Archives for category: New York City

I am reposting this because the original omitted the link to the article. I went to the car repair shop and the computer repair shop today, and wrote this post while paising in a coffee shop between repairs. Carol Burris’s article links to the original study, which has the ironic title “In Pursuit of the Common Good: The Spillover Effects of Charter Schools on Public School Studenys of New York City.” Ironic, since charter schools have nothing to do with the common good.

Recently, a study was released that made the absurd claim that public schools make academic gains when a charter opens close to them or is co-located in their building. To those of us who have seen co-located charters take away rooms previously used for the arts, dance, science, or resource rooms for students with disabilities, the finding seemed bizarre, as did the contention that draining away the best students from neighborhood public schools was a good thing for the losing school.

The rightwing DeVos-funded media eagerly reported this “finding,” without digging deeper. Why should they? It propagated a myth they wanted to believe.

The author of this highly politicized study is Sarah Cordes of Temple University.

Carol Burris, executive director of the Network for Public Education and a former principal, is a highly skilled researcher. She reviewed Cordes’ findings and determined they were vastly overstated. Her review of Cordes’ study was peer-reviewed by some of the nation’s most distinguished researchers.

Burris writes:

“Cordes attempted to measure the effects of competition from a charter school on the achievement, attendance and grade retention of students in nearby New York City public schools. In addition, she sought to identify the cause of any effects she might find.”

She did not take into account the high levels of mobility among New York City public school students, especially the most disadvantaged.

But worse, her findings are statistically small as compared to other interventions:

“Upon completing her analysis, Cordes concludes that “the introduction of charter schools within one mile of a TPS increases the performance of TPS students on the order of 0.02 standard deviations (sds) in both math and English Language Arts (ELA).”

“To put that effect size in perspective, if you lower class size, you find the effect on achievement to be ten times greater (.20) than being enrolled in a school within one mile of charter school. Reading programs that focus on processing strategies have an effect size of nearly .60. And direct math instruction (effect size .61) with strong teacher feedback (effect size .75) has strong benefits for math achievement[2]. With a .02 effect size, the effect of being enrolled in a school located near a charter school is akin to increasing your height by standing on a few sheets of paper.”

Burris noted that what really mattered was money:

“Although it appears that Cordes found very small achievement gains in a public school if a charter is located within a half mile, that correlation does not tell us why those gains occurred. To answer that question, Cordes looked at an array of factors — demographics, school spending, and parent and teacher survey data about school culture and climate.

There was only ONE standout out factor that rose to the commonly accepted level of statistical significance — money.”

Burris concludes that journalists need to check other sources before believing “studies” and “reports” that make counter-intuitive claims:

“The bottom line is that Sarah Cordes found what every researcher before her found — “competition” from charters has little to no effect on student achievement in traditional public schools. It also found that when it comes to learning, money matters as evidenced by increased spending, especially in co-located schools.

“Most reporters generally lack advanced skills in research methods and statistics. They depend on abstracts and press releases, not having the expertise to look with a critical eye themselves. But it does not take a lot of expertise to see the problems with this particular study.”

Sarah Cordes’ “study” will serve the purposes of Trump and DeVos and others who are trying to destroy the common good. Surely, that was not her intention. Perhaps her dissertation advisors st New York University could have helped her develop a sounder statistical analysis. It seems obvious that the public schools that have been closed to make way for charters received no benefit at all–and they are not included in the study.

Ariela Rosen is a high school senior in a public school in New York City. She wrote a beautiful article that was published on the op-ed page of the New York Times.

It is the story of a man you have never heard of: Charles Stover. There is a bench in Central Park in New York City dedicated to him. But only a bench.

She writes:

“Under his name a simple inscription proclaims him “Founder of Outdoor Playgrounds.” When I read that for the first time, I laughed. How could one person be the founder of playgrounds? And shouldn’t he get more than a bench?

“Even more absurd was what I found when I looked him up. His Wikipedia page was barely two paragraphs long and made no mention of playgrounds at all. The article mainly concerned the day in 1913 that Stover, after three years as New York City’s parks commissioner, went out to lunch … and didn’t come back. For 39 days.

“Naturally, this made me more than a little curious about the man. I’ve been looking for him ever since.

“The first thing I discovered was that almost nobody — not my parents, not my high-school teachers — knew who Stover was. This seemed strange to me because he was an enormously important figure. In 1886 he was a co-founder of the University Settlement House — the first settlement house in the United States — from which he spearheaded the growing reform movement in New York City. Stover was also involved in efforts to preserve Central Park and develop more parks and playgrounds in poor neighborhoods. In 1898 he founded, together with Lillian Wald, the Outdoor Recreation League, which sponsored the construction of playgrounds as a substitute for unsupervised street play. As parks commissioner, Stover created the Bureau of Recreation, which built dozens of playgrounds in its first three years, including DeWitt Clinton Park, Seward Park and Jacob Riis Park….”

“When Stover died in 1929, he left only a few books and papers, but his legacy went far beyond his possessions. He spent his time and money providing playgrounds, gardens, housing and other services for poor immigrant children and their families, all the while battling his depression…

“Stover believed — and his life proves — that it is possible to make a difference in the world without yelling. It is easy to get caught up in the shouting of politicians, or to want simply to walk away from it all. That is why it is more important than ever to listen to the stories of those around us.

“I plan to go on looking for Stover, but his bench has already taught me an important lesson: Sometimes the most powerful words are the ones that are whispered.”

What a lovely essay.

Ariela Rosen roused my curiosity, so I checked Stover’s Wikipedia entry. It was five paragraphs long.

It reads:

“Stover was born in Riegelsville, Pennsylvania, on July 14, 1861. He attended Lafayette College and graduated in 1881. He studied to become a Presbyterian minister at the Union Theological Seminary and graduated in 1884. He also took classes at the University of Berlin, before moving to Manhattan’s Lower East Side.

“In 1886, Stover founded the Neighborhood Guild on Forsyth Street, the first settlement house in the United States. In 1898, he and Lillian Wald, director of the nearby Henry Street Settlement, founded the Outdoor Recreation League (ORL), whose mission was to provide play spaces and organize games for the children of the densely populated Lower East Side. The ORL opened nine privately sponsored playgrounds and advocated that the City itself build and operate playgrounds. In 1902 the City assumed the operation of the ORL playgrounds, and in 1903 opened what is presumed to be the first municipally built playground in the nation, Seward Park in Manhattan’s Lower East Side; the ORL had opened an outdoor gymnasium there in May 1899, on city-owned land.

“In January 1910, Stover was named parks commissioner for Manhattan by New York City’s newly-elected mayor, William Jay Gaynor. Stover’s tenure was controversial; in July 1911 The New York Times reported that he was being asked to hand in his resignation. He did not resign and was not fired; in August 1911 he announced major plans were underway for Central Park and Riverside Drive Park. In April 1913 Stover said “I do not believe in the policy that the parks are merely places people to walk through and look at the trees and gaze at the landscapef from a distance, nor do I believe that any one should be permitted to destroy anything, but I take the position that certain parks of the asphalt and the lawns should be open most liberally to the young people for amusement, proper athletics, and recreation, under proper circumstances.

“In October 1913, Stover told his staff and coworkers that he was going out for lunch then he disappeared. In mid-November he was erroneously thought to have died in Delaware when a body resembling him was found. A week later, he was seen in Washington, D.C., by a former city official. In late November, a nationwide search began, which included sending a short film clip to 10,000 moving-picture places across the United States. Shortly thereafter, Stover mailed his letter of resignation from Cincinnati, and Ardolph Loges Kline, the Mayor of New York City, replaced Stover with Louis F. La Roche, Stover’s deputy. On January 28, 1914, Stover returned to the University Settlement House.[10]

“Stover spent the rest of his life developing a summer camp at Beacon, New York, operated by the University Settlement House. He died at the University Settlement House on April 24, 1929, at the age of 67, leaving an estate valued at only $500.”

I recommend that Ariela continue her search by reading about Mayor Gaynor, who appointed Stover as Parks Commissioner. He was shot in the neck by a discharged city worker, but survived. Gaynor was put into office by the Tammany Hall machine, but to the surprise of all, turned out to be an honest and dedicated public servant. I have a published collection of letters that he wrote to constituents, and they are masterpieces of wit and irascibility.

Mercedes Schneider takes us on a tour of the latest claims, exaggerations, and braggadocio on the Teach for America website. She is bothered to the extreme by TFA who are assigned to special education classes, despite their poor preparation.

What bothers me most is this:

“Even with its fly-by-summer training and its turnstile, two-year recruit commitment, TFA unabashedly proclaims itself a provider of “world class education.”

TFA has been in business since 1989. That’s almost thirty years. It cannot name a single district where its young college graduates have provided a “world class education.” Kopp wrote in her last ghost-written book that New York City, D.C., and New Orleans were proof of TFA success. But where are the miracles in those three cities? D.C. still has the largest achievement gaps of any urban district in the nation, and it has been under TFA control (Rhee And Henderson) for a decade. No one calls either NYC. Or NOLA a miracle district except for PR flacks.

Lies really bother me. It shows character to hide ones TFA background. Or shame.

On Tuesday night, the New York City Board of Education (aka, the Panel on Education Policy) will vote on paying $699,000 for a program called Teach To One. It was developed by Joel Rose, a protege of Joel Klein when he was chancellor of the NYC public schools.

Gary Rubinstein saw this program in action and thought it was dreadful.

Teach To None

To check whether his judgment was right, he reviewed the scores of the schools using this math program. They were abysmal. In one of the schools, 0.0% of the students passed the state math test.

Why would the Department of Education propose to pour more money into this failing program?

By the way, look at the funders: the Gates Foundation, the Bezos Foundation, etc. guess it doesn’t take much other than who-you-know to get their money.

The leaders of KIPP are on their advisory board, but KIPP doesn’t use the program.

Arthur Goldstein gives a close reading of Eliza Shapiro’s article about “why New York City is no longer the national leader of reform” in education.

When he read it, he felt heartened by the thought that “reform” was on the ropes, withering on the vine, falling apart, use whatever metaphor you want. Going, going, gone.

And yet he knows how demoralized the teachers in his building are.

He shows the error of Shapiro’s framing of the teacher tenure issue. “Reform” apparently means the utter elimination of any job rights for teachers. “Reformers” want to be able to fire any teacher at any time, without cause, just because they want to. Reformers agree that teachers should have no rights at all, and they wonder why there is a growing teacher shortage.

He writes:

Reforminess is something Trump is strong on, because he doesn’t believe in protecting the rights of working people. With him, it’s all about profit, hence Betsy DeVos, who’s pretty much decimated public education in Michigan. They can wrap themselves in the flag all they want, and claim to care about the children. Those of us who wake up every morning to serve those children know better.

And then there is Andrew Cuomo, who first ran on a platform of going after unions, who appeared at Moskowitz rallies and frothed at the mouth over the possibility of firing as many teachers as possible. Cuomo could not possibly anticipate that parents would become informed and fight back against the nonsense that is Common Core. He could not anticipate that parents would boycott his tests in droves.

What reformies failed to count on was the opportunism of Andrew Cuomo. As a man with no moral center whatsoever, he is driven by rampant ambition. This year, he watched Donald Trump win the presidency against neoliberal Hillary Clinton. Cuomo decided to position himself as Bernie Sanders Lite and pushed a program to give free college tuition to New Yorkers (albeit with a whole lot of restrictions).

Cuomo is now best buds with UFT, judging from what I hear at Delegate Assemblies. While I don’t personally trust the man as far as I can throw him, I’m happy if that works to help working teachers and other working people. So what is education “reform,” exactly?

As far as I can tell, it’s piling on, How miserable can we make working teachers? How can we arbitrarily and capriciously fire them? How can we give them as few options as possible, and as little voice as possible?

It’s ironic. The MORE [MORE is a progressive caucus within the UFT] motto is, “Our teaching conditions are students’ learning conditions.” I agree with that. Take it a step further, and our teaching conditions are our students’ future working conditions. When we fight for improvement of our working conditions, we are fighting for the future of our students as well.

Two of my former students teach in my school. They are the first of their families to be college educated, and the first of their families to get middle class jobs. I will fight for them, and for my other students to have even more opportunity. Betsy DeVos and the reformies, on the other hand, can fight to maximize profits for fraudulent cyber-charter owners and all the other opportunist sleazebags they represent so well.

Eliza Shapiro writes about New York City for Politico.

She wrote a somewhat wistful article about why New York City was no longer “the nation’s education reform capital.”

For one brief shining moment, she suggests, New York City had the chance to expand its privately managed charter schools and to break the grip of the teachers’ union. It came “this close” to evaluating teachers by test scores. It was near to a point where it might have eliminated tenure and seniority.

All of this is supposedly reform?

Well, as she well knows, this is the agenda of hedge fund managers and others on Wall Street. This is the agenda of the billionaires who never set foot in a public school and whose children will never go to public school.

What stopped the headlong rush to crush public schools and teachers’ unions?

Parents. The New York State Allies for Public Education, a coalition of 50 parent and educator groups (not the union), that organized the mass opt outs from testing.

When twenty percent of the parents in the state with children in grades 3-8 refused to allow their children to take the tests, Governor Cuomo stopped in his tracks. He had been gung-ho to evaluate teachers by student test scores; he boldly claimed to be the state’s charter school champion (even though only 3% of the state’s children were enrolled in charter schools). But when the opt out started, he realized he had a political problem. He hired Jere Hochman, the thoughtful superintendent of the Bedford Central public schools, to advise him, and for the first time, he had an experienced educator calming his passions. He formed a commission and grew silent.

Sheri Lederman, a much-loved teacher in the Great Neck public schools, challenged her evaluation, and the judge agreed with her that it was arbitrary and capricious.

The American Statistical Association said that the test-based evaluations in which Cuomo put so much stock were inappropriate for evaluating individual teachers.

Shapiro seems unaware of most of these developments. Her framework is: charter supporters=good; unions=bad; firing teachers at will without cause=good; tenure=bad.

She insists on seeing the New York City story through the framework of “reformers vs. union.” It would have made more sense to look at the NYC story as “parents (in New York State, not New York City) vs. high-stakes testing. Research vs. Cuomo.

Now that the reform laurels are no longer in New York City, she suggests that readers look to Louisiana and D.C. instead, both of which are among the lowest performing jurisdictions in the nation.

I want to suggest to Eliza Shapiro that she read my last two books: The Death and Life of the Great American School System: How Testing and Choice Are Undermining Education (rev., 2016); and Reign of Error: The Hoax of the Privatization Movement and the Danger to America’s Public Schools. She should read Mercedes Schneider on John White in Louisiana and John Merrow on the subject of the D.C. “miracle” that wasn’t. (John Merrow and Mary Levy will have an article in the next issue of the Washington Monthly that takes apart the D.C. “miracle.” but in the meanwhile Shapiro can read this post that Merrow wrote: https://themerrowreport.com/2017/08/08/touching-the-elephant/comment-page-1/

If she contacts me, I will send her both books at my expense. If she reads them, she will be a better education writer. Certainly better informed.

Leonie Haimson writes here about the disastrous legacy that Joel Klein and Michael Bloomberg left to the New York City public schools.

https://nycpublicschoolparents.blogspot.com/2017/08/fair-student-funding-atr-system-two-bad.html?m=1

One is called the Absent Teacher Reserve, wa pool of teachers who had been left jobless because their school closed or they were awaiting disciplinary proceedings. Now hundreds of teachers are in the lowly ATR pool, where they are treated disdainfully regardless of the reason they are unassigned.

The other policy is Fair Student Funding, which Leonie explains in her post.

The ATR pool costs the city more than $150 million per year. The Department of Education says it will assign these teachers to schools even if the principal doesn’t want them (most are experienced and thus expensive).

Arthur Goldstein thrashes the website Chalkbeat for demonizing ATT teachers. Klein used to use the very existence of the ATR pool to denounce tenure, seniority, and the union.

http://nyceducator.com/2017/08/reformy-chalkbeat-deems-paying-teachers.html?m=1

He attributes Chalkbeat’s coverage of ATR’s to their funding by Walton and other anti-teacher foundations.

The New York Post reported that New York City’s Comptroller Scott Stringer conducted an audit of grants to the New York City Leadership Academy and found no evidence that the city was getting what it paid for.

The city Department of Education has awarded contracts worth up to $101 million to the NYC Leadership Academy — but didn’t keep track of where the money went, a bombshell audit by City Comptroller Scott Stringer charges.

The Long Island City-based non-profit has collected $45.6 million from the contracts to coach “aspiring principals” and teachers. But the DOE failed to produce records to prove the $183-an-hour coaches did what they were paid for….

The contracts also require progress reports and meetings to monitor the vendor’s performance, but the auditors found none — raising the specter of “waste, fraud and abuse,” the report says.

“These failings point to a broken procurement system that allows the DOE to spend freely, devoid of oversight,” Stringer concludes. “Our principals deserve better than this.”

The DOE entered into three contracts with the academy since 2008, the first two under then-Mayor Bloomberg. The third, for payments up to $45 million from July 2014 to June 2019, was inked under Mayor de Blasio by Chancellor Carmen Farina’s chief operating officer. About $34.8 million available remains unspent.

Last month, de Blasio declared a “NYC Leadership Academy Day,” and declared the outfit “an important partner” in running city schools. Fariña praised the academy “for its tremendous work to prepare and support great school leaders.”

But the academy, founded in 2003, has also become notorious for graduating inept — and sometimes corrupt — principals with little teaching experience. Its “leadership coaches,” mostly retired principals, have also been hired in the mayor’s three-year-old Renewal program for struggling schools, which has shown meager academic gains.

The comptroller’s auditors reviewed $559,667 in DOE payments to the academy, including $394,007 for “leadership coaching.”

“Disregarding the safeguards in its own contracts and procurement rules,” the comptroller said, the DOE spent $385,612, or 98 percent of the coaching payments, without the required documentation.

This report is an indictment of mayor control, spanning both Bloomberg and de Blasio’s oversight, as well as the New York City Leadership Academy. Bloomberg and Klein announced the Leadership Academy with great fanfare as a way to fast-track “leaders” with a year of training. The original plan was intended to hire and train leaders from industry and aspiring principals from outside New York City, who would come into the school system and act as disruptors with fresh ideas. Neither of those approaches worked. Then, it became a way to jump from the role of teacher to principal while skipping the five-to-seven year apprenticeship of being an assistant principal. For a time, it was the latest new thing, like Tennessee’s Achievement School District, which has failed. It would be difficult to determine any benefit from the $101 million (actually much more, since Bloomberg raised $75 million for the LA’s first three years of operation).

I received the following letter and agreed to post it.

My name is Matt Schuman, and the majority of my professional experience has consisted of teaching and giving back my own law school education knowledge within New York City schools. My most recent school, The Charter High School for Law and Social Justice (“CHSLSJ”), has been in the news for anti-union behavior. Specifically, the management of the school (via its principal and president of the board) terminated eleven of fifteen members covered by the collective bargaining unit. The only four members retained had no overt association with our union activities.

During CHSLSJ’s first year, my colleagues and I voted to unionize with the U.F.T., not only because we wanted protection, but because we genuinely believed a fair and efficient contract would help this new school build up its infrastructure in positive ways that would impact, both short and long-term, the inaugural classes of scholars and their family-members.

While in law school, I learned about the term, “unconscionable behavior”. I learned that such a level of behavior was a very high bar to reach. From a social justice perspective, lawyers and activists do not just throw around that term. By standard definition, the term “unconscionable” means “unreasonably excessive”. The legal definition means “shocking to the conscience and/or an action so harsh that courts would proscribe it.” New York City can be a tough, competitive place, where a survival of the fittest mentality sometimes reigns: eat or be eaten, play or be played. I could easily complain that I and my fellow colleagues were treated unfairly, but what’s more shocking and unconscionable is the effect(s) of these actions on the scholars and their family-members.

The U.F.T., via its president, Michael Mulgrew, has already cited the blatant “hypocrisy” of my school’s actions: a budding institution formed to help young children from the Bronx not only learn about social justice, but actually move along a better pipeline from high-school to law-school has sent the message that people who advocate for basics protections and their rights are not protected (Otis 18).

As a teacher, I’ve always valued working with the underdogs (people who are not given everything and who very often have to endure strenuous fights for what they want in life). That’s why I joined CHSLSJ as a founding team-member. I wanted to do social justice work, and I believed I could do it there!

Until the leadership regime changed during CHSLSJ’s second year, we all were doing such work. I felt honored and motivated to work with CHSLSJ’s founding principal and assistant principal, Ms. Samantha Pugh and Mr. Simon Obas, respectively. I looked at our Board President’s, Mr. Richard Marsico’s curriculum vitae, and saw that he had devoted his early post-Harvard Law School years to studying and stimulating economic empowerment in the Bronx.

Unfortunately, the charter school wave has generated ample political tension. Charter school C.E.O. figureheads and national networks have pushed results at the expense of human treatment. I never believed that our independent, social justice-oriented charter-school would fall victim to the same trends. I’m disappointed. I do not wish for my scholars to learn non-empathetic, guarded, and secretive behavior.

As a writing teacher, I’m aware of potential back-stories in any given situation: nepotism, social preference, fiscal mismanagement, and uncertain economics. Still, teachers, especially ones that open a school’s doors and promote a man’s mission (or brainchild), deserve to be protected, supported, and celebrated. Many of us went down to the principal, Mr. Sean-Thomas Harrell, and asked for communication towards the end of the year about our roles and status. We were met with vague, misleading, and self-serving responses.

On a larger-scale, I worry about the fate of American education both in technologically, disconnected times and during President Trump’s administration. I look at the recent actions of his son and can only compare them to the actions of the people that I’d hoped would be CHSLSJ’s leaders.

CHSLSJ’s unconscionable actions directly touch on the lives of the scholars and the education provided to them by their instructors. We don’t want to raise a generation of “leaders” who cut corners and think they can squeeze by or into positions with lies. We want people who stand on their own two feet. We don’t want people who fend off any criticism with more misleading information. We want people who will be held accountable, because they, themselves, have integrity.

I am sorry that my former scholars have to see their school’s name in print as a result of a legal case and controversy. Their names should be in print as a result of their achievements! In poignant fashion, the law and mock-trial team which I coached this year knocked off Columbia Grammar and Preparatory School where Donald Trump’s son attends. That achievement mattered, because the children of the Bronx saw firsthand that their own success was possible. We all believed that we could turnkey the skills we demonstrated in the courtroom back to the rest of the school, and in turn move in the horizon line for possibilities, and make what is usually a struggle much more obtainable.

What happened is not fair, but more importantly it is not efficient. My scholars and my colleagues who no longer work at CHSLSJ deserve to hear and see the right messages. The first year teacher among us needs to know he will receive support and be championed. The most struggling learner needs to see and know that the positive connections he built up with his/her teachers will not just be mysteriously washed away by someone with whom he does not have a relationship. Power does not bestow that type of privilege.

For these reasons, I do view CHSLSJ management’s behavior as unconscionable. I am shocked, but not disheartened that the emotions of the board’s most important constituents, the scholars, their families, and their teachers, were not even acknowledged once. The lesson learned for leaders in education is that the decisions they make often impact the faces whom they do not see. These same faces, however, have unbelievable potential to stay strong, keep hope, and become needed human leaders who act in the most conscionable of ways. Our schools, and perhaps our American times, primarily depend on this proposition.

Sincerely,

Matt Schuman

Lifelong Educator and Law Program Coach

Source: Otis, Ginger Adams. “Uncivil act to teachers”. NY Daily News. 2 July 2017. P. 18.

Watch this 2-minute clip, in which New York City parents and activists explain why class size in the public schools is far too large and how this hurts children and reduces educational opportunity.

After a legal challenge, a judge ten years ago ordered the city to submit a plan for smaller classes.

The city promised that by 2012, classes in kindergarten through third grade would be capped at 20 children. The limit was to be 23 students in middle school, and 25 in high school.

“Instead, class sizes have gone up substantially since then,” said Leonie Haimson of Class Size Matters.

For example, in 2007, one thousand kids in first through third grades were in classes of 30 students or more.

This past school year, more than 43,000 students in the early grades were in classes that large.