Archives for category: Farina, Carmen

Chancellor Carmen Farina has taken on a massive challenge by stepping into a central office shaped by people who were mostly non-educators, who had a faith-based reliance on test scores, and who believed that the way to “reform” schools was to close them. This strategy didn’t work, by any measure. By the end of Bloomberg’s term, the overwhelming majority of parents were opposed to his “reforms,” and wanted smaller classes and better education, not just more testing. I wrote this report with the research assistance of Avi Blaustein, an independent researcher.

Here are some ideas for Chancellor Farina.

Next Steps in Reforming the New York City Public Schools

The media, politicians, and corporate sponsored think tanks will go on a no-holds-barred offensive against anyone who dares to challenge the sacred-cows of corporate education reform. We saw this response when Mayor de Blasio decided to preventing a charter school chain from evicting students with special needs from their public school. Evidence is irrelevant when special interests are at stake. It therefore behooves us to pre-emptively get the true numbers and accurate facts out there along with some ideas for fixing the damage done over the past dozen years in New York City.

Reform the district governance structures with an eye to creating community ownership. It is time to restore community school districts. These districts were dis-empowered and replaced by non-geographic networks as the organizing framework for management of schools. Although this was portrayed as an attempt to support schools, it actually centralized power at Tweed (the New York City Department of Education’s headquarters building) and silenced community voice. It has also proved to be an ineffectual way to support schools. 33% of the 55 Networks received ineffective or developing quality ratings. An audit by the NYC Comptroller’s Office found that “it is difficult to determine whether or not that support increased the efficiency of the school’s day-to-day operations.”

Disband the Networks and empower local instructional superintendents to oversee and support a group of 15 schools in the same neighborhood. This will re-build relationships and trust with the community, allow the development of deep school/community organization partnerships, and spread best practices throughout the schools serving the community. Back office functions should be run out of borough-based offices.

Reform and downsize the bloated central bureaucracy at Tweed. Over the past years central office headcount increased by 70% and the salaries by 79%. The number of non-pedagogues employed by the DOE increased to the highest levels since 1980. According to the Independent Budget Office, an ever increasing share of money budgeted to “total classroom instruction” actually went to central offices. In 2007 about $550,000,000 went to central offices and in 2012 about $793,000,000 went to central offices, approximately a 45% increase in total classroom instruction dollars going to central offices. This is an outrage, and it should end.

Cut the size of the staff at Tweed and return those funds to schools to reduce class sizes. Bring in pedagogical experts who can design and implement progressive education policy, which the current large crop of executive directors, CEOs, COOs, deputy executive directors, deputy CEOs, deputy COOs populating the cubicles at Tweed are both unable and unwilling to do.

 

Revise the “Blue Book” that determines how much space is every school so that every school has enough classrooms for its students’ needs. Once the Blue Book is revised, there will be fewer co-locations, and schools would have art rooms, dance rooms, rooms for special education classes, and other programs.

 

Prioritize class size reduction. New York City’s class sizes are at their highest point in at least a dozen years. Just as the research on preschool education is strong, so is the research on class size reduction, especially in schools that serve the poorest and neediest students.

 

Hold community hearings and listen to parents and the local community before agreeing to any future co-locations. This was a campaign promise that the Mayor made, yet he recently approved 36 new requests for co-location without any community. participation.

Reform the accountability process to create valid and reliable mechanisms for providing parents with information and providing schools with feedback. The Progress Reports that schools have been subject to over the past years give lower grades to schools serving higher proportions of Black and Latino students, English Language Learners, and students with disabilities. Progress Report scores remain correlated with many pre-existing risk factors, including poverty, 8th grade achievement, the percent of students who are ELLs, and the school’s admissions method.

Stop penalizing schools that educate the neediest students. Stop rewarding schools that get rid of challenging students. Develop clear, succinct, and accurate reports of each school’s program describing the academics, the extracurriculars, and the culture at each school.

Reform how students are matched to schools to increase equity. The data on all schools closed since 2003 shows that they had more special education students, more English Language Learners, a higher poverty rate, and 4x more students entering overage than the citywide average. Another report found that new schools accepted 9-10% more students proficient in reading and math, with 4% average higher prior attendance who were 15% less likely to enter overage, 6% less likely to be ELLS, 5% less likely to be students with disabilities, and 7% fewer males. The closing and opening of schools has done nothing to reduce the segregation of students by academic need. The DOE has deliberately sent the highest-need, “over the counter” students to a specific group of schools that then struggled and failed. Most small schools were not sent such students. De facto education redlining continues to exist in NYC with extreme inequities in educational opportunity across districts.

Establish a school matching process that ensures diversity and equity within and between every school.

Reform school funding to increase fairness in the distribution of resources. Although it is claimed that schools are funded based on student need, the dollars say otherwise. Schools are actually provided with different proportions of the funds they are entitled to by the funding formula. This results in schools in the same building being funded at rates that diverge by over 20%.

Give every single school the funds to which they are entitled by the funding formula so that they can educate their students.

Reform how principals are trained with an eye to improving the quality of leadership. Bloomberg’s Leadership Academy was a failure. It was created at great expense ($10 million per year) to fast-track people, often with limited teaching experience, into principal positions. According to the latest data, 32% of the 2011-12 cohort of Leadership Academy graduates did not find principal positions. Over 40% of Leadership Academy graduates from earlier cohorts are no longer principals in their original school after a mere 4 years. The market has spoken and these principals are not wanted, even with the pressure exerted to encourage their hiring.

The Leadership Academy should be closed and replaced by a career ladder of teacher leader to assistant principal to principal with on-the-job mentoring and training. Only the most successful educators at each level should have the privilege of leadership.

It is time for New York City to join districts such as Union City and San Diego, in implementing true education reform, built on the principles of professionalism and genuine community engagement. The evidence shows that this requires a coherent, cohesive strategy that involves collaboration, a focus on teaching and learning, development of engaging curriculum, and a quality pre-K program.

As reported earlier, Rupert Murdoch is pulling out all the stops to tear down New York City’s new Mayor Bill de Blasio.

De Blasio okayed 36 of the 45 co-locations he inherited from Bloomberg; he approved 14 of the 17 charter proposals. But Murdoch insists de Blasio is closing charters and throwing minority kids out on the street. In fact, Murdoch’s favorite charter operator Eva Moskowitz won five new charters, not the eight she wanted. But you would never know that by reading the editorial rant in the Wall Street Journal. The writer really, really despises de Blasio, even throwing in an irrelevant reference to Zimbabwe’s dictator Robert Mugabe. Which means? I don’t know.

The WSJ can barely contain its admiration for Governor Cuomo, who boldly stood up for the 3% of children in charter schools as he continues to disregard the basic needs of the 97% in the state’s public schools, whose education is crippled by the budget cuts caused by the governor’s 2% tax cap. Even as taxes are capped, the public schools are compelled to spend more money on Common Core and testing, which Cuomo supports. Cuomo never tires of bashing New York state’s public schools. He thinks they cost too much. Someone should tell him that Eva Moskowitz’s charters spend $2,000 per pupil more than neighborhood public schools.

This puffed-up controversy over Eva Moskowitz’s charters demonstrates the inherent divisiveness of charters. They are not public schools. As the charters say in every court proceeding, whether in federal or state courts, they are private corporations with a government contract. As they said to the NLRB, they are not public schools and not subject to NLRB regulations. As the California Charter School Association said in an amicus brief last fall, charter operators should not be convicted for misappropriating $200,000, because charter schools are not public schools and are not subject to the same laws as public schools.

So the billionaires have a chance to smear a popular new mayor, because he gave Eva Moskowitz only five charter schools instead of eight.

Murdoch is outraged that the mayor asked charter operators to pay rent. They can’t cry poverty. Eva Moskowitz is paid nearly half a million each year. She pays the powerful D.C. political lobbying firm Knickerbocker more than $500,000 each year to tend her chain’s image; it must have cost much more this year. In addition, Eva’s Success Academy spends hundreds of thousands each year on marketing to parents, to create demand. In the current battle with the mayor, someone came up with millions of dollars for television and full-page ads. Yet they claim they can’t pay the city for the space they take away from the other 94% of students in New York City. Don’t buy it.

New York City’s Chancellor Carmen Farina is step-by-step reassembling the essentials of a functional public school system after a dozen years of Mayor Bloomberg’s “creative disruption.” The Bloomberg regime quickly established its preference for inexperience over experience and its distaste for veteran educators. It created a “Leadership Academy” to turn teachers with one or two years of classroom experience into principals. The graduates of the Leadership Academy were held in low regard by the experienced teachers whom they commanded. Many got into major trouble. Yet the media loved to tell the stories of whiz kids who became principal at the age of 26 or 28, bypassing the time that others spent learning to teach, winning the respect of their colleagues, then learning the ropes as an assistant principal.

Now Chancellor Farina has issued new regulations: experience is a pre-condition for a school principal and assistant principal. What a novel idea! Another setback for corporate reform.

AMENDMENTS TO CHANCELLOR’S REGULATION C-30—REGULATION GOVERNING THE SELECTION, ASSIGNMENT AND APPOINTMENT OF PRINCIPALS AND ASSISTANT PRINCIPALS

I. Description of the subject and purpose of the proposed item under consideration.

Chancellor’s Regulation C-30 governs the selection, assignment and appointment of principals and assistant principals. The following amendments are proposed:

· Principals must have at least seven years of prior full-time pedagogic experience to be eligible for selection and appointment. Qualifying prior pedagogic positions for principals are: classroom teacher, dean, instructional coach, guidance counselor, school social worker, assistant principal, teacher assigned, education administrator, and all pedagogic supervisory titles contained in the collective bargaining agreement between the CSA and the DOE.
· Effective for the 2014-2015 school year, assistant principals must have at least five years of prior full-time pedagogic experience to be eligible for selection and appointment. Qualifying prior pedagogic positions for assistant principals are: classroom teacher, dean, instructional coach, guidance counselor, school social worker, teacher assigned, education administrator, and all pedagogic supervisory titles contained in the collective bargaining agreement between the CSA and the DOE.
· Applicants with fewer than seven years of prior pedagogic experience are eligible to be evaluated for admission to the Principal Candidate Pool, but are not eligible to apply for principal positions unless they have at least seven years of prior pedagogic experience.
· Interim acting principals must have at least seven years of prior full-time pedagogic experience to be eligible for assignment.
· Effective for the 2014-2015 school year, interim acting assistant principals must have at least five years of prior full-time pedagogic experience to be eligible for assignment.
· The Office of Leadership will promulgate guidance regarding the prior pedagogic experience requirements for principals and assistant principals.
· Assistant principal, principal and executive principal appointments in community school district schools are subject to rejection for cause by the Senior Deputy Chancellor or his/her designee on behalf of the Chancellor.
· Interim-acting principals must be in the Principal Candidate Pool, except in exigent circumstances, when the Senior Deputy Chancellor or his/her designee may authorize assignment of an interim-acting principal prior to completion of an evaluation for the Principal Candidate Pool.
· Requests for waivers from the Chancellor regarding the new pedagogic experience requirements shall be directed to the Senior Deputy Chancellor or his/her designee, 52 Chambers St., Room 320, New York, NY 10007.
· Attachment No. 1 (members of Level I Committee) has been revised for clarity.

II. Information regarding where the full text of the proposed item may be obtained.

The full text of the amendments to the regulation, and the regulation in its entirety, can be found on the main page of the website of the Panel for Educational Policy: http://schools.nyc.gov/AboutUs/leadership/PEP/publicnotice/2013-2014/April9PEPRegulations

III. Name, office, address, email and telephone number of the city district representative, knowledgeable about the item under consideration, from whom information may be obtained concerning the item.

Name: Marina Cofield
Office: Office of Leadership
Address: 52 Chambers Street, Room 315, New York, NY 10007
Email: RegulationC-30@schools.nyc.gov
Phone: 212-346-5211

IV. Date, time and place of the Panel for Educational Policy meeting at which the Panel will vote on the proposed item.

April 9, 2014 at 6:00 p.m.
Prospect Heights Campus
883 Classon Ave.
Brooklyn, NY 11225

In this post, Mark Naison explains why so many parents seek to place their children in charters in New York City. Fr 12 years, the Bloomberg administration showered preferential treatment on the charters and ignored the needs of the public schools tat enroll 94% of the city’s children.

He predicts that the policies of Mayor de Blasio and Chancellor Farina will reverse some or most of the damage done to public schools by the policies of the past dozen years:

He writes:

Charter School Growth, Bloomberg Style, Creates Dilemma for the de Blasio Administration- A Special Report to BK Nation
January 31, 2014

By Dr. Mark Naison

In today’s New York Post, an article appeared claiming that Charter School Applications in New York City were 56 percent ahead of what they were at this time last year, putting pressure on the de Blasio administration to re-evaluate its efforts to slow charter expansion.

Those numbers are REAL. They reflect the desperation of inner city and working class parents who hope to find high performing, safe schools for their children and see charters as the best hope for that.

However, they are making that judgment, based on what they observe in their own neighborhoods, not because of the inherent superiority of charter schools, but because the Bloomberg Administration rigged the game by giving huge preference to charter schools, both substantively and symbolically, and using charters not as a strategy to improve public education in the city, but as a wedge to privatize it and smash the influence of the city’s teachers union.

The challenge of the de Blasio administration is see what happens when the competition is even, and when public schools are given the resources, encouragement and support charters were given in the Bloomberg years. When and if that happens, the demand for charters is likely to decrease as parents see public schools in their neighborhood improve dramatically and innovative new public schools open in their neighborhoods.

Under the Bloomberg administration, aided and abetted by police systems of the U.S. and NY State Departments of Education, charter schools were consciously selected over public schools as the preferred alternative when low performing public schools were closed. This preference was manifested in several important ways:

• Charters were given facilities in public schools rent free.

• In schools where they were co-located with public schools, the charters were given preferential access to auditoriums, gymnasiums, laboratories, and often put in the most desirable locations in the buildings.

• Although charters selected their students by lottery, they were allowed to weed out students who had disciplinary problems, or who performed poorly on standardized tests. As a result, according to Ben Chapman of the Daily News, only 6 percent of charter students are ELL students and 9 percent special needs students, far lower than the city average for public schools.

• When you count space, charters received more city funding than public schools, and when you add to that private contributions that they solicited, charters spent significantly more per student than public schools.

• Community organizations and universities willing to start new schools were encouraged by the NYC Department of Education to start charter schools rather than public schools.

These preferences had an absolutely devastating effect on inner city public schools, which were in the same neighborhood as the charters. In the case of schools who had charter co-location, it led to humiliating exclusion from school facilities which they once had access to, leaving their students starved of essential resources. But in the case of all inner city public schools, it led to a drain of high performing students, whose parents put them in charters, and an influx of ELL students, special needs students and students pushed out of charters for disciplinary problems, taxing those schools resources and making it much more difficult for them to perform well on standardized tests. The school closing policies of the Bloomberg administration added to the stress on those already hard pressed schools, forcing their staffs to work under the threat of closure and exile to the infamous “rubber room” for teachers who were in excess when schools were closed.

What occurred was a “tale of two school systems” within inner city neighborhoods- one favored, given preferential access to scare resources, hailed as the “savior” of inner city youth; the others demonized, stigmatized, deprived of resources, threatened with closure and deluged with students charter schools did not want.

If you were a parent, which school would you want to send your child to?

But what happens when the game is no longer rigged? When charter schools have to pay rent? When they can’t push out ELL and Special needs students? When facilities in co-located schools are fairly distributed? When schools are no longer given letter grades and threatened with closing, but are given added resources when they serve students with greater needs? When universities and community organizations are encouraged to start innovative public schools, not just create charters?

If all those things happen, and I expect some of them will during the next few years of a de Blasio/Farina Department of Education, then public schools in the inner city will gradually improve, charters in those neighborhoods will become less selective, and students, on the whole, will have enhanced choice and opportunity because there will be more good schools in the city.

The current hunger to enroll students in charter schools is understandable, given the policies pursued by the Bloomberg Administration, but those policies, which undermined public education, did not enhance opportunity for all students, and pitted parent against parent and school against school in a competition for scarce resources.

The de Blasio policy of restoring public schools to public favor is a sound one, and should be pursued carefully, humanely, and with respect for the hunger of parents and students of New York City for good educational options

Mark D Naison
Professor of African American Studies and History
Fordham University
Co-Founder, Badass Teachers Association

During his campaign, Mayor Bill Di Blasio pledged to provide universal pre-kindergarten for all children whose families can’t afford it.

He said he would pay for UPK (universal pre-kindergarten) by imposing a modest tax increase on those with incomes over $500,000 a year. But he needs the support of Governor Cuomo and the State Legislature to raise taxes on the super-rich.

In the meanwhile, the Di Blasio administration has announced that it will redirect money from the city’s capital plan that was intended for charter schools to be used instead to begin UPK.

The Bloomberg administration made charters a high priority even though they enroll only 6% of the city’s children.

According to the report in the New York Times:

“The chancellor, Carmen Fariña, in describing the Education Department’s $12.8 billion capital plan, said she would seek to redirect $210 million that had been reserved for classroom space for charter schools and other nonprofit groups. The money, spread out over five years, would instead be used to create thousands of new prekindergarten seats, helping fulfill Mr. de Blasio’s signature campaign promise.

“The decision was an opening salvo in what many expect to be a long battle between the de Blasio administration and charter schools. The mayor is an unabashed critic of the schools, which are publicly financed but privately run. He has argued that the city should focus its resources on traditional public schools.”

The charter industry is outraged and is now angling to get permission to open pre-k programs.

Of course, if the charters maintain their typical practice of excluding children with disabilities and English learners, that would be disruptive for the UPK program.

The next contretemps between the Di Blasio administration and the charter industry will come when the administration reviews the decisions made in the waning days of the Bloomberg administration to open more charter schools in public school space. Chancellor Farina has said she will review each case on its merits, and Mayor Di Blasio has promised to listen to community sentiment.

This debate between Bruce Fuller of the University of California and me was just posted online by the New York Times.

Bruce takes the position that de Blasio and Farina should maintain some or many of the changes that Bloomberg made.

I argue that de Blasio has a mandate to stop closing schools, to get rid of the A-F grading system, to drop the failed Leadership Academy, and to drop the former administration’s attitude of hostility towards parents and educators. I also call for a revival of what was once a highly reputable research department, to take the place of the PR machine.

Feel free to make your comment on the NY Times website.

Marc Epstein, a teacher for many years at Jamaica High School (targeted for closure) here describes the Bloomberg years in New York City public schools and how difficult it will be to unravel the changes he imposed:

Bloomberg’s School Disaster

When Mayor-elect de Blasio announced Carmen Farina as his choice for schools chancellor and pointedly added that she was an educator, a metaphorical puff of white smoke appeared on the horizon for most of the city’s 75,000 schoolteachers.

That’s because after a succession of four chancellors over the past 13 years who had no professional education experience, it was if the Babylonian Captivity of the papacy had finally come to an end with Farina’s succession.

The hope is that Farina, with 40 years of experience that includes two decades in the classroom and another two decades holding administrative positions as principal, district superintendent, and deputy chancellor, has a fair idea of what has gone on in the school system over the past 12 years of mayoral control.

But there is also a fair amount of anxiety. The fear is that political forces outside of the school system reaching as far as the White House have a vested interest in seeing to it that unraveling public education continues unabated.

There’s even word from Valerie Strauss at the Washington Post that Secretary of Education Arne Duncan helped put the kibosh on one of the candidates on de Blasio’s short list for chancellor.

Within hours of the Farina appointment the editorialists began espousing their anti anti-Bloomberg position. Anyone who might seek to undo Bloomberg’s accomplishments is a regressive Neanderthal according to the Wall Street Journal, Daily News, and New York Post.

Should Farina maintain the status quo, the fate of public education in New York City will be sealed. What’s more, she will enjoy the accolades of the media, a media that has become heavily invested, both figuratively and literally, in the narrative put forth by Michael Bloomberg about business solutions and data driven decision-making.

That’s because Bloomberg, with his vast wealth intact, despite having spent more than $600 million dollars on his mayoralty, will continue to shape the narrative with commissioned dynastic histories and the use of his own news empire.

In addition, Rupert Murdoch and his Newscorp, which includes the Wall Street Journal and New York Post, are heavily invested in the “education revolution.” Murdoch boasts former chancellor Joel Klein as his vice-president in charge of education operations too.

So if this to be the party line, and Mayor de Blasio and Chancellor Farina want to begin undoing the damage of the past 12 years, they would do well to expose the train wreck that has become the New York City school system under Michael Bloomberg sooner rather than later.

For the past 12 years New Yorkers have been treated to a steady drumbeat over the airwaves and in print that posits that Mike Bloomberg was able to housebreak an unresponsive, unmanageable, sclerotic public school system and head it in the right direction.

He accomplished this by taking on the teachers union, introducing business-tested management techniques, creating a new kind of school principal purposefully chosen with little classroom experience, but trained in these business techniques, reconfiguring the school districts, closing failed schools and creating hundreds of new schools that offer a wide variety of school choices to parents who could shop schools to their heart’s content.

The numbers would determine all decision-making on the macro and micro level, because numbers don’t lie. Principals were given control over their budgets so they could run a school unencumbered for the first time.

And, every editorial page, intellectual journal, and radio wordsmith, bought Bloomberg’s spiel hook, line, and sinker. They’ve bought it despite irrefutable reports of poor student test performance, record numbers of students entering college unprepared, and an on-time graduation rate of 3% at New York’s community colleges. What’s more, they celebrate a budgeting system that gives the principals an incentive to hire younger, cheaper, inexperienced teachers, over more senior teachers that Bloomberg wants pushed out of the system.

The simple truth of the matter is that all of Bloomberg’s claims are counterintuitive. Numbers were manipulated in the service of his prejudices and ideology. The multiple reconfigurations of the state’s largest department actually destroyed institutional memory, and hence accountability.

State education laws regarding services are flouted with impunity. English language learners and more advanced ESL students are denied mandated instruction. The “litigate and be damned” attitude has defined the operatives at the Tweed Courthouse.

The only ones held culpable in Bloomberg’s education universe were the average teachers, and that was good enough for the pundits and Wall Street. But culpability should never be confused with accountability!

A young schoolgirl drowns on an improperly chaperoned field trip and the assistant principal who was supposed to go on the trip is let off the hook because he was busy with the school budget. Oh, there were no parental consent slips either.

Before Bloomberg, heads would have rolled possibly as high up as the chancellor, but for Joel Klein it was just another day at the beach.

A student becomes ill but is left unattended because there is no nurse in the building and the Dean’s office was instructed not to call 911 for fear that an emergency call would damage the school’s safety record being monitored in the new data driven accountability system.

It turns out the student suffered a stroke and was left permanently impaired. Her name disappeared from the enrollment list, and it was only because a lawsuit was brought against the city, and the illegal memo was leaked to the Daily News by someone in the school that the story saw the light of day.

An investigation was conducted. The chancellor promised a full report. But in Bloomberg’s universe, time heals all wounds. Nobody was held to account or lost their job. No report assigning responsibility was issued, and the city quietly settled the lawsuit.

Two weeks ago science experiment went terribly awry. All the facts aren’t in, but it appears all sorts of safety regulations were ignored.

But that’s to be expected when you have supervisors who haven’t been seasoned by years of experience or are petrified by honest reporting because they fear that bad news could lead to the demise of their school.

This has become a school system that simply can’t handle the truth. I’ve been writing about the schools for a decade, and for the first time my name has been sent to a conflicts of interest board about the content of my writing.

It’s not because I’ve become rich doing it, mind you. It’s because a thuggish ethos has became part of the DNA of the New York City schools and you speak your mind at your peril. Learning, inquiry, and dissent are being systematically flensed from the classroom and the schoolhouse in much the same manner it was done in totalitarian societies.

The net result is that the school system that Mayor de Blasio inherited is not a “mixed bag” of good innovations and things that need tinkering with, but a $25 billion dollar a year city department that is in a death spiral.

Large bureaucracies fight their battles with the tools they are given. Time and again history demonstrates that a bureaucracy can be bent to the will of the political forces running them in ways that are inimical to its mission and its very existence.

During the Korean War it seems that the generals running the war had far less intelligence capabilities at their disposal than they had when they were fighting WW II.

So what did they do?

An expert in army intelligence during this period once told me, “they fought the war they had with the tools that they were given. That’s the nature of bureaucratic organizations.”

Which brings me back to the New York City school system. My belief is that the breakdown in accountability, the widespread dissemination of doctored statistics, and the predisposition to hold the classroom teacher responsible for everything that has gone wrong in the schools has deeply compromised institutional memory. And without institutional memory, a bureaucracy of this breadth is doomed.

As a consequence, nothing short of a South African post-apartheid style commission that examines the past decade of mayoral control will suffice.

This is imperative because a well-funded chorus of writers and journalists continue to churn out a hagiography of the Bloomberg era, and portray it as a Golden Age of public education when all the evidence indicates that there has been no progress at great expense to the children and taxpayers of New York.

It should be composed on one level of well known people whose impartiality is beyond reproach and include representatives of all segments of the teaching, clerical, and administrative pool.

If the past 12 years are simply papered over, and Bloomberg’s gutting of the school system is treated as a “work in progress” that wasn’t completed because three terms as mayor didn’t give him enough time, then Farina and de Blasio will ensure that a once great system now at its tipping point, plunges over the public policy cliff.

The Wall Street Journal responded to Mayor-Elect Bill de Blasio’s choice of Carmen Farina as chancellor with bitterness. The editorial calls her “a competent steward of the failing status quo.” How could they overlook the fact that Mayor Michael Bloomberg has been the status quo for twelve years? How could they neglect that federal education policy–George W. Bush’s No Child Left Behind and Barack Obama’s Race to the Top–is the status quo? They are right that the status quo is failing. But how can they imagine that a man who has not yet taken office, a man who comes to the mayoralty after 20 years of Guiliani and Bloomberg is the status quo? A rational thinker might conclude that de Blasio represents a serious challenge to the status quo, which is very upsetting to the Wall Street Journal, defender of the status quo.

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Review & Outlook

The Inequality Contradiction

Mayor de Blasio’s schools chief is a competent steward of the failing status quo.

Dec. 30, 2013 6:59 p.m. ET
The Bill de Blasio era begins in New York City on New Year’s Day, and the new mayor is saying his main preoccupation will be reducing inequality. No doubt he means it, but his appointment Monday of Carmen Fariña as schools chancellor won’t do much for that cause.

Ms. Fariña is by all accounts a competent steward of the education status quo. Known as a fine teacher herself, the 70-year-old served for a time as a deputy chancellor during the Bloomberg era but wasn’t a reform leader. Mr. de Blasio made a point in his Monday remarks announcing her selection that she had retired because she was unhappy with the direction of the Bloomberg reforms.

Those radical reform ideas included more competition (charter schools) and more accountability (measuring school and teacher performance in part by how well students do on tests). Ms. Fariña is said to favor collaboration, rather than competition, among schools. Collaboration is a nice word, but it will achieve nothing if all it means is accommodating the demands of unions for less school choice and less accountability while demanding more money.

The contradiction of the liberal inequality agenda is that it ignores the single biggest obstacle to upward economic mobility—the failure of inner-city public schools. Mr. de Blasio built his “tale of two cities” mayoral campaign, much as President Obama has built his economic agenda, around income redistribution. Raise taxes and spread the wealth.

But no amount of wealth shifting will raise the lifetime prospects of kids who can’t read or can only do 8th-grade math before they drop out of school. The education reform agenda is about reducing income inequality the old-fashioned American way—upward mobility and economic opportunity. By accommodating the education status quo, Mr. de Blasio will make the income gap even larger.