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

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

Leonie Haimson: Why is the NYC Department of Education Closing a Successful School in Bed-Stuy?

By dianeravitch
March 27, 2018 //
39

I invited Leonie Haimson, executive director of ClassSizeMatters, to write about the unfortunate decision by the New York City Department of Education to close P.S. 25 in Bedford-Stuyvesant, Brooklyn. It is one of the most successful schools in the city. It is under enrolled, but the authorities could easily change that by advertising its success or placing additional programs in the building. If and when the school closes, the empty building would then be available for Eva Moskowitz’s charter chain, and the children in the area would no longer have a zoned public school. Did Mayor DeBlasio forget that he campaigned on the promise to support public schools against the voracious expansion of charter schools?

 

Leonie writes:

On Tuesday, a lawsuit was filed to block the closing of PS 25 Eubie Blake, a small school in the Bed Stuy section of Brooklyn, which by all accounts is a school that is excelling and exceeding expectations, especially given the high-needs students it serves.

Last month, the Panel for Educational Policy voted to approve the closure of ten city schools, most of them struggling schools on the Renewal list.  Lost in the media shuffle was the fact that one of these schools, PS 25, wasn’t a low-performing school; far from it.

According to the DOE’s School Performance Dashboard, (according to Chancellor Farina, the “the most advanced tool of its kind,” PS 25 has the fourth highest positive impact of any public elementary school in the city and the second best in the entire borough of Brooklyn, when the need level of its incoming students is taken into account.

Picture1

According to this metric, the positive impact of PS 25 also exceeds that of any charter school in the city, except for Success Academy Bronx 2, given the fact that most of its students are economically disadvantaged, have disabilities and/or are homeless.

The test scores from PS 25 on the state exams show a sharp upward trajectory, with its students now exceeding the city average in both ELA and math.

Picture2

In fact, controlling for background and need, the students at PS 25 now outperform similar students by 21 percentage points in both subjects.

Now for those who say test scores aren’t everything, the school also excels according to all other methods the DOE uses to evaluate schools.  It exceeds or meets standards in “Effective School Leadership”, “Trust”, “Collaborative Teachers”, “Rigorous Instruction”, “Strong Family-Community Ties” and “Supportive Environment,” according to the school’s Quality Review as well as parent and teacher surveys.

Picture3

The fact that the DOE is closing a school which is delivering such great results for its students should not have been ignored.

Also unreported by any media outlet were two other salient facts: if PS 25 is closed, the entire city-owned building will be left to a charter school – Success Academy Bed Stuy 3, the first time this has happened in NYC, to my knowledge.

Also ignored was that the Community Education Council District 16 never voted to close this zoned school. State law requires that before this can occur, the CEC must authorize this, as any changes in zoning lines can only happen with their approval. The is one of the main responsibilities of CECs and some would argue their sole veto power over the unilateral and often arbitrary decision-making of the Mayor and the Chancellor.

So why does the Chancellor say PS 25 should be closed?  Chancellor Farina argues that the school is under-enrolled.  Yet at least five other schools have smaller enrollments than PS 25 and are not being closed.  Moreover, DOE has never publicized the fact that this school outperforms nearly every other school in the city.  If they had celebrated this school’s accomplishments, surely more parents would apply.  The sad reality is that many public schools in D16 have lost enrollment because of the supersaturation of charter schools in the district –  a drain on space, funding and resources which will only worsen if this school is closed.

According to the DOE’s controversial school capacity formula, PS 25’s “underenrollment” also means there is sufficient space in the building for its small class sizes of 10 to 18 – which provide ideal learning environments and are likely a major reason for its students’ success.  The DOE could also place another preK or a 3K class in the building if they wanted its enrollment to grow.

Currently, PS 25 parents are being shown a list of other schools to apply to, most outside the district and a few schools within — but none will have the same small classes and positive impact on learning, and none of them will their children have the right to attend.

Given how difficult many of these families’ lives are already, with nearly one quarter of the students homeless, this will be yet another terrible disruption, though in this case, wholly preventable. One can only hope the DOE changes course and withdraws the proposal to close PS 25 immediately.

Below is the press release about the lawsuit, which describes a 2009 legal precedent when then-Chancellor Joel Klein withdrew a proposal to close three zoned schools in Harlem and Brooklyn after being sued.  He then signed an agreement that the DOE would never do this again without a vote of the CECs.  The legal complaint to block PS 25’s closure with more data about the school and facts about the law is posted here.

 

For Immediate Release: Tuesday, March 27, 2018

Contact: Leonie Haimson, 917-435-9329; leoniehaimson@gmail.com

 

 

Lawsuit filed to stop the closure of PS 25, the 4th best public elementary school in NYC according to the DOE

 

Today a lawsuit was filed in the Brooklyn State Supreme Court against the proposed closure of P.S. 25 Eubie Blake in District 16, Brooklyn, a zoned neighborhood school, which Chancellor Carmen Farina and the Board of Education are attempting to close without the prior approval of the Community Education Council.

Last month, on February 28, the Panel on Educational Policy voted to close the school which will require students to seek enrollment in other schools, with no assurance of admission.  Not only is it a violation of NY State Education law 2590-e to close the only zoned school in the neighborhood without the district CEC’s prior approval, but P.S. 25 is also the fourth best public elementary school in NYC in the estimation of the Department of Education, and the second best in the borough of Brooklyn, when the need level of its students is taken into account.

According to the DOE’s School Performance Dashboard, which according to Chancellor Fariña is ““the most advanced tool of its kind,” the positive impact of P.S. 25 is greater than all but three of the city’s 661 public elementary schools, and its closure would leave the entire city-owned building to Success Academy Bed Stuy 3, a charter school. [1]

Achievement levels of P.S. 25 students have steadily climbed over the last three years, and the school now exceeds the city average in state test scores, despite the fact that a large percentage of students are homeless, economically disadvantaged, and/or have disabilities. According to DOE’s figures, the school’s students outperform similar students by 21 percentage points in ELA and math.  The achievement of the more than thirty percent of students with disabilities is also exceptionally high.

The school also meets or exceeds standards in all the following areas:  Effective School Leadership, Trust, Collaborative Teachers, Rigorous Instruction, Strong Family-Community Ties, and Supportive Environment.

Plaintiff Crystal Williams, a parent of two children at P.S. 25, said: “The school has seen a big improvement in recent years.  The teachers are excellent.  They give students close support, and my kids are learning.  The teachers take their time in part because they have small classes, and I don’t believe my children would be provided with the same quality of education at whatever other schools they are forced to attend.”

“PS 25 should be honored and replicated, not closed,” said Mark Cannizzaro, President of the Council for School Supervisors and Administrators, the principals’ union. “The school has been on a clear, upward trajectory: Dedicated school leaders and teachers have helped boost English and math test scores ever higher compared to the district and the city as a whole. All the while, PS 25 has made great strides in addressing students’ social and emotional needs, and has offered them a vibrant curriculum with art, music, library skills, coding and STEM classes. We continue to oppose this decision. The students, families and educators of PS 25 deserve better.”

Said Shakema Armstead, a plaintiff who has a third grader at PS 25, “My son, who has an I.E.P, loves the school.  It gives him and other students with a sense of community and stability that allow them to thrive.  There is no reason for them to be thrown into another school where they would have to re-adjust to an entirely new environment, especially as P.S. 25 is doing so well.”

There is a precedent for this lawsuit. In 2009, a lawsuit was filed against Chancellor Joel Klein on behalf of parents at three neighborhood zoned schools, in Harlem and Ocean Hill-Brownsville area, to prevent the closure of these schools without a vote of the relevant CECs.  The lawsuit was joined by Randi Weingarten, then President of the UFT, and NYC Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum. Within weeks, Chancellor Klein withdrew the closure proposals.[2]  He subsequently signed the following settlement agreement:

The [plaintiffs and the DOE] agree with regard to the three schools identified in the Complaint and any other traditional public school that, for those grades that are within the province of school attendance zones, [the DOE] will not close, phase-out, remove, alter or engage in conduct designed to effect the closure of any such school in a way that deprives residents of the right to send a qualifying child to his or her zoned traditional school, without either (1) obtaining, pursuant to 2590-e(11) of the Education Law, the approval of the relevant Community Education Council as to such change or (2) timely replacing such school with another zoned school within the same attendance zone.

In this case, DOE has no plans to create another zoned school for these children, and yet no vote of Community Education Council 16 has occurred.  The DOE claims that the school is being closed because it is under-enrolled, but this ignores several important factors:  Parents have not been told of the exceedingly high quality of the school according to the DOE’s own metrics, and if they had been informed of this, more of them would likely enroll their children in the school.  The DOE could also install another preK or a 3K program in the school.   The availability of space has also allowed for very small classes, which in turn have provided PS 25 students with an exceptional opportunity to learn.

Said Leonie Haimson, Executive Director of Class Size Matters, “It would be tragic if the second best elementary school in Brooklyn were closed.  PS 25 has very small classes of 10 to 18 students, which are ideal for such high-poverty students.  Given how the DOE refuses to align the school capacity formula with smaller classes, that alone makes the school appear underutilized.  It would be extremely disruptive if this closure occurs, especially for the large number of homeless children at PS 25, because the school is a sanctuary of stability in their lives. Instead of closing PS 25, the DOE should celebrate, emulate and expand it—and give more NYC children the same chance to succeed.”

A copy of the lawsuit is posted here: https://tinyurl.com/y6wjocsu

###

[1] https://tools.nycenet.edu/dashboard/#dbn=16K025&report_type=EMS&view=City

[2] https://www.nyclu.org/en/press-releases/response-nycluuft-lawsuit-doe-announces-it-will-keep-schools-open

Categories Bill de Blasio, Closing schools, Farina, Carmen, New York City

George Miller, Fake Liberal, DFER Favorite

By dianeravitch
March 25, 2018 //
25

 

I posted the 2012 Democrats for Education Reform list of electoral favorites, which included Cong. George Miller of California, then chair of the House Education Committee and an architect of NCLB; Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut, who fought to keep high-stakes testing and NCLB punishments in the new ESSA and is now a possible candidate for president in 2020. A few years ago, the California Democratic Party passed a resolution denouncing DFER for advancing corporate policies and urged them to drop the D from their name.

Miller was the most powerful Congressional Democrat on education issues, and Nancy Pelosi follliwed his lead. Virginia Congressman Bobby Scott is now chair of the committee, and he too was on the DFER LIST.

A reader who lives in Miller’s district describes what happened:

“Miller was my Congressman. I too had an unpleasant encounter with him at a local hearing where he showed up to personally push to convert one of the high schools in my district to charter. Since then that high school has among other things, experienced huge teacher turnover. Key senior classes have had multiple substitutes with “emergency crediamtials.” They hired an “executive director” whom they pay a quarter million dollars a year,! whose primary job seems to be opening more charters in our county who will hire him as a “consultant” and who hired his wife as an administrator for a salary of $170,000 per year. He also recently put one of the Candidates for Superintendent if the County Office of Education on his payroll as an “Assistant Prinicipal”. The County Office approves charters if they are turned down at the District level.”

Categories Accountability, California, Charter Schools, Closing schools, DFER

Is Mayor Bill de Blasio Turning into Mayor Bloomberg?

By dianeravitch
March 11, 2018 //
47

 

When Bill de Blasio ran for Mayor the first time, he sought my help. We met and spoke candidly. He told me he would strongly support traditional public schools. He said he would oppose the expansion of private charters into public school space. He promised to stop closing schools because of their test scores. His own children went to public schools. He would protect them and end the destructive tactics of Joel Klein, who coldly and cruelly closed schools over the tearful objections of students, parents, and teachers.

I enthusuastically endorsed him. The campaign issued a press release. De Blasio was elected in 2013, and re-elected in 2017. I wanted him to succeed and to support public schools against the privatizers.

He tried to stand up to the charters, but Eva’s billionaire backers rolled out a multi-million dollar TV campaign and donated huge sums to Governor Cuomo and key legislators. That ended de Blasio’s effort to block charter expansion. The legislature gave them a blank check in New York City, allowed them to expand at will, and even required the city to pay their rent in private facilities if it couldn’t provide suitable public space. Now his majority appointees to the city board rubber stamp charter co-locations and expansions.

Although the Mayor and Chancellor Farina have tried to support struggling schools, they have not hesitated to close them when they don’t show test score gains.

At the last meeting of the city’s Board of Education (which Mayor Bloomberg capriciously named the Panel on Education Policy to indicate its insignificance in the new era of mayoral control but which is still called the Board of Education in statute), the Mayor submitted a list of schools to close. Sadly, like Bloomberg, he has closed many schools. Unlike Bloomberg, he does not boast about it. There’s that.

At the last meeting of the Board, onee of the Mayor’s appointees, T. Elzora Cleveland, dissented and another abstained, denying the majority needed to close two of the schools on the Mayor’s list. Cleveland has resigned, and education activists assume she was forced out to make way for a more pliable board member. 

How is this different from Mayor Bloomberg’s tactics?

During the Bloomberg regime, the Mayor ousted three appointees who objected to his wish to end social promotion. The three members worried that no one had devised a plan to help the kids held back. Bloomberg fired them on the spot, and said, in effect, mayoral control means I am in charge and my appointees do as I wish. At the time, the firings were called “the Monday night massacre.”

I strongly oppose closing public schools, especially those that are historic anchors of their community. Several years back, I was on a panel with John Jackson, president of the Schott Foundation for Public Education. He said he had traveled to many countries to learn how they dealt with struggling schools. In every country, the Minister of Education said, “If a school is struggling, we send in support.” Dr. Jackson asked, “What do you do if you send support, and the school doesn’t improve?” In every case, the Minister said, “We send in more support.”

The bottom line is that accountability lies with the leadership. If a school is in trouble, it is up to the leadership to help, not punish. They control the resources. They decide whether the school will reduce class sizes and have the staff and programs it needs. Accountability begins at the top.

Categories Accountability, Bloomberg, Michael, Closing schools, Education Reform, Klein, Joel, New York City
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »