriated that my children, other children and tax paying citizens are having their civil rights infringed upon through the bullying tactics of our mayor, CPS and big business moguls of this country.

I have been extremely active in the process of fighting against the unfunded longer school day put upon us by the mayor, fighting for an elected representative school board and now walking the picket lines and taking information to the streets and the people regarding the issues that the union is truly bargaining for for our students and teachers. My children have been in the streets along side me as well. I have utilized this opportunity as a teaching moment because I understand the importance of teaching our children, our future, true democracy in action.

My excitement comes from not just the part I play in the process, but more importantly the role and witnessing of the process by children. We talk about the importance of providing a comprehensive education to our children and that we are a “democratic society”; but based on what I am witnessing now brings me to what has has me disappointed and incensed.

Yesterday I watched a television ad paid for by Education Reform Now Advocacy that ran on our local ABC station channel 7. The ad blared carefully selected quotes taken from stories in the Chicago Sun-Times and the Chicago Tribune against the union, the teachers and the strike. It ends with the narrator quoting from the Sun-Times that “a deal is within reach, all CTU has to do is grab it”.

The content from both media outlets is based off of mis-information that is simply not true. This is a strike that is, in fact, long over due. Contrary to what the city wants everyone to believe, this is a strike to take back the fate and control of our children’s education. The city and big business are combining efforts and dollars to dismantle the union, and to pit parents and communities against teachers and our children so that they can continue to create standardized testing factories. They aim to turn our students into consumers of a privatized, on-line product that produces data and dollars so that the rich can continue to become richer.

This is both disgraceful and disrespectful and therefore, I am making a plea to you to support our union, our children and the people of Chicago by helping to shed light and expose the bullying tactics of big business in their continued attempt to dismantle unions and privatize education in this country during the time of our fight.

Thank you in advance for your attention and support! Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or comments.

In Solidarity,

Tonya Payne
Parent/Educator

Please read this article.

Eric Zorn of the Chicago Tribune has taken the time to read research.

This is especially important because the Trib has been hostile to the CTU strike.

I am especially pleased that he read Gary Rubinstein’s careful dissection of VAM in New York City.

Gary’s posts should go viral.

He shows that VAM doesn’t work.

It is meaningless.