Archives for category: New York City

Time is running out on the Bloomberg administration, so his compliant board will vote at its next meeting in October on a record giveaway of public school space to privately managed charters.

The panel, which has a majority of members appointed by the mayor, will consider more than 40 proposals for co-locating schools at two meetings next month. More than 30 of these plans are for new schools.

Communities will debate the proposals, but the mayor’s “Panel on Education Policy” never listens to what communities want. If the past is any guide, there will be cries from parents and students not to force another school into their building, but they will be ignored. The board will follow the mayor’s orders.

Voters overwhelmingly disapprove of the mayor’s education policies–polls show only 22-26% approve of closing schools and opening schools, closing schools and opening schools, again and again-but it’s full speed ahead for the failed policies of Mayor Bloomberg.

Why so many “failing schools” after more than a decade of mayoral control?

I know a mole inside the New York City Department of Education. He/she knows how the DOE manipulates data to burnish the mayor’s image. This is a good reason to oppose mayoral control of the schools. He/she says the mayor’s small schools close with regularity; that the data cannot be trusted; that the Department has shown preference to charter schools but they got lower scores on the Common Core tests than the public schools.

Most shocking: the DOE intends to delete all the emails on its computers.

Quick, someone file a FOIL before it’s too late.

The mole writes:

“A Bad Business: The Bankruptcy of Education Policy”

Mike Bloomberg, in his recent interview with the magazine New York, admitted to following the companies run by his friends as economic barometers of New York City’s conditions. According to his website, “Mike has made education reform the focal point of his agenda,” an agenda dominated by applying business ideas to New York City’s schools.

Are the profit margins of huge corporations truly “indicators,” as Bloomberg claims, of how the citizens of New York City are doing? Does his application of business ideas actually improve schools for children? Let’s examine the evidence to see how the next mayor can do better.

Day trader versus business owner. Under Bloomberg, the bureaucrats at Tweed see themselves as “portfolio managers.” Just like day traders, they take no responsibility for the success or failure of the shares in their portfolio. They close and open schools, just like a day trader flips stocks. They refuse to take ownership of the schools under their charge and decline to commit to ensuring their success. Of course, in this case, the stock shares are schools with roots in a community and tens of thousands of children. What do the numbers say is the end result all this? The schools opened under Bloomberg are shuttered at the same rate as older schools, leading to an overall profit of zero. What should the next mayor do? Like a small-business owner who works as hard as possible to ensure her business succeeds, he must put children first and hold the education bureaucrats accountable for the success of each and every school in New York City.

Enron-like accounting practices versus independent auditor. Under Bloomberg, the Department of Education fudges and manipulates numbers to serve their political ends. They refuse to open up their complete data sets to independent researchers at universities who publish results in peer-reviewed journals. Sometimes they release limited data to friendly “think” tanks or to organizations that need to maintain their good will. These paid advertisers publish favorable “reports” in order to continue to have access to the seemingly top secret data.

Now they plan on deleting all emails from the Department of Education right before Bloomberg leaves office, just like Arthur Anderson and Enron.

What is the end result of all this? Bloomberg touts false numbers as “evidence” of “success” while the voices of independent researchers are silenced. For example, Aaron Pallas, a professor at Columbia University’s Teachers College, was refused access to data after finding that the achievement gap did not close under Bloomberg.

What should the next mayor do? Just like an honest business has its results audited by an independent accounting firm, he must put children first and create an independent panel of researchers who are guaranteed full access to all DOE data. The reports of the panel should be made public and should inform education policy decisions in the city.

Crony capitalism versus fair business practices. Under Bloomberg, select schools are favored and granted unfair financial advantages over other schools. New schools that opened under Bloomberg are given more money per student than other schools. Charter schools are given more money per student, including free-of-charge public school space, than other schools. Favored schools are granted extra money through mysterious appeals and special grants. This is similar to business practices in corrupt countries where relatives and friends of the ruling family are granted monopolies and other unfair advantages in business.

What should the next mayor do? He should put children first and institute a set of fair business practices under which all schools receive the full share of funding they are entitled to based on the students they serve.

Buyer beware versus fiduciary duty. For years credit card companies and other financial firms used small print and legalese to rip-off customers. Companies are now required to abide by consumer rights laws. Under Bloomberg, a complicated and frustrating high school application process has been deceptively advertised as choice for students. While some parents and students have the time and patience to navigate the process others do not.

What is the end result? Vast differences in student enrollment patterns between schools. The 10% of schools with the highest special education enrollment rates average 27.4% students with special needs. The 10% of schools with the lowest special education enrollment rates average 4.5% students with special needs. The 10% of schools with the highest English Language Learner enrollment rates average 40.8% (not including specialized schools for new immigrants). The 10% of schools with the lowest English Language Learner enrollment rates average 1%. Screened and specialized schools have a student body that is extremely unrepresentative of New York City’s children.

What should the next mayor do? He must put children first and ensure that every student has the opportunity to attend a quality school with a diverse student body that allows students to build the skills needed to function in our global economy and international city.

False advertising versus truth in advertising. Under Bloomberg, schools were supposedly being run along the lines of a business. It is now clear that this was false advertising and the “business” practices employed have bankrupted many a corporation. Ideology has determined policy rather than data and evidence.

Charter schools were touted as putting public schools to shame while the data showing that charters do not serve similar student populations and get rid of underperforming students was ignored. Then the test scores of the new common core exams were released and charter schools performed significantly worse than public schools. This data was ignored.

If Coca Cola had followed a similar “business” approach they would have continued to market “New Coke” and bankrupted the entire company. What should the next mayor do? He must put children first and ensure that all children have access to a quality early childhood education program. The economic data shows such programs have very high returns on investment and more than pay for themselves over time. We need a mayor who is willing to employ honest business practices such as ownership, honest accounting, fairness, and responsibility to the consumer in improving our schools.

In its ongoing effort to destroy neighborhood schools and communities, the NYC brought out a plan to centralize kindergarten admissions. This paren activist says it is time to fight back now:

“Last week, the DOE announced the roll-out of a new $800,000 kindergarten admissions process, known as Kindergarten Connect.

“Kindergarten Connect, like the centralized system currently used for high school admissions in the city, asks parents to submit a list of their school choices, ranked in order of preference. The DOE will then process this application and determine where the child will attend kindergarten. For most districts, this differs significantly from the current, school-based system in which parents who apply to multiple schools learn of acceptances or waitlists from each school individually. It is then up to the parents to decide where to enroll their children.

“Of course, there are many ways our admissions policies can be improved, but any policy that moves from press release to Panel for Education Policy vote in one week—and that affects thousands of families—deserves our close attention. This is especially true since the last time the DOE tried to centralize kindergarten admissions (in 2008) over a thousand parents, from all 5 boroughs, signed petitions to stop the policy from becoming a reality.

“Despite this, there has been no opportunity for public comment on Kindergarten Connect. So we at NYCPublic.org are taking things into our own hands and creating a place for the public to weigh in and ask questions about this policy.

Please visit this page to see what parents are saying about Kindergarten Connect, and to add your two cents by filling out the form on this page. Our hope is that these stories will find their way into the press and be heard by decision makers.

“Even if you are not quite sure what to think about this policy change, we ask that you consider writing the Panel for Education Policy today to request that they table a decision on Kindergarten Connect until there has been a public hearing and period for public comment.

“In May of 2014, parents will receive kindergarten admissions letters with only one school placement (a big change from years past). They will likely have very few options to move their child to another school. Please don’t wait until then to mobilize around this policy.

“Sincerely,

“The NYCpublic.org Team


Liz Rosenberg
Executive Director and Co-founder
NYCpublic.org
917-697-1319

Bill de Blasio won an amazing victory in the New York City Democratic mayoral primary. Not long ago, he was in fourth place but last night he ran decisively ahead of former Comptroller Bill Thompson (the UFT’s candidate) and Christine Quinn (who was tarnished by her close association with Mayor Bloomberg).

In exit polls, voters said their leading concerns were jobs and education. Of the three leading candidates, de Blasio was the sharpest critic of the mayor’s education policies.

The election was a clear repudiation of Bloomberg’s strategies of test-based accountability, closing schools (despite community opposition), and charter schools. .

The New York Times polls showed that only one in four New Yorkers approved of Bloomberg’s education policies. The Quinnipiac poll showed approval at only 22%.

One thing is clear:

The national reform movement just took a big hit. New Yorkers rejected it as stale and oppressive. They don’t like the status quo. They want change. They want leadership that cares more about children than about data. They want leadership that values education more than testing.

A public school parent and former local school board member, Bill de Blasio is poised to bring a fresh vision to the city’s schools.

Liz Rosenberg, New York City public school parent, has a
new idea about her daughter’s test scores: she ignores them. This
is what she wrote: Refusing our Daughter’s Test Scores Earlier this
month, New York state made headlines when it revealed how poorly
schools and districts had fared on the state’s new Common
Core-aligned standardized tests. Beginning August 26, families of
the roughly 400,000 New York City public school pupils who took the
tests can log into ARIS (the system that stores student records) to
see their children’s ELA and math scores. My partner and I,
however, have decided that we will not be joining our fellow
parents in this endeavor. Instead, we are sending our school a
letter asking that they not share this year’s scores with our
daughter nor send them home via backpack or snail mail. Why? In
order to trust the reliability of this year’s scores, we would need
to believe that the tests are valid instruments that can accurately
measure what our daughter knows and is able to do. But how can
we–or educational experts, for that matter–assess the tests when
we can’t even see them? When New York signed a contract allowing
Pearson LLC, the producer of the tests, to keep the actual tests
private, it enabled the for-profit testing behemoth to shield
itself from scrutiny–and to dominate the lucrative test-prep
market. Since only small fragments of the tests are being made
public, the only other state-condoned resource that we have to go
by are the curricula the state has purchased and posted online
(produced by Core Knowledge and Expeditionary Learning). Looking at
a series of lessons that focus on frogs, we find a text called
“Everything You Need to Know about Frogs and Other Slippery
Creatures (DK Publishing). Who wouldn’t want third graders to read
a book by this title? But reading a book in class with your teacher
is quite different than testing students on their ability to
analyze a particular text. Everything You Need to Know about Frogs
and Other Slippery Creatures has a Lexile score of 1040 (Lexile is
a well regarded system for mapping the complexity of texts), which
puts it in the 6-8th grade range of text complexity. The Lexile
“analyzer” predicts that an average 3rd grade reader will
comprehend 50% of this text. Assessing students using texts that
are 3-5 years above their grade level does not help teachers or
parents learn much of anything about what those students know and
are able to do. Many high profile ed reform advocates, like Arne
Duncan, have voiced their support of NY state Education
Commissioner John King’s choice to set the bar for proficiency on
the tests so high. “I think the only way you improve is to tell the
truth, and sometimes that’s a brutal truth….,” he commented.*
Aside from “telling the brutal truth,” is there something else to
be gained politically from King’s choice? Perhaps he (and by
extension, his boss, Governor Andrew Cuomo) want to use low
proficiency rates to justify some of the reforms they have put in
place. The more “trouble” our schools are in, the more we need the
state or city to move to fix them. The fixes range from assessment
driven “personalized learning environments” (part of the national
Race to the Top applications for this year) or commercially
produced curricula to closing district schools, opening more
charters, and placing more schools on the turnaround list. They
also include expanding standardized testing to even our youngest
students–those in kindergarten through 2nd grade. As money and
personnel are diverted to these “reforms,” the byproducts are
larger class sizes; curricula that have no ties to schools,
students, or communities; an exodus of talented teachers frustrated
by their loss of autonomy; a stronger argument for charter schools,
and a weakened union. Given all of this, the state has not given us
any reason to trust the scores our daughter (or anyone’s daughter
or son) received this year. So like Michelle Rhee, President Obama,
Commissioner King and federal Department of Education Secretary
Arne Duncan–all of whom send their children to private schools–my
partner and I will have to rely on factors other than the state’s
standardized test scores to evaluate our child’s learning and
progress towards the standards. Our faith will lie with our school,
our daughter’s teachers, and with our own ability to assess her
learning in relationship to the standards. For other parents who
question the content, methodology, and uses of NY State’s 3rd-8th
grade tests, please consider refusing the scores with us. Our hope
is that this action will not only be the best choice for our
family, but that it will help spur a conversation about these
issues among parents/guardians around the city and state.
*http://www.wnyc.org/blogs/schoolbook/2013/aug/06/lower-scores-expected-duncan-backs-ny-new-state-tests/
Liz Rosenberg is a co-founder of NYCpublic.org, an organization
that is creating more opportunities for public school parents to
learn, organize, and take action — together. She lives in Brooklyn
with her partner, Sue Schaffner and their two children.

This teacher began her second career during the Bloomberg era.

She writes:

“I started working as a teacher for the NYCDOE during the Bloomberg regime (“second” career). It is, unfortunately, the ONLY regime that I worked as a teacher in. Previously, I had worked in the corporate world.

“From the beginning, it was obvious to me what Bloomberg was trying to do. I had seen it in the business world. “Starving” schools of programs, supplies, books, etc. It’s a tactic used by retail chains and corporations that want to close unproductive stores or offices ( in terms of sales). When I mentioned this to people I had worked with, many did not believe that what Bloomberg was doing could actually happen.

“And, it did- closure of many public schools, staff and students displaced, strong arm “business” tactics used, by skewing “data” to make it appear that schools were “improving” under this arrogant and distasteful Mayors’ policies, while trying to break the union and underserving the students.

“What surprises me most of all is how so many people acquiesced to all this, though there are a few groups that did not, and attempted to fight this Bloomberg juggernaut.

“Frankly, I’m tired of it all, and am looking forward to retiring in three years. If the next Mayor of NYC truly values education for the citizens of this city and the nation, the first step would be to undo ALL of the Bloomberg “reforms” and make the PUBLIC schools what they should be, places where the PUBLIC truly has input and say in how the schools are run, and let educators do their jobs unfettered without fear of reprisal and fear of losing their jobs.”

The New York Times published an online debate about what is needed next in NYC.

Pedro Noguera, Geoffrey Canada, So Stern and I weigh in.

Who is defending the status quo? You decide.

I was invited to write about the changes that the next mayor of New York City should. Make in the education system.

This is what I wrote.

I begin thus:

“My grandson starts second grade in a Brooklyn public school, so I hope to see real change in the city school system, not just for his sake but for the benefit of all the 1.1 million students.

“By real change, I mean a new vision for education. I mean a shift away from the failed policies of the past decade that have turned our public schools into testing factories.

“Today, our schools are spending hundreds of millions of dollars on testing and test preparation that should be spent instead on reducing class size, enriching the curriculum, and giving extra help to the students who need it.

“Polls show that only 1 in 4 New Yorkers think the schools have improved after a decade of heavy-handed testing and accountability. They are right.”

Meanwhile Chancellor Dennis Walcott has been speaking to business groups and penning opinion pieces warning that any deviation from the status quo of high-stakes testing, closing schools, and privatization would be a disaster.

Hopefully, a new mayor will bring fresh ideas.

The status quo of the past decade has left too many children behind, while destabilizing communities and demoralizing teachers.

It is time for a change.

John Marzulli of the New York Daily News reports that the ex-project manager of the South Bronx Classical Charter School is suing the school for $1 million for firing her for reporting financial and academic wrong-doing.

She allegedly told supervisors that the school was billing the city for special education students who were not enrolled and that some exams were plagiarized.

She also complained that children were punished by withholding food from them.

Leonie Haimson of Class Size Matters reports that the school was awarded an A by the city on its latest report card:

She writes:

 South Bronx Classical Charter allegedly defrauded public  funds by charging DOE for special ed kids no longer attending, cheated on the state tests and withheld food from kids as punishment; yet got an A on NYC progress reports.   

The school claims to develop “citizens of impeccable character.” 

Lester Long, the ED and principal, who was allegedly informed of the fraud and shrugged his shoulders, is a former investment banker according to Wikipedia. 

The charter school was allowed to expand into the middle grades and to replicate and open a second school, S. Bronx Classical Charter II by SED and the Regents, despite the fact that it was reported in 2012 that between 20 and 40 percent of students originally enrolled in the school left before they were tested, and no new students replaced them. 

 

Moreover, in its site visit dated June 2012, the DOE charter office noted that the “school should continue its efforts to reach compliance with the amended 2010 NYS charter law requirements related to the enrollment and retention of at -risk student populations… …its enrollment of students with IEPs is below CSD 12 averages with a special education population of 5.4 % compared to CSD 12’s average of 18.3 %, as is the school’s population of ELLs (7.7% compared to 19% in the district.)”

The visitors also mentioned the high level of turnover of teachers and excessive reliance on inexperienced TFAers.

In another case reported in the DN in 2012, the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights was  investigating the suspension of Christian Charriez, 6, a special-needs student, who was suspended four times – the last time his parents told that he had to receive a psychiatric diagnosis.

“Principal Lester Long said the school invited Christian back to school and contacted his mother multiple times, but a letter from the family’s lawyer shows the school was contacted multiple times without response.”

 

In this article published at The Daily Kos, the writer describes Bill de Blasio’s forceful demand for a moratorium on new charter “co-locations.”

As the author explains, “co-location” is a euphemism for a hostile appropriation of public space, which is given rent-free to private charter operators, some of which have billionaires on their board.

When a charter school is “co-located” with a public school, “Kids attending then ‘co-located’ neighborhood schools are kicked out of their classrooms and forced into yet more crowded classrooms. Charter schools don’t pay rent, often get the best facilities, and cherry pick the use of ‘shared space’.  They often reject students who don’t fit in their managers’ model of the right sort of student.”

He writes:

The charter school movement was originally a progressive idea – let local parents try to build local alternate schools.  Let a thousand classrooms bloom.  Fair enough.  

But this nice warm hippy concept has been hijacked and industrialized and capitalized and even securitized by the neo-cons.  Bloomberg (not parents) led the push for charter schools here. His cronies at the Department of Education led the revolution from above. By last year there were 125 elementary and middle school charter schools in New York City.  Charter schools now account for over 5% of NYC’ students. But parent demand didn’t create these schools; all were manufactured by administrative fiat. And almost none of these schools were built anew – the space was stolen from neighborhood schools.

And he adds:

Actually almost  all parents would choose the same thing – a sound neighborhood school. And by subsidizing charter schools Bloomberg diverted billions of Dollars that could have made neighborhood schools stronger.

The promise of charter schools was that their existence as an alternative would give parents a choice.  The theory was that management of existing system would make improvements to compete with the new schools.   But in NYC parents aren’t really given a choice. Billions of dollars of real estate has been expropriated from neighborhood schools and given to Charter Schools. The neighborhood schools are robbed in a deliberate effort to make the Charter Schools seem more attractive. It’s only natural that when given the choice between a starved carcass of a neighborhood school or an a shiny new floor in a charter school, some parents choose the latter.  Bloomberg has his thumb on the scale. He has sabotaged neighborhood schools, not strengthened them.

If de Blasio is elected and follows through on his promise to be a mayor for all the children–especially the neglected 95% who do not attend charter schools–he could become a national leader in the fight to restore sanity and common sense to education policy.

The writer says:

De Blasio could be New York City’s next Mayor.  He can use the office to not only reverse Bloomberg’s failed educational policies but as a national podium.  He can fight to end NCLB, to end the “Reign of Testing Terror”, to end the misuse of Charter Schools, and for reasonable universal pre-k.

DINOs like Rahm Emanuel and NY Governor Cuomo still think they should talk about closing failing schools.  Neighborhood schools are being closed in Chicago, Detroit, Philadelphia, etc. Maybe if New Yorkers elect de Blasio we can also send a message to Congress and Education Secretary Arne Duncan and President Obama.