Archives for category: New York City

District 2 in New York City–one of the city’s highest scoring districts–plans protests this Friday against the poor quality of the ELA tests given last week. State officials tried to dismiss concerns from other districts, specifically from Liz Phillips, a respected Brooklyn principal who wrote a letter to all the parents in her school saying the tests were.”terrible.” More than 500 parents and teachers at her school joined to protest the ELA tests last Friday. The Néw York Times ignored Phillips’ informed judgment and accepted the assurances of state officials (and pupils–how large was their sample?) that the test was “easier” than last year.

District 2 principals agreed with Phillips.

Here is their statement:

Community Action:

Join Us in Speaking Out Regarding the NYS English Language Arts Exam

Friday, April 11th, at District 2 Schools

Dear District 2 Families,

Community School District 2 represents a richly diverse group of school communities and it is not often these days that we have an opportunity to join in a shared effort. Last week, and for several weeks prior, every one of our upper grade classrooms devoted hours of instructional time, vast human resources, and a tremendous amount of thoughtful effort to preparing students to do well on the NYS ELA exams and, ultimately, to administering them. Only a handful of District 2 families even considered opting out, and we are not advocating families do so, specifically because we believe our students are well prepared for the rigor and high expectations of the Common Core and our schools have worked hard for several years to adjust our curriculum and teaching to support students in meeting those expectations. We had high hopes for what this year’s tests would bring and assured families that they would reflect the feedback test makers and state officials had received from educators and families regarding the design of the test following last year’s administration. Our students worked extremely hard and did their very best. As school leaders, we supported teachers in ensuring that students and families kept the tests in perspective – they were important, but by no means the ultimate measure of who they are as readers, students, or human beings. We encouraged them to be optimistic, and did our best to do the same. Frankly, many of us were disappointed by the design and quality of the tests and stood by helplessly while kids struggled to determine best answers, distorting much of what we’d taught them about effective reading skills and strategies and forgoing deep comprehension for something quite different.

Last Friday morning, Liz Phillips, the principal of PS321 in Brooklyn, led her staff and her parent community in a demonstration objecting, not to testing or accountability or high expectations for kids, but to these tests in particular and, importantly, to their high stakes nature for teachers and students, and the policy of refusing to release other than a small percentage of the questions. 500 staff and parents participated.

By Friday evening some officials were dismissing the importance of their statement, claiming that Liz and her community represented only a tiny percentage of those affected, implying that the rest of us were satisfied. Given the terribly high stakes of these tests, for schools, for teachers and for kids, and the enormous amount of human, intellectual and financial resources that have been devoted to them, test makers should be prepared to stand by them and to allow them to undergo close scrutiny.

Many District 2 schools will be holding demonstrations this week, making sure our thoughts on this are loud and clear and making it more difficult to dismiss the efforts of one school. On Friday morning, April 11th, at 8:00am, we invite our families and staff to join District 2 schools in speaking out, expressing our deep dissatisfaction with the 2014 NYS English Language Arts LA exams and the lack of transparency surrounding them. Among the concerns shared by many schools are the following: The tests seem not to be particularly well-aligned with the Common Core Learning Standards; the questions are poorly constructed and often ambiguous; the tests themselves are embargoed and only a handful of select questions will be released next year; teachers are not permitted to use (or even discuss) the questions or the results to inform their teaching; students and families receive little or no specific feedback; this year, there were product placements (i.e., Nike, Barbie) woven through some exams. We are inviting you and your family to join together as a school community in this action, helping to ensure that officials are not left to wonder whether our silence implied approval.

Yours truly,

District 2 Principals

Adele Schroeter, PS59; Lisa Ripperger, PS234; Robert Bender, PS11; Tara Napoleoni, PS183; Jane Hsu, PS116; Sharon Hill, PS290; Amy Hom, PS1; Lauren Fontana, PS6; Jennifer Bonnet, PS150; Nicole Ziccardi Yerk, PS281; Susan Felder, PS40; Alice Hom, PS124; Nancy Harris, PS397; Kelly Shannon, PS41; Nancy Sing-Bok, PS51; Lisa Siegman, PS3; Irma Medina, PS111; Terry Ruyter, PS276; Medea McEvoy, PS267; Darryl Alhadeff, PS158; Samantha Kaplan, PS151; David Bowell, PS347; Lily Woo, PS130; Jacqui Getz, PS126; Kelly McGuire, Lower Manhattan Community MS

Andrea Gabor, the Michael Bloomberg Professor of Journalism at Baruch College of the City University of New York, has an opinion article in today’s New York Times, where she patiently explains that charter schools enroll a smaller proportion of students with disabilities, causing the neighborhood public schools to have a larger proportion of the students with the highest needs than the charter schools.

 

She writes:

 

In Harlem, there is a marked disparity between the special-needs populations in charter and traditional public schools, according to the city education department’s annual progress reports. In East Harlem, data for the 2012-13 school year shows that most of the public open-enrollment elementary and middle schools have double, and several have triple, the proportion of special-needs kids of nearby charter schools. At most of these public schools, at least a quarter of students have Individualized Education Programs, or I.E.P.s, which are required for children who receive special-education services.

 

Read that again slowly: the local public schools “have double, and several have triple, the proportion of special-needs kids of nearby charter schools.”

 

Noting that the latest legislative boon to favors allows them to expand at will inside public school buildings, pushing out the students who are there, Gabor asks the obvious question:

 

“Is there a point at which fostering charter schools undermines traditional public schools and the children they serve?”

 

Gabor makes a sensible recommendation:

 

If charter schools are allowed to push out existing public schools, they should, at the very least, be subject to the same accountability measures for enrollment, attrition and disciplinary procedures, to ensure that the neediest students are being treated fairly.

 

Gabor did not mention that charters do not accept the same proportion of English language learners, which causes the nearby public schools to have higher proportions of these students as well. One wonders why the reporters at the New York Times have not discovered these obvious disparities, which can easily be found in public records? Any school that manages to enroll fewer needy students and can push out those it doesn’t want will have higher scores than any school that must accept those that were unwanted by the first school. This is the charters’ secret sauce.

 

Gabor concludes, We should not allow policy makers to enshrine a two-tier system in which the neediest children are left behind. 

 

But with the latest favors to the billionaire-supported charter industry, that is exactly what New York legislators are doing. The legislature guaranteed that charters don’t have to pay rent, even though the latest legal ruling says that they are not “technically” units of the state and cannot be audited by the State Comptroller. The legislature guaranteed that if the charters rent private space, the New York City public schools must pay their rent. The legislature said that if they are already co-located in a public school building, they can expand at will and take public school space away from the children who are already enrolled there, who have far higher needs. The legislature also reversed Mayor de Blasio’s decision to deny approval to three charter proposals–all belonging to Eva Moskowitz’s Success Academy–because she wanted to place elementary schools in high school buildings and because she wanted to grow an elementary school into a middle school in a Harlem public school, which would require the relocation of students with severe disabilities.

 

The legislature accepted the charters’ claim that the needs of children with high test scores trump the needs of children with disabilities. They assume that those with high scores deserve the right to kick out those with disabilities. There is an ideology behind this but I forebear from naming it.

Jeff Nichols appeals to State Commissioner King and Chancellor Farina to call off the math tests.

He writes:

Dear Commissioner King and Chancellor Fariña,

Events are moving very fast. You are no doubt aware that today the principal, staff and parents of one of the most highly regarded schools In New York City, PS 321 in Brooklyn, will be holding a protest outside their schools to decry the abysmal quality of this year’s ELA tests. You have probably read the astonishing comments from teachers and principals that continue to pour into the the New York City Public School Parents blog and other sites (http://nycpublicschoolparents.blogspot.com/2014/04/liz-phillips-brooklyn-principal-i-have.html).

I have not yet heard your view of this situation, Chancellor Fariña. But as an opt out parent, I have to tell you frankly I was offended by your remarks earlier this week to the effect that while parents’ opinions should be respected, children should come to school prepared to meet challenges like the state tests.

Have you not realized that parents are protesting the tests precisely because we want our kids challenged deeply by real learning in our schools and these tests are obstructing that goal? Have you not realized that NYSED’s and Pearson’s claims that these tests represent new levels of “rigor” and “critical thinking” are demonstrably false?

There was no rigor applied to the development of these tests, nor does the practice of high-stakes testing in general stand up to critical analysis, so I fail to see how taking the state tests represents a worthwhile challenge for any child.

Moreover, Commissioner King, I cannot accept the state’s intention to keep the tests secret from parents. My wife and I are responsible for all aspects of our children’s upbringing. We would not permit a doctor to administer a vaccine to our children and forbid us from knowing what is in the shot. We will not let you subject our children to any exercise in school while forbidding us to know its contents, much less tests that are being used to determine their promotion and whether or not their teachers will be fired.

The forced, secret high-stakes testing of minor children is going to go the way of cane switches, dunce caps and forcing left-handed children to write with their right hands — practices that were once commonplace that we now regard as child abuse. It’s only a matter of time.

The question is, will our local and state education leaders join together and stop this travesty? Given the fact that the NYSED and the Pearson corporation have again utterly failed the test of earning parents’ and educators’ confidence in the quality of these exams, why should our schools proceed with administering the math tests later this month? Can you give me any reason other than obedience for obedience’s sake? All I hear from you, Commissioner King, is slogans about higher standards and career readiness. I have yet to witness direct engagement by you with the arguments made by the thousands of educators and parents in our state who are advocate abandoning high-stakes testing of young children once and for all.

I call on you, Commissioner King, to suspend the administration of this year’s state tests, and if you fail to do that (as I expect you will) I call on you, Chancellor Fariña to refuse to administer them.

We have lemon laws protecting consumers from egregiously faulty consumer products, but we no one is protecting our children from these worthless exams. Chancellor Fariña, they are state tests, so you can blame Commissioner King and the legislature for them, but you are ultimately responsible for our city’s schools. You must ensure that no one forces educational malpractice upon them. If NYSED continues to ignore the protests against the state tests that are exploding across the state, and you allow the math exams exams to go forward, the public will hold the DOE accountable as well as NYSED and the U.S. Department of Education.

We now have teachers in this city and beyond refusing to administer the state tests and parents refusing to allow their children to take them. Chancellor Fariña, will you stand with these disobedient citizens, or will you stand with Arne Duncan and John King and insist that the tests must go forward regardless of their quality, because an unjust law says they must?

I hope both of you will acknowledge that finally, enough is enough. Suspend the state tests and bring daylight onto the whole process that led to this debacle.

Sincerely,

Jeff Nichols


Jeff Nichols
Associate Professor
Queens College and The Graduate Center, CUNY

A parent in New York City explained her family decision to opt out of state testing.

“This morning, our fourth grader refused the standardized tests.

“After months of research, debate, personal grappling and weighty discussions with our 9-year old child, we have decided that for our family, this mindful act of civil disobedience is the right choice — right for our kid, right for our parental conscience, the right stand to take, the right message to send.

“We are deeply concerned about the direction of education in New York City. Disproportionate emphasis on standardized testing, the influence of corporate interest, rampant data mining, and compromised student privacy are all issues undercutting the health and efficacy of our school system. But we believe the most urgent education issue we currently face is High-Stakes Testing; it’s ramifications are both broad and deep.

“We are in favor of rigor and high standards, we’re not strictly anti-standardized testing or anti-Common Core, we affirm the need for some baseline accountability metric in our educational system. However, we strongly oppose the unique double whammy situation we face in New York City, namely: Pearson’s problematic new Core-aligned curriculum/tests, combined with the overblown significance attached to these tests because we live in a school jurisdiction where standardized test scores have been used to determine grade promotion and student placement/admissions, as well as to evaluate teachers, and also have dire implications for schools.

“I have high hopes that Mayor de Blasio’s administration will rapidly bring much-needed change to education in NYC. I’m thrilled that he has spoken out against “teaching to the test.” Carmen Fariña was an excellent choice for Chancellor, and I’m very excited about her commitment to progressive principles, collaboration, and reworking Common Core in NYC. I recognize that they did not create the high-stakes climate, and to the extent that this situation reflects state and even federal mandates through Race To The Top, that it is not entirely in their control. We need more help from Albany.

“NYC schools have been even harder hit by high-stakes testing than their statewide peers. Nowhere is “the tale of two cities” more evident than in our educational system, where the ever-widening achievement gap is only exacerbated by the deeply flawed Common Core roll-out and the weight attached to the corresponding tests. The most vulnerable student populations are hit hardest; children living in poverty, English Language Learners, and students with disabilities are inordinately burdened. But even in high-performing schools, the culture of data-driven and test-focused education is pervasive and damaging.

“It is well established that the implementation of Common Core standards and curriculum in New York was hasty and reckless, and the resulting test materials convoluted, developmentally inappropriate, and inaccessible for most students. Teachers were ill prepared to implement the new standards, and the students given inadequate time to assimilate unfamiliar teaching methods, content, test format and language prior to testing. Due to insufficient and inferior field test methods, it is unlikely that this year’s exams will be much better.

“Our family is fortunate to attend a wonderful, nurturing school, with abundant arts and enrichment programs. We love and support our wonderful teachers and superb administrators, who are under unconscionable pressure from the city and the state. We stand in solidarity with our educators, and know they do not want our kids to endure an excruciating learning environment in the weeks leading up to testing. But even in our thriving community, the quantity and intensity of test preparation is overwhelming.

“Chancellor Fariña’s letter to principals last week, which stated, “Preparing for life is living it,” and advised schools to keep test prep in moderation, as well as yesterday’s legislation aimed at limiting test prep and decreasing the power of standardized tests, are encouraging signals that our leaders understand that change is necessary. But with all due respect, with testing beginning today, this comes too late to provide relief to our overwhelmed children, and the rather nebulous new guidelines fall short of eliminating the circumstances that have created the bubble of intensity which surrounds standardized testing. In fact, it seems that a most crucial point has been missed.

“Multiple high-stakes factors compel schools to spend weeks in test prep, taking the focus off authentic learning, to instruct and drill students in strategies for a test that nobody believes in, just so students stand a chance of passing, and their teachers and administrators do not suffer disastrous consequences. Student promotion and placement policies, school rank, and funding issues have been and are problematically attached to testing, but the most insidious aspect of the high-stakes system is a too-crude link between teacher evaluation/job security and student test scores.


Realistically, the high-pressure classroom climate that surrounds standardized testing will never be relieved, schools will not ease up on test prep, nor will the agonizing anxiety of our kids be diffused, as long as our educators fear for their jobs in relation to a set of dubious tests. And no matter what we adults say, or how we “spin” it, if schools abandon broader, deeper learning to spend a month or more preparing for the tests, it sends the message loud and clear that the tests are what we care about. This dissonance leaves our smart, intuitive children conflicted and afraid, and brings distrust into the classroom.

“The test preparation process is grueling and high-anxiety for all involved, and outrageous strain is being put on even our youngest, most vulnerable students. Many of them are suffering demonstrable stress — crying, illness, nervous behaviors, sleeplessness, irritability, shame and crippling self-doubt. It has diminished my son’s love of school and learning, and has eroded his relationship with his teachers. Furthermore, it’s teaching him that the keys to success are not curiosity, exploration, innovation, collaboration and passion for knowledge, but rather, the ability to use tricks to beat the system. This is of little educational value, and questionable ethics. Worst of all, because Pearson’s current Core-aligned standardized testing model rewards only one (very narrow) type of learner, it has caused our son to doubt his own abilities and intelligence, and not in any constructive way.

“The test scores, then, are invalid not only because the tests themselves are so unsound, but because they in no way reflect what our children are actually learning in school, or how well the schools are really doing – only how effectively students have been taught to “game the test.”

“In a multidimensional sense, our children’s educational futures are dependent on worthless data. That this coercive and punitive system is unethical seems self-evident.

“Until the situation is remedied, and in the absence of an official “opt-out” clause, many families, like our own, feel they are left with no choice but to refuse the tests. And yet, they face pressure to comply, and fears about what test refusal could mean for their schools. The right to protect one’s child from an abusive system is inviolable; no parent should have to refrain from doing what best serves their child due to the threat of repercussions for their schools and educators. This poisons school culture by creating competing interests for concerned parents and their conscientious-but-frightened teachers and administrators.

“Test refusal is a nerve-wracking decision; a lot hangs in the balance and there are many unknowns. But all acts of civil disobedience are risky; it is risk that makes them powerful — willingness to take a stand against something that is wrong, even if it means venturing into uncharted territory. I would not have chosen to be in this position, but since we find ourselves here, it’s a worthwhile lesson for our children that living in a democracy sometimes demands this type of engagement.

“We’re all in the position of having to make crucial decisions quickly, and tensions are running high. But whatever our collective adult stress surrounding standardized testing issues, our first priority must be to ensure that kids are not the victims of the debate. We need substantive legislative action and policy change to lift the burden of the High-Stakes Testing climate that reduces our teachers and our children to defective data, so that schools may return to the vital task of educating our children in a healthy, expansive learning environment.

Jenny Sheffer-Stevens”

These remarks were delivered by a parent in Brooklyn at the Opt Out rally:

“Good morning and welcome to Brooklyn!

“My name is Kemala Karmen and I am the parent of a 4th grader at PS 146, the Brooklyn New School. In recent years, our borough has earned a reputation as a trendsetter in everything from Indie music to urban farming to participatory budgeting—pioneered in NYC by Council Member Brad Lander, who is here today to support us.

“Now we can add one more way in which Brooklyn is blazing a trail: the parents of Brooklyn, outraged by the hijacking of our childrens’ educations, outraged by the assault on our public schools and on our public school teachers, we parents of Brooklyn are taking a stand. Whether we live in Brownsville or Cobble Hill, Ft. Greene or Greenpoint, we are saying ENOUGH! Stop using the blunt instrument of the state ELA and math tests to rank and sort our children, our teachers, and our schools.

“Maybe it’s our city, state, and federal policy makers who need to take the ELA test! When we delivered petitions or wrote letters about the misuses of the tests, they didn’t seem to be able to read—or heed—our urgent concerns about our children.

“Our policy makers also flat-out ignored experts in child development and test design, experts whose published research “warned against attaching severe consequences to performance on any test.” And, sadly, even the teachers’ union has been slow to protect its members from the stranglehold of testing.

“So now, we parents are invoking the only tool we have left. In growing numbers, we are refusing to let our children take these tests. No test score means no data. No data on which to base teacher evaluations. No data on which to justify school closings. No sensitive, personal data that follows our children from year to year, from school to school.

“This morning parents at our District 15 school stand together with parents at other Brooklyn schools to announce the explosive growth of test resistance in our borough, a movement that is gaining momentum elsewhere, too—in the city, and the state, and, really, anywhere in the country where parents see the joys of teaching and learning constrained, the spark of curiosity and creativity snuffed out.

“At 3 Brooklyn schools that we know of—our school, District 23’s PS 446/The Riverdale Avenue Community School (which is in Brownsville) and the Academy of Arts & Letters, located in Ft. Greene in District 13—this year there will be far more children NOT taking the tests than taking them. What that means in stark numbers: at PS 446 48 out of 60 children will REFUSE THE TESTS. At Arts & Letters 44 out of 53 3rd graders will REFUSE THE TESTS. At PS 146, Brooklyn New School 243 out of 306 students will REFUSE THE TESTS.

“It may be April Fools Day, but these tests and, indeed, the whole edifice of corporate “education reform” built upon these tests is no joke. It is no laughing matter when millions are diverted away from our children’s classrooms and into the hands of for-profit companies. It fails to amuse when our class sizes become so large that even our best teachers are hard pressed to know each child.

“I am happy to report that at Riverdale Avenue Community, Arts & Letters, & BNS, our families will no longer blindly default to taking the tests. We are fortunate, because the administration and teachers at our schools have supported us in exercising our rights as parents to make informed decisions about “opting in” or “opting out” of the tests. We hope that others will take heart from what is happening at our schools, that other parents will understand that they have the right to direct their children’s education—and not be afraid to exercise that right. And we hope more principals will not be afraid to stand up for their families.

What happens when parents say “No, not with my child”? They protect their child against state-sanctioned harm.

PRESS RELEASE

EMBARGOED UNTIL 9:15 AM APRIL 1, 2014

BROOKLYN, NY

Contact 1: Elizabeth Elsass, 917-605-3640, rinelsass1@gmail.com

Contact 2: Dani Liebling, 347-218-3107, daniliebling@yahoo.com

GROUNDSWELL OF BROOKLYN PARENTS FROM BROWNSVILLE TO CARROLL GARDENS REFUSE STATE TESTS

A grassroots opt-out campaign organized by Brooklyn parents has yielded a record number of test refusals for this year’s 3rd – 8th grade state-mandated math and English exams. The campaign is part of a national movement in which parents are rejecting high-stakes standardized tests as harmful to their children, teachers, and schools and as detrimental to creativity and deep learning. In a first for the borough, at least three public schools will have more students sitting out the exams than taking them.

Families of children in the testing grades at PS 446/Riverdale Avenue Community School (District 23, Brownsville), the Academy of Arts & Letters (District 13, Fort Greene), and PS 146/Brooklyn New School (District 15, Carroll Gardens) deluged their principals with “opt out” letters. Each school had a refusal rate of over 70 percent; at Arts & Letters the 3rd grade refusals topped out at 83%.

Administrators expect to continue to receive refusals, but as of March 31, the day before the start of the annual testing season, ­­­­ 225 of the 306 students in grades 3-5 at Brooklyn New School had submitted letters. (Last year, 4 families at the school opted out.) Parents of 48 of 60 children refused the tests at PS 446. At Arts & Letters, where the refusal effort focused on the 3rd grade, 44 of 53 3rd graders will not be taking the tests.

“The high stakes attached to these tests must go,” says PS 146 parent Elizabeth Elsass. “We refuse to take part in a test-score-driven education system that is hurting all children.” William Fletcher, whose son attends 3rd grade at PS 446, adds, “In third grade, children need music, art, and gym. But these get crowded out by the tests.”

The groundswell of parent protest is fueled by deep concerns over the length, cost, and content of the tests; their inappropriate use as the primary, and sometimes sole, evaluator of children, teachers, and schools; and their damaging effect on the direction in which public education is headed. Many parents stress that they are not against testing in general. Betsy Guttmacher, who is opting out her eighth-grade daughter at Arts & Letters, explains, “Parents want authentic, meaningful assessments of our children’s learning, and of their teachers’ effectiveness—not punitive, poorly designed, high-stakes testing.”

Parents who refuse the tests are outraged by:

• The length and content of the exams: Children as young as 8 are expected to sit for 6 days of 70-minute test sessions. 5th graders will spend 90 minutes a day taking the tests, longer than college graduates spend on the GRE, MCAT, or LSAT. School staff who saw last year’s exams report that questions were “tricky” and that some questions had no clear right answer. They did not see a chance for children to demonstrate deep thinking, even though the Common Core-aligned tests claim to measure exactly that. Only 5% of English Language Learners passed the state tests last year.

• Promotion decisions determined by one test score. (Recent state legislation may render this exact point moot, but parents remain uneasy since they do not know the extent to which this single score will figure in promotion and admissions decisions.)

• Teacher evaluations based on children’s test scores.

• The high stakes of the tests which force teachers to teach to the test and abandon rich, creative curriculum.

• The high costs of testing. For-profit testing companies receive millions while schools struggle to work with reduced budgets each year. This results in larger class sizes and reduced staff.

• The requirement that schools pay for the scoring of the tests out of their own budgets and/or send teachers out of the classroom for several grading days. (Doubly outrageous at schools where so few children are actually taking the test!)

• The collection and sharing, without parental consent, of children’s personal data (for the cloud-based inBloom database).

Parents who are refusing the tests reflect the diversity of Brooklyn’s opt-out movement, cutting across class and color lines. Many of them have been educating and organizing their fellow parents for months—attending meetings, producing literature, and researching opt-out related questions. For example, when 4th grade parents at Brooklyn New School wondered whether opting out would affect their children’s middle school applications, parent organizers surveyed 19 middle schools. Their findings: there is no ironclad connection between test scores and middle school admissions in the consulted schools. (These were mostly District 15 and citywide middle schools.) The results of this parent survey are available to the press.

The conviction of the parent activists is infectious. Mother of 3, Johanna Perez, relates, “Learning about the tests has been eye-opening. I shared what’s going on at our school with my sister, whose kids go to school in the Bronx; now we’re both opting our children out.” Says parent Marvin Piqué, “We need a system that works for all children. The obsession with testing is hurting the children it is designed to help the most. Stop this and fix it.”

PRESS ALERT

Contact 1: Elizabeth Elsass, 917-605-3640, rinelsass1@gmail.com Contact 2: Dani Liebling, 347-218-3107,daniliebling@yahoo.com

GROUNDSWELL OF BROOKLYN PARENTS FROM BROWNSVILLE TO CARROLL GARDENS REFUSE STATE TESTS

WHAT:

To mark the first day of State-mandated standardized tests, Brooklyn parents from schools with unprecedented rates of test refusal will hold a playground press conference to announce how and why they have embarked on a civil disobedience campaign.

WHEN:

Tuesday,, April 1st at 9:15 AM

WHERE:

DiMattina Playground (between Rapelye and Woodhull Streets & Henry and Hicks Streets), adjacent to the Brooklyn New School in Carroll Gardens, Brooklyn

WHO:

Parents from a diverse group of Brooklyn public schools including host schools PS 446/Riverdale Ave Community School (Brownsville), Arts & Letters (Fort Greene), and PS 146/Brooklyn New School (Carroll Gardens); elected officials or their representatives. (Confirmed: Brad Lander,
City Council Member; Daniel Wiley, Community Coordinator for Congresswoman Nydia Velazquez; Representative from Community Education Council 15. List in formation.)

WHY:

Brooklyn parents organized a grassroots opt-out campaign that yielded a record number of test refusals for this year’s 3rd – 8thgrade state math and English exams. In a first for the borough, more students at the host schools will sit out the tests than will take them.* The campaign is part of a national movement in which parents are rejecting high-stakes tests as harmful to their children, teachers, and schools and as detrimental to creativity and deep learning.

PRESS ALERT

Contact 1: Elizabeth Elsass, 917-605-3640, rinelsass1@gmail.com
Contact 2: Dani Liebling, 347-218-3107, daniliebling@yahoo.com

GROUNDSWELL OF BROOKLYN PARENTS FROM BROWNSVILLE TO CARROLL GARDENS REFUSE STATE TESTS

WHAT:

To mark the first day of State-mandated standardized tests, Brooklyn parents from schools with unprecedented rates of test refusal will hold a playground press conference to announce how and why they have embarked on a civil disobedience campaign.

WHEN:

Tuesday, April 1st at 9:15 AM

WHERE:

Dimattina Playground, adjacent to the Brooklyn New School

(between Rapelye and Woodhull Street, Henry and Hicks Street)

WHO:

Parents from a diverse group of Brooklyn public schools including host schools PS 446/Riverdale Ave Community School (Brownsville), Arts & Letters (Fort Greene), and PS 146/Brooklyn New School (Carroll Gardens); elected officials or their representatives. (Confirmed: Brad Lander, Daniel Wiley, Community Coordinator for Congresswoman Nydia Velazquez, Community Education Council 15 Member. List in formation.)

WHY:

Brooklyn parents organized a grassroots opt-out campaign that yielded a record number of test refusals for this year’s 3rd-8th grade state math and English exams. In a first for the borough, more students at the host schools will sit out the tests than will take them.* The campaign is part of a national movement in which parents are rejecting high-stakes tests as harmful to their children, teachers, and schools and as detrimental to creativity and deep learning.

VISUALS:

Parents holding signs and examples of student work.

*Exact number available at the press conference

The following just in as the New York State Legislature responds to the pressure of a $5 million advertising campaign demanding free space for privately-managed charters. Also, the billionaires behind this ad campaign have given handsome sums to Governor Cuomo and other key politicians. Cuomo has received at least $800,000 from the charter advocates. Under the legislation below, the charters are given the right to expand as much as they want, without paying rent, pushing out the public school that once was sited in the building. The charters can afford to pay their “CEO” half a million dollars, but they can’t pay the rent. They can pay millions for attack ads on television, but they can’t pay the rent. They can hire the politically-hot public relations firm SDK Knickerbocker more than $500,000 a year, but they can’t pay the rent. Their biggest boosters are billionaires, like Paul Tudor Jones, whose Robin Hood Foundation raises $80 million in a single night, but the charters can’t pay the rent. The charters are proving to be public parasites in New York City, invading the host and doing harm to the 94% of children who are not in charters.

***

One more point: When the Common Core tests were given a year ago, students in charter schools got the same average scores as students in public schools, even though the charters have few if any students with severe disabilities (and the public schools in poor neighborhoods have nearly 15%), and the charters typically have half as many English language learners. There were a few high-flying charter schools, but even more high-flying public schools. On average, there was no difference between the public schools and the charter schools.

 

***
Looks like the City is forced to offer either space or rent to new or expanding charter schools.

http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=A08556&term=2013
http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?default_fld=&bn=A08556&term=2013&Summary=Y&Text=Y

(E) IN A CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT IN A CITY HAVING A POPULATION OF ONE
24 MILLION OR MORE INHABITANTS, CHARTER SCHOOLS THAT FIRST COMMENCE
25 INSTRUCTION OR THAT REQUIRE ADDITIONAL SPACE DUE TO AN EXPANSION OF
26 GRADE LEVEL, PURSUANT TO THIS ARTICLE, APPROVED BY THEIR CHARTER ENTITY
27 FOR THE TWO THOUSAND FOURTEEN–TWO THOUSAND FIFTEEN SCHOOL YEAR OR THER-
28 EAFTER AND REQUEST CO-LOCATION IN A PUBLIC SCHOOL BUILDING SHALL BE
29 PROVIDED ACCESS TO FACILITIES PURSUANT TO THIS PARAGRAPH FOR SUCH CHAR-
30 TER SCHOOLS THAT FIRST COMMENCE INSTRUCTION OR THAT REQUIRE ADDITIONAL
31 SPACE DUE TO AN EXPANSION OF GRADE LEVEL, PURSUANT TO THIS ARTICLE,
32 APPROVED BY THEIR CHARTER ENTITY FOR THOSE GRADES NEWLY PROVIDED.
33 (1) NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION OF LAW TO THE CONTRARY, WITHIN
34 THE LATER OF (I) FIVE MONTHS AFTER A CHARTER SCHOOL’S WRITTEN REQUEST
35 FOR CO-LOCATION AND (II) THIRTY DAYS AFTER THE CHARTER SCHOOL’S CHARTER
36 IS APPROVED BY ITS CHARTER ENTITY, THE CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT SHALL
37 EITHER: (A) OFFER AT NO COST TO THE CHARTER SCHOOL A CO-LOCATION SITE IN
38 A PUBLIC SCHOOL BUILDING APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF EDUCATION AS PROVIDED
39 BY LAW, OR (B) OFFER THE CHARTER SCHOOL SPACE IN A PRIVATELY OWNED OR
40 OTHER PUBLICLY OWNED FACILITY AT THE EXPENSE OF THE CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT
41 AND AT NO COST TO THE CHARTER SCHOOL. THE SPACE MUST BE REASONABLE,
42 APPROPRIATE AND COMPARABLE AND IN THE COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT TO BE
43 SERVED BY THE CHARTER SCHOOL AND OTHERWISE IN REASONABLE PROXIMITY.

Leonie Haimson of Class Size Matters describes the deal to benefit the billionaire-funded charter schools  that is being negotiated right now by the New York legislature and will be voted on next week.

It is not too late to make your voice heard!

Governor Cuomo, who received $800,000 for  his re-election campaign from charter school advocates, is making good on his promise to take care of charters. These privately operated schools, supported by billionaires like Paul Tudor Jone, Rupert Murdoch, Michael Bloomberg, and a long list of hedge fund managers, will never have to pay rent for their use of public facilities; they will get additional public fund; and a guarantee that they can never be moved out of their public space. The billionaires proved in the past month that they are willing to spend $5 million or so on attack ads, but they will not pay rent to the city for their use of public space. The Robin Hood Foundation, founded by billionaire Paul Tudor Jones, is able to raise $80 million in a single night. But the charters can’t pay the city rent for use of public space. According to Forbes, Paul Tudor Jones manages $13 billion in assets, and he has decided to “save” public education. He and his fellow hedge fund managers have determined to privatize public education. With the help of New York’s feckless legislature and cold-hearted Governor, they are on their way.

 

Leonie Haimson writes:

 

According to today’s NY Post, the legislature is about to make the worst possible deal imaginable: considerably more per pupil funding for charters, including more than $1100 per student over three years, and free space or rent paid for by NYC for any new or expanding NYC charter going forward – just in NYC, by the way, where we have the most overcrowded schools in the state, with more than half our students sitting in extremely overcrowded schools by the DOE’s own metrics, which we know are an underestimate.

Thousands of kids on waiting lists for Kindergarten each spring, thousands more sitting in trailers, and the capital plan provides less than one third of the seats needed to eliminate current overcrowding and address future enrollment growth. But charters will be guaranteed the space to expand – paid for by city taxpayers, while our public school students are crushed into larger and larger classes with less space to learn.

Call the Speaker’s office now: tell him to say NO to the deal forcing the city to pay for facilities forever for new or expanded charters, while public school students will sit in increasingly overcrowded buildings.

Speaker Silver: (518) 455-3791

Then call your Assemblymember and urge them to say NO to this deal as well; find their contact info here:

If this deal goes forward, this will truly create a two tier system in which the charter schools will be the only ones in uncrowded facilities, with the rent paid for by NYC taxpayers, and all parents will be forced to apply to charter schools whether they want to or not, just to guarantee a seat for their child in a school that is not hugely overcrowded.

Please call the Speaker’s office and your Assemblymember now.

Thanks,

Leonie Haimson
Executive Director
Class Size Matters
124 Waverly Pl.
New York, NY 10011
212-674-7320

Anthony Cody wonders why corporate education reformers hate democracy. They love mayoral control, but only if the mayor agrees with their privatization agenda. They hate local school boards, because they are elected and can be removed.

They love private corporate control. They work to enact ALEC’s goal of removing local control from communities.

Democracy is too messy. The reformers know how to buy mayors and legislatures. Campaign contributions do the job. But the problem with democracy is that voters are unpredictable. The “reformers” can’t buy them, although the reformers can spend millions to flood the airwaves with attack ads, and they own most of the mainstream media. Think Murdoch. Think Education Nation.

Think Reed Hastings, the billionaire who owns Netflix. He let the cat out of the bag in a recent speech, which Cody quotes and links to.

Cody asks:

“Reed Hastings was right about one thing. If you go to the American public and actually tell them you want to eliminate elected school boards, or completely disempower them, no one’s going to go for that. So instead, these billionaires conspire. Yes, conspire, behind closed doors, and we only find out when someone surreptitiously shoots a video of the bald-faced attempt to steal our democracy right out from under us.

“The question nobody asks is “why do they hate our freedom”? The answer is obvious. Occasionally it gets in the way of what they want to do. And when that happens, the solution is to destroy democracy. Take power away from the elected offices that are there to ensure accountability to the people. Make sure that it goes wherever your grip is strongest. And spend millions on TV ads to cover up the real game under way. “