Archives for category: New York City

 

Peter McPherson, a former parent of students in the District of Columbia public schools, describes the failure of Mayor Bowser’s leadership of the city’s schools. He lists her many poor decisions, her authoritarian style, and her refusal to take responsibility for scandals on her watch. She seems determined to keep the Rhee agenda intact. About half the children are enrolled in charter schools, with more on the way. This is an admission of failure on the part of the mayor and her chancellor. For the record, D.C. has the largest achievement gaps of any urban district in the nation.

In Chicago, as he notes, the new mayor Lori Lightfoot, is committed to restoring a locally elected board. In New York City, Mayor Bill DeBlasio is determined to hold onto autocratic rule of the schools.

I was reminded as I read his article about having been invited to meet with the D.C. City Council education committee before it endorsed local control on 2007. I warned them not to do it and told them that the story about the “New York City Miracle” was fantasy. Obviously I was not persuasive.

I think the Mayor should appoint a significant number of board members but the board should choose the leader, not the Mayor.

There is no ideal way to govern schools but the worst way is to vest control solely in the hands of one person.

 

Jan Resseger does not title her post “The Futility of School Closings.” She calls it “Considering School Closures as Philadelphia’s Empty Germantown High School Faces Sheriff’s Sale.” I inserted “futility,” because that is what I see as I read the books and studies she cites.

I am persuaded by books like Eve Ewing’s Ghosts in the Schoolyard (Chicago) and by Shani Robinson’s None of the Above (Atlanta) that the primary purpose of school closings is to gentrify low-income neighborhoods, push out poor black people, and open charters to lure white middle-class families. Chicago lost 200,000 black people from 2000 to 2016. Coincidence?

Read Jan’s great post and see what you think.

Gary Rubinstein deals in this segment with two controversial sagas in the brief and tumultuous life of Eva Moskowitz’s Success Academy Charter Chain. 

The first came about because Mayor DeBlasio declared that he would rein in Eva Moskowitz when he was elected (under Bloomberg and Klein, she got whatever she wanted). Eva’s billionaire friends promptly put up a kitty of millions to run emotional television ads claiming that her students were about to be tossed out into the street, when the reality was that she was trying to claim extra space and push out children with serious handicaps. Her campaign was skillfully managed, and she ended up with legislation guaranteeing that the city would give her the space she wanted or pay her rent. Governor Cuomo embraced the charter cause,and the mayor suffered a defeat.

Then there was the infamous video, leaked to the New York Times, showing a teacher ripping up the paper of a first grader and sending her as punishment to a corner to calm down (although the teacher seemed to be more agitated than the child). Most people thought the teacher humiliated the child, but the practice seems to be commonplace at SA.

The next segment is the last.

 

Michael Mulgrew, president of the New York City United Federation of Teachers, urges the Legislature not to raise the cap on charters but to enact legislation to make charter schools transparent and accountable.

There is a national pushback against untrammeled growth of charters, and New York State is unlikely to give the charter industry carte blanche since Democrats won control of the State Senate last fall. Until now, the charters were protected by the Governor Cuomo, whose campaign was funded by charter-loving financiers, and by the Republican-controlled State Senate, which was happy to expand the number of charters but not in their own suburban districts.

Mulgrew points out that under existing law, charters have room to add as many as 50,000 students. One charter gives the operator the authority to expand to K-12, or three schools. The city currently has 235 charters, which are actually 377 schools, enrolling 123,000 students. These schools divert $2.1 billion from public schools, but do not accept a proportionate share of the neediest students. Success Academy alone has room to add another 10,000 students without lifting the cap.

He writes:

Charters should be forced to demonstrate that tax dollars are spent in the classroom rather than on inflated salaries of charter executives and overpriced services of charter management companies. The transparency legislation would make wealthy charters — those with $1 million or more in assets — ineligible to receive co-located space in public building, or to get a public rental subsidy for private classroom space. It would also cap compensation packages for the majority of charter executives at $199,000 a year.

“Real transparency would also reveal why charters had only 9% of the school population but 46% of the suspensions; 10% percent of the homeless students, less than the public school average of 15%; and only 7% of the English language learners population, less than half the public school average.”

 

He concludes:

It is time for state government to freeze their growth, and to put in place measures to ensure that charters take, keep and educate all kinds of students, while they open up their operations to real public scrutiny.

There are two bitter pills in Mulgrew’s proposal:

One is the cap on salaries, which would be anathema to charters, where teacher salaries are artificially low, due to hiring of young teachers and constant turnover as they burn out, and lavish executive compensation, which is sometimes far above that of the School Chancellor, who oversees 1.1 million students.

The other is the idea that rich charters should not get free public space. This will outage the charter industry but please the existing public schools that have been forced to give up computer rooms, resource rooms, rooms for the arts, and other spaces that are not considered classrooms.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Committees of the New York City Bar Association sent a statement to School Chancellor Richard Carranza opposing the use of competitive admissions to elementary and junior high schools.

They said:

  • Measures of young children’s ability and behavior through competitive admission screening and testing are unreliable and racially biased.
  • Competitive admissions for very young children are pedagogically unsound because research demonstrates that all children derive educational and social benefits from diverse classrooms with students of differing races, economic status, and learning ability.
  • The practice of excluding the majority of certain socioeconomic and racial groups of young children from a large percentage of public institutions is inequitable and conducive to racial hierarchy.

Such policies, they said, are incompatible with the goal of equal educational opportunity, because opportunities are denied based on flawed measures.

 

 

BASIS is a corporate charter chain with about 20 charters, mostly in Arizona. The chain is known for high test scores, high attrition, and high returns to its owners and operators, Michael and Olga Block. It also owns private schools, and these have run into problems.

BASIS has private schools in the US, Silicon Valley, NYC and Virginia, all of which are owned by the REIT, Entertainment Properties.  https://www.eprkc.com/portfolio/education/private-schools/property-list/
Its DC charter school was owned by Entertainment Properties, but BASIS ran into problems meeting the rent for the second year of operation as it had nearly doubled from the first year when it had been about $1 miilion.  In addition to an OCR complaint re special education, enrollment declined and the DC charter board refused to increase its enrollment cap, which the school said was necessary to meet their rent.  Apparently, the DC school was sold as it is no longer listed on Entertainment Properties portfolio of charter schools.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/parents-voice-concern-over-sale-of-basis-independent-schools-11556583203

Parents Voice Concern Over Sale of Basis Independent Schools

New York City families say they worry about possible curriculum, tuition changes following the purchase by a company backed by China-based investment firm

More than 190 New York City families at the private Basis Independent Schools sent a letter to its leaders Monday to express concerns about its recent purchase by a company backed by a China-based investment firm.

The letter from parents at the Brooklyn site of Basis questioned whether the sale might prompt the school in Red Hook to change curriculum, lose teachers, boost tuition, increase class size and lose its reputation among top college admissions offices.

Basis has five for-profit schools in the U.S., including sites in California and Virginia. It also has a charter arm run by a nonprofit, which wasn’t part of the purchase.

 

Betsy DeVos was honored by the rightwing Manhattan Institute. In her by now well-rehearsed speech, she ridiculed the idea of spending more money on public schools, and extolled school choice. She singled out Mayor deBlasio’s Renewal program for criticism.

Matt Barnum has a good summary in Chalkbeat of her boilerplate remarks and appropriately notes how she cherrypicked data and ignored recent studies about the poor results of vouchers, one of her favorite causes. He noted that the Manhattan Institute had praised the Mayor’s efforts.

The charter industry in New York City hopes to persuade the State Legislature to raise the charter cap in the city. The state has unused slots but the city does not. They claim there’s a wait list for their charters but at the same time they demand access to the names and addresses of public school students whom they bombard with recruitment letters. If they have a long wait list, why are they recruiting?

He wrote:

Other recent studies have shown that more money for schools benefits students in a number of ways. DeVos also did not mention research, including a recent study in Louisiana, showing that private school voucher programs hurt students’ math test scores.

But she was on firmer empirical ground criticizing de Blasio’s Renewal program and praising New York City’s charter schools, which tend to outperform district schools on state exams. A recent study found that the Renewal turnaround approach didn’t lead to clear improvements in test scores or high school graduation rates, but did seem to boost attendance.

Ironically, the Manhattan Institute analysis has offered the most optimistic view of the Renewal program. DeVos didn’t bring up this study.

Of course, New York City’s charters are free to push out the students they don’t want, which raises test scores.

Having DeVos as their ally won’t be helpful to their cause now that both Houses of the Legislature are controlled by Democrats.

This statement was released today by the Alliance for Quality Education in New York City.

 

Despite years of advocacy, court mandates and promises from politicians, the new NYS budget plan once again locks in educational inequality. And while politicians refuse to cough up $1.6 billion to begin fully funding our schools, the state spends over $1.5 billion a year on its high stakes standardized testing program.

For years, Albany has told parents that standardized tests will help close the “achievement gap” in our schools – but year after year of testing, while refusing to fully fund our schools, has not closed this gap, which is an “opportunity gap” and NOT an “achievement gap.”

The truth is, you won’t heal the inequities that plague our schools by administering something that is toxic, and these high stakes tests are toxic, for our kids, and for our schools. You want to close the gap? Start by funding our schools.

While Albany keeps expecting our schools to do more with less, while the tests lay the foundation for closing and privatizing more neighborhood public schools, we keep calling, writing, traveling to Albany, meeting with legislators, rallying and petitioning. We keep working within a system that won’t respond to our needs.

What do we do with a system that won’t respond?

We break it. Albany has ignored us for years. We succeed when we make ourselves impossible to ignore.  Enough is enough. We are joining the hundreds of thousands of parents and educators that have had deep concerns on the corrosive effects of these tests.

Math exams administration dates are May 1–2, with make-up exams on May 3, and May 6–8. You have a right to opt out with no consequence to your child. The right to refuse the state tests in encoded in ESSA, the federal law that governs education policy, which explicitly recognizes that right.

As we know from history, the power of a boycott is huge. If Albany won’t comply with a court ruling to fully fund our schools, why should we give Albany what they want? Join the hundreds of thousands of New York State families who making their voices heard in a most powerful way, and consider joining boycott the state tests this week. A sample opt out letter is here and questions can be sent to nycoptout@gmail.com.

 

Peter Greene found an insightful article at The 74 about the serial failures of the Democracy Prep Charter Chain.

Betsy DeVos gave the chain $21.8 million to expand but it is having trouble growing beyond its New York City home base.

It was invited to take over the massive disaster that was Andre Agassi’s charter school (which had principal churn, teacher churn, abysmal academics, etc.), and Democracy Prep is struggling to hold on to teachers and students. (Andre Agassi, of course, has abandoned the role of charter founder to become a builder of charter schools in partnership with a venture capitalist. More money, fewer headaches.)

Democracy Prep was asked to take over a failing charter in D.C., where it too failed.

Greene notes:

“The DC school was in trouble from the start. The Executive Director was Sean Reidy who graduated from Loyola with a BS in business administration, did two years with TFA, taught another two years at Harlem DP, went on to get his MBA from Georgetown, and then took over the DC school. (DP, like many charters, likes its TFA recruits, but Mahnken doesn’t really address that, though I’d argue that the culture of edu-amateurs is part of the root of DP’s problems.)”

Greene concludes:

Educational amateurism combined with Big Apple hubris leads to people who don’t think they have to learn anything about the culture where they want to set up shop. This is not unique to DP, or even charters, or even education– it’s just extra-ironic because DP is supposed to be all about being informed effective citizens. Of course, public schools that are owned and operated by the people in the community (and not run from an office thousands of miles away), aren’t so prone to this problem.

No excuses schools are a lousy idea. I know there are students here and there who thrive in them, but they’re still a lousy idea. No wealthy white parents would put their kids in a No Excuses school.

One size does not fit all. Charter folks insist that charters are the solution to OSFA [Editor’s Note: “One Size Fits All”], but their insistence on having everything under one roof be a tightly united philosophical whole has the opposite effect. Public schools have room for many cultures and many philosophies under one roof, which means that students can find a corner of the school that “fits” without having to start over at a whole new school. There’s no reason that charters can’t operate the same way.

Solve problems; don’t walk away from them. This article just gives a peek at the world where charter after charter after charter is taken over, turned around, handed off to some other business. DP moves in, tries their one thing, waits, makes some tiny tweaks, and if it fails, they walk away. Public schools may not always live up to the promise of their commitment, but they don’t just walk out the door saying, “Good luck, kid. Hope somebody happens by to help you out.”

Education concerns and business concerns don’t fit together. Again– business concerns are not evil or wrong, but they don’t match the considerations of education. Good business decisions are not good education decisions.

One of the selling points of charters has always been that they will figure out great new things that the rest of the education world can then pick up and run with. But most of what Democracy Prep needed to know they could have learned from a public school teacher.

 

 

 

As Leonie Haimson explains in this post, it has been a busy few weeks for Eva Moskowitz, founder and CEO of NYC’s controversial Success Academy charter chain.

Once again, her chain has been accused of violating the rights of students; Betsy DeVos awarded $9.8 million to her schools, added to the $43.4 million  Eva previously received from the federal Charter Schools Program; she will receive an honorary degree from Tufts University; and the President of Harvard University is giving the commencement speech to her graduating class.

How does it happen that the president of the nation’s most prestigious university is speaking to what may be a graduating class of a few dozen students at a charter school? .

“The former president of Tufts, Lawrence Bacow, who is the current president of Harvard is scheduled to speak at the Success high school’s graduation, which last year only graduated 16 out of the 73 students who entered the school in Kindergarten  or first grade.  No doubt both occurrences were influenced by the fact that the head of the Success board, hedge funder Steve Galbreath, is also on the Tufts board of trustees and heads its investment committee.”

Follow the money.

Don’t be surprised if next year Moskowitz land DeVos herself, America’s leading charter school champion.