Archives for category: Closing schools
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

A Short Video About the Real Cost of School Closings

By dianeravitch
May 21, 2018 //
11

In 2013, Rahm Emanuel closed 50 public schools in one day. If for no other reason, he will go down in history as the mayor who shuttered 50 public schools on the same day. Never happened before.

What happened to those schools? Watch this short video.

Did he think that schools are like hot dog stands or shoe stores? If you don’t make a profit, you close it and move on? Did he forget that he was cutting the arteries away from communities, families, and children?

Tina Trujillo at the University of California, Berkeley, and the University of Colorado’s Michelle Renée suggest that government agencies and policy-makers, including the U.S. Department of Education, would be wise to look at educational research as they guide school turnarounds.

Evidence shows that top-down, punitive efforts are ineffective and counterproductive. Instead, a collaborative, community-driven approach—combined with significant, sustained financial investment and a focus on improving the quality of teaching and learning—has been proven to be the better path to school improvement.

Categories Accountability, Chicago, Closing schools, Corporate Reform

Tom Ultican: The Destroy-Public -Education Movement Targets Oakland

By dianeravitch
May 13, 2018 //
20

Tom Ultican has been writing a series of posts about the “Destroy Public Education Movement,” a phrase coined by Professor Jim Scheurich of Indiana University, who has been documenting this vile effort to privatize public schools.

In this post, Ultican writes about current events in Oakland, where the school board seems to be cooperating with the demise of the district.

He writes:

“A “Systems of Schools” plan has been introduced by the destroy public education (DPE) forces in Oakland, California. The plan basically posits that with 30 percent of students in charter schools, the system has become inefficient. Therefore, the school board needs to review resources and close schools in areas with too many seats and overlapping programs.

“However, since Oakland’s school board has no authority over charter schools it is only public schools that can be closed or downsized unless charter schools voluntarily cooperate.”

Read on.

Categories California, Charter Schools, Closing schools, Education Industry, Oakland, Privatization

Kymberly Walcott: Stop Closing Our Schools!

By dianeravitch
May 10, 2018 //
22

This video features Kymberly Walcott, now a senior in Hunter College in New York City. She describes the terrible injustice of closing her high school, Jamaica High School.

The idea that closing schools is a “remedy” was one of the cruelest aspects of the failed No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top.

Countless schools were closed because they had low scores. Typically, these schools were located in black and brown communities, and the students enrolled in them were, of course, nonwhite. Children were dispersed, communities were disrupted, teachers and principals and support staff lost their jobs and had to fend for themselves.

Jamaica High School was once one of the greatest high schools in the nation and in New York City. As its population changed from white to predominantly nonwhite, its reputation changed. It enrolled needier students. But instead of providing the school with the supports it needed, school officials in the Bloomberg era declared that it was a “failing school.” That immediately sent enrollments into a tail spin, as parents withdrew their children. The label became a self-fulfilling prophecy, dooming the school. The Department of Education closed it and replaced it with small high schools, none of which could match the broad curriculum, the programs for ELLs, or other offerings at the original school.

This article in the New Yorker in 2015 captures a sense of what was lost.

There is no evidence that closing schools produces better outcomes for students. It predictably produces disruption and chaos, which are not good for children and teens.

If there are any researchers out there who have a source for the number of schools closed by NCLB and RTTT, please let me know. I have searched for the number without success.

Categories Closing schools, NCLB (No Child Left Behind), Network for Public Education, New York City, Race, Race to the Top

School Closings Hurt Children and Communities

By dianeravitch
May 10, 2018 //
8

 

No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top encouraged school Closings as a “reform,” but this turns out to be a destructive approach that hurts children and communities. 

Rahm Emanuel and his hand-picked board in Chicago closed nearly 50 public schools in one day in 2013. That’s a record. One for the history books. That’s the kind of thinking that views people and children as objects, unimportant lives, easily discarded.

The National Education Policy Center describes the strategy of closing schools as “high risk, low gain.”

BOULDER, CO (May 18, 2017) – Federal and state school accountability policies have used standardized test results to shine a spotlight on low-performing schools. A remedy offered to “turn around” low-performance in school districts is the option to close the doors of the low-performing schools and send students elsewhere.

School Closure as a Strategy to Remedy Low Performance, authored by Gail L. Sunderman of the University of Maryland, and Erin Coghlan and Rick Mintrop of the University of California, Berkeley, investigates whether closing schools and transferring students for the purpose of remedying low performance is an effective option for educational decision makers to pursue.

Closing schools in response to low student performance is based on the premise that by closing low-performing schools and sending students to better-performing ones, student achievement will improve. The higher-performing schools, it is reasoned, will give transfer students access to higher-quality peer and teacher networks, which in turn will have a beneficial effect on academic outcomes. Moreover, it is argued that the threat of closure may motivate low-performing schools (and their districts) to improve.

To investigate this logic of closing schools to improve student performance, the authors drew on relevant peer-reviewed research and well-designed policy reports to answer four questions:

  1. How often do school closings occur and for what reasons?
  2. What is the impact on students of closing schools for reasons of performance?
  3. What is the impact of closing schools on the public school system in which closure has taken place?
  4. What is the impact of school closures on students of various ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds, and on local communities and neighborhoods?

Based on their analysis of the relevant available evidence the authors offer the following recommendations:

  • Even though school closures have dramatically increased, jurisdictions largely shun the option of “closure and transfer” in the context of the federal School Improvement Grant (SIG) program. Policy and district actors should treat the infrequency of this turnaround option as a caution.
  • School closures have at best weak and decidedly mixed benefits; at worst they have detrimental repercussions for students if districts do not ensure that seats at higher- performing schools are available for transfer students. In districts where such assignments are in short or uncertain supply, “closure and transfer” is a decidedly undesirable option.
  • School closures seem to be a challenge for transferred students in non-academic terms for at least one or two years. While school closures are not advisable for a school of any grade span, they are especially inadvisable for middle school students because of the shorter grade span of such schools.
  • The available evidence on the effects of school closings for their local system offers a cautionary note. There are costs associated with closing buildings and transferring teachers and students, which reduce the available resources for the remaining schools. Moreover, in cases where teachers are not rehired under closure-and-restart models, there may be broader implications for the diversity of the teaching workforce. Closing schools to consolidate district finances or because of declining enrollments may be inevitable at times, but closing solely for performance has unanticipated consequences that local and state decision makers should be aware of.
  • School closures are often accompanied by political conflict. Closures tend to differentially affect low-income communities and communities of color that are politically disempowered, and closures may work against the demand of local actors for more investment in their local institutions.

In conclusion, school closure as a strategy for remedying student achievement in low-performing schools is at best a high-risk/low-gain strategy that fails to hold promise with respect to either increasing student achievement or promoting the non-cognitive well-being of students. The strategy invites political conflict and incurs hidden costs for both districts and local communities, especially low-income communities and communities of color that are differentially affected by school closings. It stands to reason that in many, if not most, instances, students, parents, local communities, district and state policymakers may be better off investing in persistently low-performing schools rather than closing them.

Find School Closure as a Strategy to Remedy Low Performance, by Gail L. Sunderman, Erin Coghlan and Rick Mintrop, at: http://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/closures

 

 

Categories Chicago, Closing schools, Education Reform, Emanuel, Rahm, National Education Policy Center

Puerto Rico: Privatizing Public Schools in Puerto Rico

By dianeravitch
May 5, 2018 //
17

Puerto Rico is part of the United States. You would not know that if you paid attention to the neglect of the Island’s needs since Hurricane Maria. Just as the privateers took advantage of Hurricane Katrina to wipe out public schools in New Orleans, they are now moving swiftly to replace public schools in Puerto Rico with charter schools and vouchers. The privatizers are using their familiar tactics of disruption and chaos to shatter communities and displace students and families. The rationale is unexplained.

The austerity measures imposed on the residents have led to violent clashes and tear-gassing of resistors. 

Consider the following information, compiled by the AFT:

Consider the following:

Puerto Rico School Closings: Background

On April 5, Puerto Rico’s Secretary of Education Julia Keleher announced that Puerto Rico would be shuttering 283 schools by September 2018. Those closings would affect nearly 60,000 students and 6,000 teachers and could cause thousands of educators to leave their jobs. This would have a devastating impact on families and communities in Puerto Rico as the island works to recover and grow. Economists have been arguing that the single most important group to keep on the island to stabilize the economic outlook of Puerto Rico are families whose plans for returning or reestablishing normalcy are thrown into chaos.

A small group in the Puerto Rico Education Department proposed the school closing with no input from stakeholders, no visits to schools and using an database that was never shared with the public.

The education secretary for Puerto Rico has admitted that at no time did they do an analysis of any of the school being closed or the impact on students at the closed schools.

The latest round of closings comes less than a year after Puerto Rico closed 167 schools, bringing the total number of schools closed within one year to 450. This represents more than a third of its public schools, though the island’s population has decreased by only 9 percent over the past seven years.

The latest closings also come on the heels of an earlier, smaller round of school closings that occurred due to population loss. Between 2010 and 2015, Puerto Rico closed another 150 public schools in order to deal with population loss.

In addition to the school closings, the U.S. Secretaryof Education Betsy DeVos has been working with Puerto Rico closely to pass legislation to introduce charter schools and vouchers in Puerto Rico. The bill was drafted by a team from Betsy DeVos’s U.S. Education Department, with very little or no input from stakeholders in Puerto Rico.

The closure of schools was built on misleading information.

Initially the Puerto Rican government promised cost savings from closing schools.

o The Government of Puerto Rico has been unable to sell any previously closed schools and is leasing 50 schools out of more than 300 available schools for $1 annually.

o The Governor subsequently acknowledged that there is very little cost savings from closing schools.

o The Governor’s latest statement tracks with studies about school closing in other states that found like one from Pew research that found municipalities get a fraction of the savings they budget for, when they close schools.

o Meanwhile the government just passed voucher and charter school legislation written by DeVos that would cost the Puerto Rico up to $400 million a year.

o As the plan to close schools, the fiscal plan approved by the fiscal oversight board includes more than $7 billion in debt service over five years to vulture funds at the expense of schools and recovery.

The Puerto Rico Secretary of Education had previously argued that school closing were driven by the fiscal board required it. In a recent interview with Telemundo, Jose Carrion, Chairman of the Fiscal Control Board, said the Fiscal Board did not require the closing of schools.

There’s not a transparent and coherent process for why schools are being closed. Various arguments have been made that are sometimes at odds with each other.

On Friday April 20th, the Department of Education indicated that it had not conducted an updated analysis of which schools were being closed, their impact on the education of kids in the schools or whether receiving schools had the resources to help the incoming kids. The Department also indicated that despite protests from mayors, parents and teachers that the list of 283 would not change under any circumstance.

o On Saturday April 21st, The Department of Education sent out a press release that they would make changes to the number of schools being closed.

o Two days later the education department removed six schools from the list and added three new schools to the list.

The schools on the closure list were not selected using an understandable and transparent process. In fact, a quick review of the latest school performance and demographic data shows a number of troubling facts. It is critical that education officials explain how these schools were selected.

Of the 50 poorest schools (at least 95 percent poverty), 21 are slated to close.

Of the 50 least poor schools (56 percent poverty or less), all are expected to remain open.

Among the 50 schools with the lowest proficiency (9 percent proficient or less), 11 schools are slated for closure.

Among the 50 schools with the highest proficiency (90 percent proficient or better), 22 schools are slated for closure.

58 of the 283 schools scheduled to be closed are rated good or excellent by the Department of education

40 percent of the children in the schools slated to closed are special needs students, including children with autism.

There was no consultation with teachers, parents and community leaders before the school closure list was finalized.

There was no transparency to the school closure process other than what we read in the press.
There is real human and economic impact to the school closures that has not been considered. No one has performed an economic impact on school closure in Puerto Rico.

A department of education offical visited a recently built modern school with air conditioning and computer labs slated for closing and told teachers that the school would be perfect for a charter school operator.

The Secretary of Education went on the record to confirm that she is closing a Montessori school because administrators refused to allow the school to become a charter.

Local mayors find the school closings so disruptive that they’ve petitioned the government to take over operations of the schools.

In Lares a school closing will impact four communities in the surrounding area forcing students to commute for an extra hour to 2 hours a day.

Mercedes is a beloved neighborhood school in San Juan where teachers have invested hundreds of dollars for supplies and the school where they are supposed to go has a lower rating and is located in a violent area.

Manuel Caves is a school slated for closing that had a waiting list last year.

In Arecibo, the only bilingual school is being closed.
A school closing in Barceloneta offers pre-vocational courses, and there is no indication that the new school will continue the program.

A school closing in Bayamon, Papa Juan XXIII High School, specializes in mathematics and science. It has an enrollment of 346, and its honor roll is made up of 320 students. These students receive multiple math, science and English classes during the year. Last year, five students in grade 11 went directly to college.

A school being closed in Humacao, Su Luciano Rios, won a robotics championship in 2017.

A school that specializes in baseball is slated to close in Comerío. Keleher argued that the closing was due to poor conditions, but reporters found the school to be in great physical conditions, with the municipality providing maintenance services for the school.

There are dozens of receiving schools that are too far from the closing school. Teachers feel that some receiving schools are too dangerous for students.
In multiple instances, receiving schools have facility problems that can’t accommodate incoming students, or problems with bathrooms or clean water.

All in all, the department of education under Keleher has made no effort to reach out to and work with teachers and parents about what closing their school would mean for students. There are no indications that any thought has been put into the logistics of disrupting the lives of 60,000 students by talking to the adult guardians or teachers of these kids.

New stories emerge daily about communities and schools impacted because there has been no analysis. The list above is just a sample of problems.

Categories Charter Schools, Closing schools, Education Industry, Privatization, Puerto Rico, Vouchers

The Corporate Plan to Prepare Our Children for a Life of Servitude

By dianeravitch
April 28, 2018 //
35

 

In this insightful and harrowing article, we can see clearly the contours of a devilish plan, hatched in the corridors of ALEC and other corporate-controlled entities. The centerpiece of the plan is the destruction and privatization of public education, which all of us own and paid for with our taxes.

Read it and get involved. Join the Networkfor Public Education. Join your local advocacy group. Never despair. Don’t stop fighting.

It begins like this:

It was the strike heard ‘round the country.

West Virginia’s public school teachers had endured years of low pay, inadequate insurance, giant class sizes, and increasingly unlivable conditions—including attempts to force them to record private details of their health daily on a wellness app. Their governor, billionaire coal baron Jim Justice, pledged to allow them no more than an annual 1% raise—effectively a pay cut considering inflation—in a state where teacher salaries ranked 48th lowest out of 50 states. In February 2018, they finally revolted: In a tense, nine-day work stoppage, they managed to wrest a 5% pay increase from the state. Teachers in Oklahoma and Kentucky have now revolted in similar protests.

It’s the latest battle in a contest between two countervailing forces: one bent on reengineering America for the benefit of the wealthy, the other struggling to preserve dignity and security for ordinary people.

If the story turns out the way the Jim Justices desire, the children of a first-world country will henceforth be groomed for a third-world life.

Gordon Lafer, Associate Professor at the Labor Education and Research Center at the University of Oregon, and Peter Temin, Professor Emeritus of Economics at MIT, help illuminate why this is happening, who is behind it, and what’s at stake as the educational system that once united Americans and prepared them for a life of social and economic mobility is wiped out of existence.

The Plan: Lower People’s Expectations

When Lafer began to study the tsunami of corporate-backed legislation that swept the country in early 2011 in the wake of Citizens United—the 2010 Supreme Court decision that gave corporations the green light to spend unlimited sums to influence the political system—he wasn’t yet clear what was happening. In state after state, a pattern was emerging of highly coordinated campaigns to smash unions, shrink taxes for the wealthy, and cut public services. Headlines blamed globalization and technology for the squeeze on the majority of the population, but Lafer began to see something far more deliberate working behind the scenes: a hidden force that was well-funded, laser-focused, and astonishingly effective.

Lafer pored over the activities of business lobbying groups like the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) – funded by giant corporations including Walmart, Amazon.com, and Bank of America—that produces “model legislation” in areas its conservative members use to promote privatization. He studied the Koch network, a constellation of groups affiliated with billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch. (Koch Industries is the country’s second-largest private company with business including crude oil supply and refining and chemical production). Again and again, he found that corporate-backed lobbyists were able to subvert the clear preferences of the public and their elected representatives in both parties. Of all the areas these lobbyists were able to influence, the policy campaign that netted the most laws passed, featured the most big players, and boasted the most effective organizations was public education. For these U.S. corporations, undermining the public school system was the Holy Grail.


After five years of research and the publication of The One Percent Solution, Lafer concluded that by lobbying to make changes like increasing class sizes, pushing for online instruction, lowering accreditation requirements for teachers, replacing public schools with privately-run charters, getting rid of publicly elected school boards and a host of other tactics, Big Business was aiming to dismantle public education.

The grand plan was even more ambitious. These titans of business wished to completely change the way Americans and their children viewed their life potential. Transforming education was the key.

 

 

 

Categories ALEC, Betsy DeVos, Billionaires, Charter Schools, Closing schools, Corporate Reform, Dark Money, Democracy, Disruption, Education Reform, Koch Brothers

Why the Colorado Democratic Party Denounced DFER

By dianeravitch
April 16, 2018 //
5

 

Democrats for Education Reform is an organization founded, funded, and led by hedge fund managers who support charter schools and high-stakes testing. They raise money to elect likeminded people across the country and are a key part of the Dark Money world of fundraisers for privatization of public schools.

On Saturday, the Colorado Democratic Party passed a strong resolution opposing privatization of public schools and demanding that DFER stop calling themselves “Democrats.”

Here is the story of the state Democratic convention, as reported in Chalkbest.

Colorado has been fertile ground for corporate reform, and DFER has been a source of funding for candidates for the state board, the Denver board, and other critical races. Senator Michael Bennett, once a superintendent of the Denver public schools, is a DFER favorite. So are two current candidates for governor, Jared Polis (who is so rich he doesn’t need DFER money) and former TFA State Senator Michael Johnston, who drafted the state’s harsh and ineffective teacher evaluation law.

“Vanessa Quintana, a political activist who was the formal sponsor of the minority report, was a student at Denver’s Manual High School when it was closed in 2006, a decision that Democratic U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet, then Denver’s superintendent, defended at an education panel Friday.

“She said that before she finally graduated from high school, she had been through two school closures and a major school restructuring and dropped out of school twice. Three of her siblings never graduated, and she blames the instability of repeated school changes.

“When DFER claims they empower and uplift the voices of communities, DFER really means they silence the voices of displaced students like myself by uprooting community through school closure,” she told the delegates. “When Manual shut down my freshman year, it told me education reformers didn’t find me worthy of a school.”

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Closing schools, Colorado, Democrats, Denver, DFER, Education Reform, Privatization

Will DeBlasio Close Another School for At-Risk Students?

By dianeravitch
April 9, 2018 //
19

Normally I wouldn’t write about the fate of a single school. But this is a special case.

I recall that when Bill DeBlasio ran for Mayor in 2013, he said emphatically that he would not follow the Bloomberg script of closing schools. I moderated a debate back in that first election where he pledged to take a different path. He has recently hinted that he has national ambitions, so his reversion to the previous Mayor’s plan of closing schools as a matter of course, over the protests of the school community, is very disturbing.

Here is a statement by the PTA president of a school that is slated for closure. It is a “transfer school,” that is, a high school for kids who have persistently struggled and are trying to earn a diploma. In other words, it is a “last chance” school for kids who have not been able to make it in the general education program.

Read this and see what you think. Should this school die?

“For Immediate Release

Contact: Shaunte Williams, PTA President
(718)-877-3821

“Crotona Academy, a transfer high school in the South Bronx, is actively rallying its community of students, alumni, parents, and staff to challenge a New York City Department of Education proposal to lock its doors to more than 150 at-risk students.

“Superintendent Paul Rotondo informed the school’s community in early February that the DOE had put the alternative high school on a fast track toward closure by August 2018. “This proposal threatens a major disruption in the education of teenagers who are at Crotona precisely because they have already suffered a disruption in their education,” said Shaunte Williams, president of Crotona Academy’s parents association and the parent of a current student at Crotona Academy.

“Unlike other identified NYCDOE schools proposed for closure, the decision to close the transfer high school Crotona Academy was left totally at the discretion of the Superintendent of transfer schools, Paul Rotondo. Superintendent Rotondo has been granted the authority to select which of his transfer high schools he elects to merge, co-locate, replace the school leader, or close completely. On February 9, 2018, Superintendent Paul Rotondo shocked the Crotona Academy community of students, parents and staff by stating that the school was proposed for closure effective September 2018.

“For thirteen years, Crotona Academy High School, the “Little Transfer School That Could” has dedicated itself to educating and supporting at risk, over aged, under credited students in their determination to earn a traditional high school diploma. Crotona Academy High School is a small transfer high school located in the poorest congressional district in America in the heart of the South Bronx. Since its inception, Crotona Academy High School has worked in conjunction with community-based organizations to offer in depth-individualized support, job readiness and career exploration to students who for a litany of reasons could not succeed in a general education high school. A large proportion of the Crotona students and their families are struggling with poverty-induced obstacles such as homelessness, unemployment, substance abuse, and mental health issues. Nearly half of Crotona Academy’s total enrollment compromised of special education and English language learners. In September 2016, the Crotona Academy school community was grateful to move into a new school building location after eleven years of being relegated to receiving instruction situated in series of TCU trailer units.

“Superintendent Rotondo’s decision to close Crotona Academy High School leaves many questions to bear in mind…

“Crotona Academy High has been identified by NYSED as a school “In Good Standing” for over five consecutive years. There are currently nine underperforming Transfer High Schools identified by the NYSED ESSA as “Focus” or “Priority” schools. Four of these underperforming Transfer High Schools identified by NYSED as Focus or Priority transfer high schools are located in the Bronx. Superintendent Rotondo however has elected to select only Crotona Academy High School, a school in GOOD STANDING for closure. Crotona Academy High School is actually the only transfer high school Superintendent Rotondo has selected for closure.

“Crotona Academy has made significant educational gains within the last three years in student attendance and has experienced a steady increase in student enrollment, graduation rates of English Language Learners and Special Education students and the inclusion of a variety of multi-cultural and college/career ready programs.

“Unfortunately, Superintendent Rotondo in the published Impact Statement has strategically concealed much of this data in order to support his rationale to close Crotona Academy High School.

“In spite of the educational gains Crotona Academy has made, the school’s five year identified status as a school “In Good Standing” by NYSED ESSA, and the fact that Crotona Academy students were just moved into their new school building less than two years ago, Superintendent Rotondo has still chosen Crotona Academy High School for closure. To add insult to injury, the proposed plan for the school building is to move the Crotona Academy students out and designate the school building to another school currently located in TCU trailer units.

“What message does this send to the Crotona Academy students? Those Crotona Academy students are less worthy than other students to be educated within a nice school building. That although NYSED has identified Crotona Academy as a school in good standing for the past five years, that this information is irrelevant, that the gains made at Crotona Academy in attendance, enrollment, graduation rates and post-secondary enrollment rates, is deemed by Paul Rotondo as inconsequential. What is the rational for Superintendent Rotondo to TARGET Crotona Academy High School for closure rather than those underperforming transfer schools identified by NYSED? What was the rationale for Superintendent Rotondo directing Crotona Academy High School to seize enrollment in August 2018 and preventing admissions although there was a demand from the community and no indication that the school was being proposed for closure that announcement was made later in February 2018.

“Clearly, many unanswered questions deserve to be answered before a decision is made to close Crotona Academy High School. It would be a travesty to punish at risk students by forcing them to relocate to other schools due to the questionable and possibly bias decision making practices of Superintendent Rotondo.

“A public hearing on the DOE proposal will be held on Thursday, April 12, 2018 at 5:00 P.M. at Crotona Academy High School located at 1211 Southern Boulevard, Bronx, NY, 10459. The panel for Educational Policy will vote on the proposal at a meeting on Wednesday, April 25, 2018 at 5 pm Murray Bergtraum High School, located at 411 Pearl Street, New York, NY, 10007. The Crotona Academy community encourages supporters to attend and voice their opposition to the proposal at both hearings.

“To voice your opposition to the closure ahead of the above-mentioned hearing dates, contact the DOE (anonymously) calling 212-374-5159 or email D12proposals@schools.nyc.gov”

Categories Bill de Blasio, Closing schools, Education Reform, New York City

Will Seattle Risk Another Broadie as Superintendent?

By dianeravitch
April 2, 2018 //
2

 

Dora Taylor, parent activist, wonders why the Seattle school board would consider another Broadie, in light of the city’s horrible experience with another Broadie.

“Many of us painfully recall our last Broad Superintendent, Dr. Goodloe-Johnson and the pain she brought with her through school closings, successful programs being decimated, an increase in bureaucracy, nonsensical rifing of teachers and a regime of fear.

“This kind of disruption has been felt by other districts who hired superintendents trained by the billionaire Eli Broad who thinks all schools should be privatized.”

Categories Broad Foundation, Charter Schools, Closing schools, Education Industry, Privatization, Seattle

The Failure of Mayoral Control in D.C. (and Everywhere Else)

By dianeravitch
April 2, 2018 //
14

 

Peter McPherson writes here about the failure of mayoral control in the District of Columbia. He recites the promises made by its proponents, and the turmoil and scandal and absence of accountability that has followed.

Reformers don’t like democratic control of public schools. They prefer top-down control, by a mayor or a governor or a commission beyond the reach of the voters. The mayor or governor listen to elites, not to those who are most engaged in the schools, especially parents and local communities.

But, writes McPherson, mayoral control does not improve schools. He agrees that the modernization of school buildings has been a success but it was not necessary to eliminate the elected school board to accomplish that goal.

In those 10 years, has a school system controlled by the mayor and administered by the executive’s chosen instrument, the chancellor, been transformed into a gleaming educational edifice of quality and broad academic achievement?

Not really.

The level of turnover and attrition among DCPS teachers has been far higherthan national norms. The same is true of DCPS administrators. DCPS has fewer students than it did 10 years ago. In school year 2006-07, DCPS had 52,645 students and DC charter schools 19,733, with DCPS having almost 73% of students. In the 2017-18 school year, despite growth in the school-age population of the city, DCPS has 47,982 students and DC charters schools 43,340. Alongside the decrease in absolute numbers of students, DCPS’s share of students has declined to a little over half citywide.

Such declines are not evidence of success.

Under mayoral control and like DC’s charter schools, DCPS has judged its progress using statistical measures of student test taking, such as the DC-CAS and PARCC. Sadly, all of DC’s publicly funded schools have shown only modest gains on these tests, while the achievement gap between white and African American students has widened–and while in the wake of a 2012 cheating scandal, it has become clear that many recent DCPS graduates were not, in fact, eligible to graduate.

(There is no independent analysis of what is occurring in DC charter schools regarding meeting standards for graduation.)

In the meantime, DCPS’s pedagogic innovations, like student performance-based teacher evaluations, have been clung to like life preservers in the freezing North Atlantic, with the belief that they alone would save the day..

This governance model allows those running DCPS to act both quickly and unilaterally. In the end, there could be little surprise that former Mayor Adrian Fenty chose Michelle Rhee as chancellor. He installed someone who was indifferent to what a large swath of stakeholders felt, operating like a zealot and atomizing the old order as she went. In her drive to close schools, Rhee was clearly indifferent to the input of affected communities and the negative effects of those closures, which continue to the present day.

Charter schools are booming, because those with money and power get what they want.

This is a governance system with no public oversight or accountability. It has failed.

The same could be said for mayoral control in Cleveland, New York City, and Chicago.

Mayors should have a role because they control the budget. But the people who enroll their children in the schools should have a large role also. The mayor is not uniquely qualified to run the schools or to choose the best person to run the schools.

Democracy may be inefficient, but it is far better as a governance system than one-man or one-woman rule.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Closing schools, Democracy, District of Columbia
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »