PAVE Charter Anti-PS 15 Graffiti

What are they teaching the kids at PAVE Academy which shares a building with PS 15 in Red Hook?

The day after I wrote this about PAVE and PS 15 (Having Lunch With Spencer Robertson of Pave Charter)  this was seen around the school building:

PS 15: DO NOT PASS

Mayoral Control - 15 Years of Failure in Chicago

Before you check out this very important report published in Feb. 2011 -

Here is a reminder of where Mulgrew and the UFT stand on mayoral control no matter what they say for the public at large and internally:

Mulgrew was very up front w/ me that he supports continued if ameliorated mayoral control and wants to look at other cities where it is going well...

Yet his toadies near the top of the org will proclaim he is NOT! Are they misled? out of loop? guilty of wishful thinking?----- Anon Parent activist

So when the Unity hacks come around saying the UFT will oppose mayoral control ask them to list the cities where it is going well.

Really useful for the coming battle here.

Here is the exec summary and recos.

Email me for the entire report: normsco@gmail.com

Videos: Brooklyn Automotive HS closing Hearing

Report from Pat Dobosz:

Many alumni spoke about the school. The DOE was charged with not providing stability and funding to the school, setting it up to fail.  Below are a few of the speakers. I had more, but the quality of the video was poor because the sound system was terrible.

I did these videos on behalf of GEM (Grassroots Educatiom Movement).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HevguhYOxFE

1967 graduate: The DOE has not put resources into this school.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gk-fGwuOFzg

Teacher: He said he was going to speak until he was done. Watch the security come up to him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZDzcRsUnLg

2011 Graduate: Give us the money.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMMmCTfRCJI  

CSA Rep: Bloomberg's DOE Speaks about the Turnaround Model for schools.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgzinbXWtWI

1968 graduate and present teacher: This has always been a family....You had a trade... and you could go to college.

    

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeSMWTTy540

Rep from Councilman Steve Levin's office: ...should be discussing creative solutions...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hkbzPLZpgXIv=kwdLfhe5epw

UFT Vice President of CTE, Sterling Roberson: Two minutes is not enough.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwdLfhe5epw

Teacher; Had 21 supervisors in 18 years. The last two principals were removed from the building and yet they got jobs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RhpDfbmB-A

UFT Rep: Which side are you on?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxHZJISSaAQ

David Dobosz: Southside Community Schools Coalition

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNz8H6OBOS8

Mother of a current student: We can't let the DOE tell us how to raise our children academically.

Here is Gotham Schools' report on the Automotive Hearing:

NYCDOE and Gotham Schools Back E4E Dribble

One of my GEM/ICE colleagues attended a Professional Development workshop last week when the person running the workshop started passing out leaflets promoting an E4E event. Just how much cooperation is E4E getting from the DOE?
When my friend objected the workshop leader said she had no idea what E4E was all about. It is not clear how she got the leaflets but I'll let you guess.

Of course Gotham Schools reported (check out the comments) on the E4E salary report, as expected while ignoring the NYCORE all-day conference (March 24) that attracted 400 people attending 50 workshops with Chicago based professor and author of "Bad Teacher" Kevin Kumshiro as the keynote speaker along with student poet Amani Breanna Alexander: (See videos at: http://vimeo.com/39179678 and http://vimeo.com/39214616.)

The conf was run by volunteers and people actually PAID money to attend. No Gates/DFER funding here.

Really, how do you compare what E4E does with NYCORE ---- with much greater outreach and effectiveness? (NYCORE meets 3rd Friday of every month).

And check out all the activities by GEM and the State of the Union (which attracted over 200 people who paid on Feb. 4) and another 70 at the March 10 working group meeting. None of us have staff or funding yet accomplish so much more than E4E.


The Inside Co-location blog which chronicles what an Eva Moskowitz invasion of a school looks like also had a visit from the E4E gremlins and points out that E4E and Success Academy share the same web campaign manager info that Gotham manages not to report.

From the blog:

Last week, these unauthorized flyers mysteriously appeared in all faculty mailboxes, advertising free drinks to entice teachers to a meet-and-greet. The event sponsor was Educators 4 Excellence, a group founded by young teachers. The corporate-funded group shares a web campaign manager with Success Academy, as well as a decidedly anti-union stance.




So below is the E4E update --- monthly events to try to keep themselves appearing relevant. 

The next one -- on April 17, the same evening as the GEM Teacher Evaluation event with speakers Carol Burris (LI Principal opposing the tchr eval), Francis Lewis HS CL Arthur Goldstein and well-known blogger Gary Rubinstein, amongst others. (Look for our announcement soon.)

Upcoming Events

New York

April 17 Speed Networking  6:30pm E4E Offices

333 W. 39th Street, Suite 703, New York, NY 10018

Gee, Speed Networking -- a crucial issue facing us all. 

Guess E4E is running out of topics to lure Gotham into covering. 


AFTERBURN: Gotham ignores GEM film too


And if you read Gotham you would never know about our movie which has gone all over the world (we just got an email from New Zealand with an offer of $200) and with the NYC public library ordering 20 copies and with showings around the nation and the city (except for the UFT.) That we alone have not only produced 8000 dvds while people all over the world are making copies and give it and all rights away (and have received enough donations to cover all costs so far) is not a story?


Try to tell me that Gotham's willful ignorance about our film with attacks the corporate deformers is not connected to fear of loss of funding from these very same people.

By the way -- do you think a review would appear in Gotham given that the people who made the film are well-known teacher/parent activists in NYC?


Here are just a few upcoming showings we can keep track of:

•Saturday, March 31st. CEA New Teachers Conference, Connecticut.

•Saturday, March 31st, 11:00AM. 400 Maryland Ave SW, Washington DC. Occupy the DOE in DC, as part of the United Opt Out movement to end punitive public school testing. Click here for more information.

•Saturday, March 31st from 2:30 – 4. Baldwin Public Library, 3322 Grand Ave, Baldwin, NY (between Sunrise Highway and Merrick Road).
•Tuesday, April 10th at 6:30 pm. Towles Montessori Intermediate School at 420 E. Paulding Road, Fort Wayne, IN 46816.

Fred Smith: A History Lesson as NYC School Tests Near

Our pal Fred Smith continues drilling deep on high stakes testing. Fred is a member of the GEM spinoff Change the Stakes Committee. See our blog at:
http://changethestakes.wordpress.com/


A good reminder of past high-stakes failures from Fred at http://www.citylimits.org/conversations/168/school-testing-drama-are-students-center-stage-or-a-sideshow

Next month, city students take the standardized tests on which their progress, and perhaps the fates of their teachers and schools, depend—all amid a debate over testing that, this writer observes, is nothing new.

By Fred Smith

Thursday, Mar 29, 2012 

• Share 7

  5

  2

  Email

In 1980, a promotion policy was put forward by Mayor Ed Koch, who wanted to be known as the education mayor and judged by student test performance. He championed a promotion/retention effort built around results obtained on the citywide test. He talked about returning to tough standards. He received favorable press for this bold initiative.

Decisions on promoting children would be based on their performance on the city's annual reading and math tests. Score a year or more behind and you'd be retained in fourth and seventh grade, the so-called Promotional Gates.

Koch’s chosen chancellor held obligatory hearings, where mothers and fathers raised rational arguments against the policy: unreliable data; not enough highly-skilled teachers to reach kids in a way the schools had been unable to before; the harmful, disruptive impact keeping kids back would have (the specter of "bearded 7th graders"); the lack of an appeal process; and the likelihood of insufficient funding to support the program.

The school system didn't listen to parents. But it did listen to its bean counters.   An arbitrary cutoff score was initially set for each Gates grade to separate students who met the promotion criteria from others who would be eligible for retention. Based on preliminary data, the budget office projected how very high the cost would be for the instructional services needed by so many low scorers, including money for prescribed summer school. No problem, the administration effectively said. The cut-off points for holding kids back were immediately lowered—literally, a new bottom line—and a more affordable plan adopted. So much for standards.

The chancellor then asked the city's 32 school districts to tell him what practices worked best in reaching the holdbacks. Clearly, this was a policy in search of a program. The mayor and chancellor, having rejected input from the public and not thought out the consequences, lurched ahead.

Three or four years later, five independent studies came out concluding the program had come up short largely because of the very problems parents had warned about. The Board of Education stuck by its own statistics and hailed the program's success, distorting test data to show an exaggerated rate of promotion after summer school. However, by 1984, the city had quietly begun phasing out the program. In short, Gates (no relation to Bill) was a failure.

The episode should have served as an historical object lesson for the current administration. Instead, Mayor Bloomberg has recited the “let’s end social promotion" mantra in every grade. He took credit when the number of holdbacks almost vanished in 2009. Their near-disappearance was because the cut-off scores needed to reach “Level 2,” the threshold of promotion, had been set so low that kids could advance to the next grade by guessing. The mayor was too busy to acknowledge this fact as he ran for re-election to a third term.

In 2009, Albany was finally forced to admit its exams lacked rigor and that tough standards had to be imposed. So, the state and its test publisher increased the number of items required to pass in 2010. Many more students wound up in Level 1, the lowest performance category, making them eligible for additional services. Upon that news, the Board of Regents approved a waiver: Districts wouldn’t have to provide such costly help. As had happened under the Koch administration, which scaled back its own standards in the face of fiscal constraints, city students who needed extra support did not receive the services to the extent they should have. Once again, budget trumped need.

But the Bloomberg administration has done more than echo the Koch administration's mistakes on the use of standardized tests to govern promotion. It has expanded on them. High-stakes test data have become the basis for denying tenure to teachers and rating their effectiveness via complicated value-added formulas that give major weight to how well their students do on statewide exams whose scoring in recent years has been anything but reliable. And flimsy test results have been overextended to generate school report cards, identifying and justifying which will be closed, restructured, turned around, etc.

All but invisible amid these furies, the troubled promotion program has been relegated to secondary or tertiary status, an ironic outcome, perhaps—one showing how education has devolved from focusing on the children to a preoccupation with administrative and organizational matters.

Fred Smith

But the voices of parents that were long ago ignored never died. Unaddressed concerns have grown louder about how testing and its misapplied results have damaged education. A spectrum of resistance is emerging now among parents who question and conscientiously object to putting their sons and daughters through the testing wringer. The proposals range from advocating that informed parental consent be a pre-condition for testing, to more boldly opting out of a program some see as inimical to learning, to flat-out calling for a boycott of next months' test.

We shouldn’t forget that our current raging debates started in the classroom. Somehow I feel a mixture of ambivalence and perverse consolation in knowing that children hold in their hands the most potent weapon in education today: the No.2 pencil. Armed with this, they fill in circles on answer sheets that control the fate of teachers and schools, as well as their own.

===
AFTER BURN

Confused about what might happen if you decide to opt your child out of high stakes testing in New York this year?  Opting out is not for everyone, but if you have already considered this (or if you want to learn about other ways to challenge high stakes testing):


- Check out our new flier at www.changethestakes.org
- For additional information on how to opt out visit http://nystoptesting.blogspot.com/
- And if you have already decided to opt out contact us at changethestakes@gmail.com


Please repost the petition demanding a non-punitive opt out process on Facebook and share via email, Twitter, etc.

http://signon.org/sign/give-new-york-state-parents.fb1?source=s.em.cr&r_by=1228146&mailing_id=3021

Thanks for your support! 


Andrea from the Change the Stakes Campaign

Did Rhambo Blink in Settlement with CTU?

UPDATED WITH NEW INFO (in blue): Friday, March 30, 9AM

From Substance:

Fight back against Longest School Day a major feature of the Board of Education meeting

The battle in Chicago over the longer -- or linger -- day will go on despite the settlement as Rhambo Emanuel wants to impose a longer day but without having to pay the teachers other than a small pittance. Earlier in the year he engaged with a pissing contest with the union, trying to go around then by offering individual schools bribes if they would adapt the longer day this year instead of next. They mmanaged to get 13 schools to vote for it (with one school reporting that a custodial worker broke a tie vote.

The union jumped in and stopped the bleeding pretty quickly which was a real defeat for Rhambo. Despire what some would consider union busting on the part of teachers at the 13 schools who voted for the longer day or were coerced into it (where's Justice Alito when we really need him) the union sued the Chi DOE violated basic collective bargaining rights.

So they settled and the teachers will get a raise. Did the union get everything? Probably not. But they didn't cave and given the assault the union has undergone in Chicago over the last 2 decades this is only a beginning. Lots of people think a strike is possible in the fall when the full implementation of the longer day goes into effect without matching pay. I'll do more on this aspect --- a whole bunch of NYC activists are heading to Chicago the weekend of May 5-6 for the Labor Notes conference which will focus on the strike issue.

Said CPS spokeswoman Becky Carroll: “We choose to focus on the classroom, not the courtroom and this settlement is an attempt to avoid the courtroom.”

Yes. that means they knew they would lose so they settled. I guess the CTU could have waited them out but is saving the ammo for the big fall battle. Another reason I feel is that these 13 schools in essence went against union policy and by putting some money in the pockets of the teachers at these schools is a way to win them towards the value of the union. Assume next year that Rhambo and his minions will make enormous attempts to split the union, with faux E4E groups and Teach for America spewing forth how they are about children while the union is about adults.

Here are 2 articles, the first from George Schmidt at Substance.

Chicago Teachers Union reaches settlement on pay for 'Pioneer School' teachers

John Kugler - March 29, 2012
The Chicago Teachers Union (CTU) and the Chicago Public Schools (CPS) have settled a long-running dispute over CPS’s unlawful implementation of a longer school day at 13 neighborhood schools without properly compensating the teachers for the extra hours of work. The agreement was signed by both parties following the Board of Education meeting on March 28, 2012.


Flanked by parents, teachers, and community leaders, CTU vice president Jesse Sharkey (above at microphones) spoke during the protest rally prior to the March 28, 2012 meeting of the Chicago Board of Education. Substance photo by George N. Schmidt.
As reported in August and September 2011 in Substance. CPS unilaterally implemented the Longer School Day Pioneer Program beginning on September 26, 2011, with the last implementation date in January 2012, at a total of 13 schools. To induce teacher cooperation, CPS paid teachers up to $750 stipends and up to $150,000 to each school that participated in the program.

The CTU filed Labor Board charges, alleging that the Longer School Day violated its bargaining rights, and the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Board unanimously voted on October 20, 2011 to seek injunctive relief blocking CPS from implementing the program at any of other 600+ public schools whose staff is represented by the CTU, and referring the initial 13 schools to a hearing before an Administrative Law judge. Rather than face a court fight, CPS agreed not to impose the longer school day at any more schools this school year.

“Today’s settlement is a great victory for collective bargaining in Chicago, and a step forward for the Chicago Public Schools,” says CTU President Karen GJ Lewis. “The longer school day will give CPS students the schools they deserve only if sufficient resources are devoted to making it work, including fair compensation for teachers. We have serious reservations whether CPS will devote sufficient resources system-wide to maintain reasonable class size, educate the whole child, provide robust wrap-around services, and provide quality facilities. But CPS makes its first good faith step in that direction today.”

Today’s settlement resolves the fate of the 13 schools. The agreement effectively guarantees those teachers the same salary for the 2011-12 school year that teachers will receive next school year when the longer school day is implemented system-wide. Under the agreement, CPS will initially pay over $300,000 in prorated payments of up to $1,500 for each teacher employed at the 13 schools.

CPS has also agreed that when the labor contract is concluded for the 2012-13 school year, these teachers will be paid the difference between this year’s compensation (including the $750 stipend and $1500 settlement) and next year’s negotiated salary. The effect will be that the salaries negotiated for next school year – when Mayor Rahm Emanuel imposes the longer school day at all CPS schools – will be paid to the teachers at the 13 schools retroactively for this year.
 --------

Chicago teachers, district settle lawsuit over longer school day pilot

BY ROSALIND ROSSI Education Reporter rrossi@suntimes.com March 28, 2012 6:58PM

Teachers in Chicago public schools that agreed to pilot a longer school day starting this past fall will be paid an extra $1,500 under a deal announced Wednesday.

The settlement between Chicago Public Schools and the Chicago Teachers Union resolves a CTU lawsuit accusing CPS of illegally circumventing the collective bargaining process in its attempts to forge ahead with a longer day pilot.

CTU officials agreed to drop their suit in exchange for extra payments within the next 30 days of $1,500 for teachers in schools that started a 1 1/2 hour longer day in the fall, and an extra $750 for those who started a longer day in January.

CPS also agreed to pay teachers at the 13 schools the difference between this year’s compensation and next year’s if a higher salary is ultimately negotiated for next school year. Contract talks have gone on for several months.

The new $1,500 is on top of an extra average of $1,500 the typical CPS teacher received for working in a longer-day pilot school, starting in September. More than 200 teachers were affected, union officials said.

CTU President Karen Lewis hailed the deal as “a great victory for collective bargaining.’’

Said CPS spokeswoman Becky Carroll: “We choose to focus on the classroom, not the courtroom and this settlement is an attempt to avoid the courtroom.”

ALSO NOTE:

Professors challenge CPS push to evaluate Chicago teachers based on 'growth' models

By George N. Schmidt - March 27th, 2012 | 1 comment

One hundred local academics representing virtually every major college and university in Chicago and the Chicago area came together on March 26, 2012 at a press conference. The purpose was to oppose CPS teacher evaluation . . .

Having Lunch With Spencer Robertson of Pave Charter

It isn't often I get to go to lunch with a billionaire. Or rather, the son of a billionaire. Especially the son of a billionaire (recently deceased Julian Robertson) who can say to dad, "Buy me a charter school (PAVE) that I can implant in a highly successful public school (PS 15) while I wait for you dad to get your pal Bloomberg to give me mucho millions to build my own building, even if it comes down to using public money to the tune of $75,000 a student."

Well, today was that day. I popped over to PS 15 to take Julie Cavanagh to lunch --- I want to make sure that the baby coming in 3 months is being well fed. But Julie assures me "no problem" as she's eating everything in sight -- except meat. (Boy what I would give to see her chomp into a burger.)

As I was checking in I had a few young people in front of me who were clearly not "public school." You know the type if you have a charter school in your building. The very pale type. And thin. And dressed a certain way. Clearly PAVE was recruiting new teachers  --- maybe a bit of teacher turnover going on?

Well, Julie and I headed over to the diner across the street and there was Spencer with about 8-10 "recruits" sitting at a table. Was it my eyes or did they all look alike? Do they have a cloning machine over there? Actually, they all looked like a version of Spencer  - 15 years ago. Guess what? Not one that had the same skin shade as the children that go to PAVE.

Well, Julie and I had a jolly good lunch. Spencer did not pick up our check, though the recruits probably got a free lunch. Then they were off to the tour of the wonderful things PAVE is doing with the kids. On the way Spencer pointed to a former student at PAVE, now back at PS 15 (one of many), explaining the parent did not agree with the PAVE policy of hiking test scores by holding over scads of kids so each succeeding year they take a test geared for kids a year younger.

As a matter of fact I hear that PAVE had so few kids in the 4th grade due to so many holdovers in the 3rd grade which led to some parents moving their children back into PS 15 -- they had 12 in a class NS  had to merge the classes in mid-year. I guess the sales pitch changed from low class size as they turned one of the rooms into an art room and now are trying to sell parents on PAVE on their art program.

I wonder if on the day of parent recruitment Spencer will be treating them to lunch in a restaurant. Shouldn't cost too much.

The way PAVE is going, when the millions of dollars for the new building, which as I mentioned now amounts to $75,000 per child, we may see that number rise to $100,000.

Well, gotta run. On my way into the city to meet Michael Fiorillo for Korean barbecue. (I'm locking up my cat Bernie before I leave). Maybe we'll send Spencer the check.

You think eating out twice in one day is too much? If Julie won't eat meat I'll do it --- for the baby, of course.

AFTER BURN
MONDAY- APR. 2.6:30 at NYU
See Leonie in action as she kicks Charter Center James Merriman's ass. And clips of both movies. Yummie. I may go in early to eat.

Is there an Inconvenient Truth behind Waiting for Superman?

 

Why is the UFT Ignoring This? Thoughts on Turnaround

REVEALING COMMENTS FROM 2 NYC PARENT ACTIVISTS:

I found it interesting that Elaine could not produce for me the language in the grants that mandates an evaluation system—you’d think the chief of turnaround would have it ready at hand, since that's what they're using to argue their hands are tied by the feds.

Why is the UFT ignoring this? --- Thoughts on turnaround, state and federal guidance.
 - email from parent activist Paola de Koch

Mulgrew was very up front w/ me that he supports continued if ameliorated mayoral control and wants to look at other cities where it is going well...

Yet his toadies near the top of the org will proclaim he is NOT! Are they misled? out of loop? guilty of wishful thinking?

----- Anon Parent activist in response to Paola

I cannot imagine they [the UFT] didn't see this coming and I find it very troubling that Mulgrew brushed off my question about the turnaround at the CEC presidents dinner. There's something that doesn't smell right here because you’d think they would be all over the "mass firings" required by the turnaround model. But they clearly are not-- although individual teachers at the turnaround schools are giving heartbreaking testimony about finding initiatives they spearheaded in the EIS’s for the” new schools” all the while not knowing whether they will be called back in the fall.  ---Paola

If you are confused about why the UFT functions the way it does, Vichy anyone?

You have to follow the bouncing ball on this email exchange between 2 parent activists who are scratching their heads at the UFT response, or lack of on the turn around model. One has to ask why a parent (as so many have been doing) is doing the basic kind of work the UFT should be doing?

Paola de Koch started the ball rolling with questions about the DOE implementation of the turn around model after conversations with the chief DOE office on that issue. Her entire email is the last item. (It's a bit long so I put it below under the ******).

Another parent (B) responded with this:

March 26, 12:02 PM
Excellent work- wow!

Can we try to get UFT attorneys on this?

Does anyone know Carol Gerstel well enough to reach out to her? I know Leonie does...as does David Bloomfield....

I was at that first OPA briefing last June where the restart model was introduced- turnaround too? and the DoE explained they'd need UFT buy in on the evaluation piece but were confident they'd get it before the deadline and were creating a turnaround CFN just for these EPO's or something like that- I have to find my notes because I may have garbled this...

Paola: 12:14PM

I certainly don't know Carol but I'm not sure how reaching out to the UFT attorneys will help. I cannot imagine they didn't see this coming and I find it very troubling that Mulgrew brushed off my question about the turnaround at the CEC presidents dinner. There's something that doesn't smell right here because you’d think they would be all over the "mass firings" required by the turnaround model. But they clearly are not-- although individual teachers at the turnaround schools are giving heartbreaking testimony about finding initiatives they spearheaded in the EIS’s for the” new schools” all the while not knowing whether they will be called back in the fall. I raised the issue of budget-busting ATRs vs. same allegedly lousy teachers recirculated through the turnaround schools with Elaine-- the pat answer is that the teachers will be "a better fit" !

I better stop before I have a fit!

Paola

Parent B responds at 12:23PM

I know, I know- the UFT is either an incredibly stupid and careless organization ((there may be some of that operating here) or there is a whole series of deals; horse trades; parries, feints and thrusts being played out on so many levels that we outsiders (and I include the membership and 90% of the UFT employees here) are not aware of that come into play in these "negotiations" and position formulations.

Mulgrew was very up front w/ me that evening that he supports continued if ameliorated mayoral control and wants to look at other cities where it is going well...

yet his toadies near the top of the org will proclaim he is NOT!

Are they misled? out of loop? guilty of wishful thinking?

Between doE and UFT we are all sunk- look at the past 10 years.

The 5 men in a room- (adding Mulgrew and Bloomberg to the traditional 3) has been a disaster for our schools, kids and communities.

No matter the personalities of say the UFT head or the Governor, etc the outcome is just plain disastrous.

Why parents and teachers don't rise up is beyond me!

************

Original email from Paola de Koch

March 26, 11:35 AM

Good morning all:

-- DOE makes it up as they go along, but they do have help from the state.

Here is the original (2010) state guidance document on the SIG grants and the four school improvement models:http://www.p12.nysed.gov/accountability/TitleI/sigfieldguidance.html

The New York State Education Department will provide LEAs with SIG grants under 1003(g) to facilitate implementation of one of the following four school intervention models in Tier I and Tier II schools:

• Turnaround: Phase out and replace the school with a new school(s) or completely redesign the school, including replacing the principal and at least half the staff.  
• Restart Model: Either convert a school to a charter school or replace a public school with a new charter school that will serve the students who would have attended the public school. Under certain circumstances, districts may also enter into contracts with the City University of New York or the State University of New York for them to manage public schools.
• Transformation: Similar to the turnaround model, but with a requirement for an evaluation of staff effectiveness developed by the LEA in collaboration with teachers and principals that takes into account data on student growth, multiple observation-based assessments, and portfolios of professional activities. Evaluations would serve as the basis for rewarding effective teachers and removing ineffective teachers after ample professional development opportunities. A school that opts for a transformation model does not close but rather remains identified as persistently lowest-achieving until it demonstrates improved academic results. 
• School closure: Close the school and enroll the students who attended the school in higher achieving schools in the LEA.

Note, by the way, that DOE keeps conflating the models and the SIG grants, which are two separate and distinct things. You (probably – even this is not certain) cannot have a SIG grants without a model, but you certainly can have a model without SIG grants.

I found it interesting that Elaine could not produce for me the language in the grants that mandates an evaluation system—you’d think the chief of turnaround would have it ready at hand, since that's what they're using to argue their hands are tied by the feds.   I went back and found the final US DOE regs published in Federal Register and updated guidance for the SIG grants:

http://www2.ed.gov/programs/sif/2010-27313.pdf
 http://www2.ed.gov/programs/sif/legislation.html#guidance

On a quick read, I cannot find the evaluation requirement but it's pretty dense stuff so that doesn't mean it's not there or cannot be construed as being there (will review more closely later).  The most likely scenario, though, is that the evaluation was a requirement added by the state (that's probably why the person who spoke with Noah attributed it to John King).  And note that the evaluation requirement is not in the restart model (which was applied in some of the schools now subject to turnaround), not even at the state level.  BTW, the PEP voted on Tuesday to fund the EPO’s there were given contracts under the restart model so they can continue working with the schools even after they go to turnaround.  Conclusion? 1) it's not really a matter of money or federal requirements; 2) they find the money if it's a matter of paying off private contractors (which may have been the fiscally prudent thing to do anyway in view of breach of contract suits).

 One thing to keep in mind: the language re: evaluations in the state guidance document is pretty ambiguous.  Although it explicitly says the transformation model requires “an evaluation of staff effectiveness” that would serve as the basis for rewarding/removing teachers, it's not clear at what point the evaluation system must be in place (the guidance recognizes that at least the reward part will occur “later in the process”).  What the guidance is unambiguous about, however, is that for transformation (and turnaround) model, “the principal must be replaced prior to the start of the 2010-2011 school year. There is no exception for retaining the principal was been in the school for more than two years.”  So what about Barry Fried, “longtime principal” of John Dewey HS, whom many wanted out as an ineffective leader a few years ago but is still in place even though the school went into transformation? I am sure there are similar situations elsewhere.  Yes, they make it up as they go along, picking and choosing the mandates they feel constrained by.

 Also, on page 2 of the guidance document, the state says that the funding is "contingent on the LEA's demonstrated capacity to implement the selected models and an approved application and budget that includes sufficient funds to implement the selected intervention fully and effectively in each school."  A reasonable construction of this rather opaque language is that NYC DOE must have demonstrated that it had money set aside to implement the models regardless of whether the federal funding came through.  If I'm right, the public is once again being taken for fools by DOE.

Enough boring, picky stuff for now.  But why is the UFT ignoring this?
Paola

I'm going to add this comment from Gary Rubinstein on Gotham Schools re: turnaround:

Gary Rubinstein wrote: Mass Insight is a company has has made millions of dollars by convincing districts that they hold some magic secrets to school 'turnarounds.'  Certainly every school can improve with more resources and better management, but most schools won't improve by that much because they are already doing a 'good' job under the constraints they face. But any plan should be the 'least invasive' necessary.  Why fire more teachers than you have to, considering that the instability that results from massive staff turnovers has adverse affects on students? So the Mass Insight guy says that it is better to err on the side of too much firing.  He admits, though, that there is 'nothing magic about 50 percent,' which is something everyone knows but I'm glad to see someone from that perspective saying it. For the US DOE SIG grants, which they are currently touting as a great success, 75% of the schools chose not to fire half their staffs.  So even with the option to, they didn't because they knew that this would not be the best way to 'turn around' these schools.  Such reckless activity would likely make the schools worse.

Friday, March 30, 4:30pm - UFT Chapter Elections: Advice for Candidates

Friday, March 30, 4:30pm

Even if you are a current CL and Delegate – join with others who have had it with Unity and want to take back the union one school at a time.

I know a lot of people focus on the big tent UFT elections which will take place in 2013. As someone who has been deeply involved in the past 3 elections I will make the claim that the upcoming school level elections for chapter leader and delegate(s) are way more significant.

This is where Unity Caucus not only consolidates its control over the Delegate Assembly but also assures that information from the opposition will never reach the overwhelming majority of teachers but locking down the mailboxes.

Even when there are schools with opposition chapter leaders, Unity sends in the district reps to make sure all teachers in the system get Unity lit. (An illegal act by the way in the use of union employees).

The chapter leader job (which I did for 3 years with great enthusiasm) is a big one. To do it right requires some skill. I learned a lot on the job. Now some people working with the State of the Union groups are organizing events for those interested in running this spring for CL or delegate (a much lighter requirement --- attend a DA once a month and report back). This group intends to be a support group for CLs in organizing their chapters by sharing successes and failures

Here is the announcement -- come even if you are a current CL and Delegate. Join with others who have had it with Unity and want to take back the union one school at a time.

Thinking about running for chapter leader or delegate (or know someone who is) but need help with your campaign?

Not sure what building a strong chapter would entail?

Friday, March 30, 4:30pm – Happy Hour – Discuss the ins and outs of a successful campaign for Chapter Leader and of building a stronger chapter. 

Shades of Green Pub - 125 East 15th Street

4/5/6/N/R/Q to Union Square 

Feeling Demoralized?
A strong union chapter can counter demoralization


In this year’s annual MetLife Survey of the American Teacher, teacher satisfaction has hit a 20-year low point. Teachers nationally are feeling more demoralized than ever, and New York City is no exception.

 
Building strong union chapters in our schools is one of the best ways to counter this demoralization. Through an organized, active chapter teachers are empowered to work together with colleagues to fight for positive working conditions for ourselves and learning conditions for our students.

-------------------

I'm not making this meeting as other working groups of the State of the Union are meeting on the West Side at the Skylight Diner (34th St and 9th Ave) at 4:30 to work on a variety of issues. I'm interested in questions of how to build a caucus with a democratic structure -- the nuts and bolts.

Class Size Rise, UFT Sighs

One of the basics of Ed Notes which began publishing in 1997 has been class size and I brought it up at the UFT numerous times, often to a tepid response. That was why when we formed ICE in 2003 a major plank was calling for the UFT to put class size at the top of negotiating demands. They laughed at us.

Back in the fall of 2000 I put up a reso at the delegate assembly calling for the NY Teacher to publish every single instance of class size violation.

At that time Randi and I were getting along and she even gave me her mic to make the reso (I caught her cold). It was voted up. The NY Teacher published these numbers -- for 2 years and then stopped.

So when this article is published at Schoolbook my evil brain always wonders why not focus on this issue given that the UFT has the capability to gather this data very quickly through its network? I'll leave it to others to figure out why.

We do know that the ed deformers disparage class size, so the response from Tweedles is expected. (Hey Barbara Morgan, how many kids were in your classes when you went to school?)

Elementary Students in Large Classes Tripled, Report Shows

Finally, Krugman Mentions Ed Deformers – but Leaves Out Obama

Updated: March 27, 2012, 9AM

NY Times columnist Paul Krugman is one of my favorites. After Obama was elected he was a noted critic of the administration’s economic policy. Lately he's focused his lens on the Republicans and the right wing backers of the tea party. Clearly he has shifted to making it clear that there is a stark difference between the two parties. Not so fast. Certainly not when it comes to education.

For quite some time many of us have been hoping Krugman would address the ed deform privatization movement. In his March 26 column he does so for the first time but in the broader sense of the right wing Koch Brothers control of organizations such as ALEC, which would privatize your teeth if it could. He even ties their influence to the Florida Stand Your Ground Law which is getting so much attention in the Trayvon Martin murder.

Many ALEC-drafted bills pursue standard conservative goals: union-busting, undermining environmental protection, tax breaks for corporations and the wealthy. ALEC seems, however, to have a special interest in privatization — that is, on turning the provision of public services, from schools to prisons, over to for-profit corporations. And some of the most prominent beneficiaries of privatization, such as the online education company K12 Inc. and the prison operator Corrections Corporation of America, are, not surprisingly, very much involved with the organization. 

Ahhhhh! Finally he mentions schools and the K12 online scam.

ALEC’s claim to stand for limited government and free markets is deeply misleading. To a large extent the organization seeks not limited government but privatized government, in which corporations get their profits from taxpayer dollars, dollars steered their way by friendly politicians. In short, ALEC isn’t so much about promoting free markets as it is about expanding crony capitalism. 

And in case you were wondering, no, the kind of privatization ALEC promotes isn’t in the public interest; instead of success stories, what we’re getting is a series of scandals. Private charter schools, for example, appear to deliver a lot of profits but little in the way of educational achievement. 

Yes, we do get that most charters perform worse than comparable public schools. But why does Krugman ignore the role Obama and the Democrats have played in the push for privatizing public education along with Arne Duncan, Cuomo and Rhambo Emanuel (who makes Bloomberg look benign)? With all the right wing attacks on everything Obama does or says you will not see many negatives on his ed policy – unless from Ron Paul and other state righters. Republicans and the Koch Bros. won't attack Obama's ed policies, because they not only agree with most of them but actually formulated many of them.

There is an interesting anomaly when Obamacare comes under such attacks but the removal of local power from running their own school systems and the forced expenditure of enormous funds on unnecessary testing and teacher evaluations and down your throat curriculum materials is ignored and even praised. Both the Obama administration and the right wing privatizers want to eliminate elected school boards, especially in urban areas and hand dictatorial power over to the mayors – a perfect scenario for the privatizers to use their billions to gain control over the schools.

Sadly, Krugman lets the Democrats as perpetrators of school privatization and the charter school movement off the hook.

Charter School Parents Speak Out Against Abuse

The paternalistic/racist attitudes behind charter schools are increasingly being revealed as many former charter school parents are recoiling in horror at the methods being used to modify the behavior of children of color. A word to our teacher readers --- charters are not all about an attack on you and the union but on the kids and parents and communities. Don't forget that and only talk about it from the teacher point of view --- it is not the message we want out there. Every teacher is a PR person for the response to ed deform --- with family, friends etc. Broaden your message and reframe the debate. When ed deformers say we are about adults and they are about children, throw it back in their faces.

Check out: A former KIPP teacher comments on her experience and "At KIPP, I would wake up sick, every single day"


So here is an interview I filmed for our movie with 2 former Achievement First Brooklyn parents with Leonie Haimson doing a wonderful job of interviewing (not my strength). And I give Leonie full credit for insisting that we set up these interviews and insisting we MUST include some of this in our film. In fact it was the last interviews we did before finalizing and I think they really cinch our message. But we could only squeeze in a few sound bites. You really have to watch the entire hour and a half. People in Providence used this footage to battle attempts by Achievement First to take over parts of the system.

Here, out pals in Seattle are using the footage to fight off the charter school movement. Watch them directly on vimeo for better playback:

http://vimeo.com/30227766
http://vimeo.com/30238788

Achievement First Charter School Parents Speak Out : A must watch

Posted on March 25, 2012 by seattleducation2011 | Leave a comment

 

I have read and heard stories about charter schools that are geared toward minority students, as most are, but this is the first time that I have watched in-depth interviews of parents who had their children in these charter school franchises.
“Behavior modification training” is a term that one parent described her son’s first experience in this charter school.

May Taliaferrow, Former parent at Achievement First, Brooklyn, NY starts out as an avid charter school supporter but finds parents are shut out and children are subjected to severe discipline and ends up telling her son how sorry she was for putting him the school.

Achievement First Charter School Parents Speak Out: Why they removed their children Part 1 from Grassroots Education Movement on Vimeo.

“My child was made to sit on the floor until he
‘earned’ a seat.” A revealing interview on how all too many charter schools view children of color when it comes to discipline: total repression.
When Leslie-Anne Byfield “won” the lottery for a charter school in Brooklyn she felt her prayers for her child’s education had been answered. Until the horror stories began.

Achievement First Charter School Parents Speak Out: Why they removed their children Part 2 from Grassroots Education Movement on Vimeo.

Check South Bronx School for his stuff on hedge hog Gideon Stein (Gideon Stein Looks Down His Nose From His Balcony).

And let me point out to those out there who feel we are wasting our time and spitting against the wind, these are some of the fruits of our efforts. Yes. even a few people can nudge the needle.

By the way, here is a poster for an upcoming screening in LA:

After burn

You know one thing I can say about my teaching --- and I never claim to have been a fabulous teacher --- I absolutely made sure my kids got as much joy out of being in my class as I could manage. I know, I know. School should not be about joy but about pain. Sorry. Not in the grades I taught -- 4-6. It is not that I didn't spend a lot of time teaching but I also gave the kids lots of space to talk to each other and to me. I felt my class was one of the most socialized I saw. A friend who visited said I was the most relaxed teacher she has ever seen. Do you think that has an impact on kids who might already have some tension in their lives?

I did do test prep and all the stuff we did in the 70's. But my admins--- old timers, while they weren't always happy with my methods felt I was a good enough teacher to trust me. But a new data princess principal who took over in 1979 changed all that with enormous pressure to get scores. And yes the school rose but the learning didn't. That's where I became a foe of the future of ed deform -- in 1979. After that year I began to consider ways out of the classroom even though I taught in the self-contained room (in the old days that did not mean spec ed but the classroom tchr as opposed to a cluster or pull-out program) until 1985 when I left for 2 years to get an MA in computer science -- a decision I believe prompted by the lack of freedom to teach. When I got back in '87 the principal who did not want me to teach a test grade enticed me out with the promise of a computer cluster. I did not hesitate for long and did the next decade doing that which I enjoyed but it was nowhere close to being a real teacher in a class of kids for an entire day and entire year -- the most grueling and exhilarating experience.

Afterburn 2

I have written about how the son of ICE's Vera Pavone has a best selling novel as a first time author. Chris Pavone was on NPR yesterday. Listen here.

Eva in desperate scramble to meet enrollment targets is assisted by the DOE

UPDATED Sunday, March 25, 11 PM---

I have long heard that schools suspect that the NYC DoE's Enrollment Office is under-enrolling schools for several years and then using the declining enrollment trend, that they create and control, as justification for colocation or closure. ---
Lisa Donlan

Where is the press on issues such as this?

 

For those fighting introduction of charters or raising the caps on the number of charters, here is some powerful ammunition: http://schoolfinance101.wordpress.com/2012/03/24/snapshots-of-connecticut-charter-school-data/

Snapshots of Connecticut Charter School Data schoolfinance101.wordpress.com In several previous posts I have addressed the common argument among charter advocacy organizations ...

I keep adding info to the bottom of this post as it comes in. Really worth checking out.

Originally posted Sat., Mar. 24, 11PM

The latest headlines are that Bloomberg will meet his goal of starting 50 more charters before he leaves office. But what if he gives a charter party and no one comes? Well it's very simple, see. Just have Tweed send out kindergarten rejection letters to parents applying to local public schools in areas with a new charter coming in that people don't seem to want to send their kids too, thus putting them in a position of being forced to choose the charter.

This came in from a parent in Williamsburg:

Considering Success Academy's massive ramp-up of direct mail and advertising in just the past week here in Williamsburg, it seems obvious that, despite her claims of receiving 700 applications for her new Success Academy Williamsburg, Eva's in a desperate scramble to meet her enrollment targets.

Now we hear of a new tactic from the DOE: An SLT parent at a local public school informed us that the DOE is suddenly FORCING all non-magnet schools to issue rejection letters to all non-zoned students applying for K -- even though most local schools have plenty of kindergarten seats! The letter reads that the child has not been given a seat but has been placed on a wait-list.

So while magnet and district-wide (CHARTER) schools are able to offer acceptance letters, and have done so this week, parents may get rejections from great local schools that HAVE SEATS!

I have never heard of this, but it feels like it has the Success Academy stink all over it. Anyone have any insights?

Complaints can be directed to es_enrollment@schools.nyc.gov.

 The other day Leonie nailed them in this blog post:

Aggressive marketing by charter schools, soliciting applicants

The Bloomberg administration and the charter school operators always claim that in the rapid proliferation of charter schools across the city, they are merely responding to parent “demand” but this ignores the aggressive recruiting methods they use to build up their “waiting lists.”  Eva Moskowitz has hired paid recruiters to “poach” students for her Success Academy charters, as in the video below, outside PS 261 in Brooklyn.  Not to mention her extensive and expensive advertising campaigns, in which she spent $1.6 million dollars on marketing efforts alone in 2009-2010, amounting to $1,300 per incoming student.

This year, there is evidence that Harlem in particular has become so oversaturated with charters, that they have been forced to go far afield to solicit applications.  Parents as far away as lower Manhattan have receiving mailings from Democracy Prep and Harlem Link.     

More at:  Aggressive marketing by charter schools, soliciting applicants

 Jassica Bouvier of GEM put this summary together:

Last week, NYC parent Lucinda Rosenfeld wrote an op-ed regarding the effect of Success Academy Charter Schools’ marketing strategy and its detrimental impact on already struggling public schools. Yesterday, the organization issued this letter written by a Success Academy parent on the Upper West Side defending the high “demand” for Success Academy and “debunking” the claims made in the op-ed regarding the central role that charter schools play in school segregation.

We wanted to sum up some of the parent and teacher responses to the organization’s letter fresh off the presses this morning (Thank you Lisa Donlan for summing up the criticisms so coherently!):

The letter’s author claims that there is high parent demand for Success Academy in Cobble Hill. It would do us good to remember that the charter process centers on one question: can the school meet its target enrollment?

In fact, the whole support/demand piece of the charter application is all about reaching larger enrollment numbers.  The charter must do aggressive outreach to ensure that the school can meet its enrollment targets. If there is community opposition the charter must address it, changing its proposal if necessary to encompass or address any objections. This means the school risks missing its targets. There simply is not enough demand for these “choices,” which is why some charters are scaling up to capture market share dominance and break into new market segments.

And here is Lisa Donlan's comment in full:

So then why did UWS not meet its enrollment goals this year?

Has the charter authorizer SUNY CSI monitored this?

Because that is what the charter process is all about- can the school meet its target enrollment?

In fact, the whole support/demand piece of the charter application is all about reaching that goal- the charter must do outreach to ensure that the school can meet its enrollment targets.

If there is community opposition the charter must address it, changing its proposal if necessary to encompass or address any objections THAT MEAN THE SCHOOL RISKS MISSING THE TARGET ENROLLMENT.

That is the measure of success for a charter, initially.

After that it has to be financially sound (or cook the books enough that the fraud is not caught by the auditors/authorizers), and meet its performance goals ( self defined in the charter).

We all hear the HSA spin that it is the "assault" ( I suppose driven by the UFT, according to the false spin) that caused parents to flee, that it was the law suit that put getting public space in danger (like it did for Girls Prep in D1) that caused otherwise willing parents to run away.

But more spin and lies will not cover up the facts. There simply is not enough demand for these "options" which is why some charters are scaling up to capture market share dominance and break into new market segments.

I predict that, as these charter chains expand, and the potential demand levels out or even declines, as the myths /marketing/ PR and spin are exposed as such, not only will enrollment drop but so will "performance".

There just won't be enough suckers born every minute that produce high test scores and bring few needs for the charter chains to keep afloat.

If and when they go bust, they 'll very likely have taken our public education system with it.

 No doubt the Evas and Erics and Curry Boykins, the lawyers, hedge funders and ambitious pols will be long gone, hopping onto the next sexy thing to fuel their coffers and careers.

Lisa

And then there is this news about the replacement for Pedro Noguera on the SUNY charter authorizing board as the scum-sucking NY Post issues a warning. Initial commentary by Leonie.

Important development in charterland

New head of SUNY charter committee, replacing Noguera, is Ken O’Brien, who was the strongest voice in opposition to the co-locations of the SuccAcademy chain at the last televised meeting. Acc. to article below, in the letter in which he accepted appt, O’Brien wrote:
“I am committed to making certain that we do not let charters, which constitute 2.5 percent of New York’s school population, dominate our committee agenda,” O’Brien said in a letter accepting the appointment.
He also said the policy of allowing charter schools to share building space with traditional public schools — which has fueled protests and lawsuits — needs to be revisited.
I strongly suggest that all communications w/ SUNY institute be copied to both O’Brien and McCall in future. They have got to hear clearly how the co-location fiasco is undermining our public schools. Here are the emails:
trustees@suny.edu and carl.mccall@suny.edu and ken.o’brien@suny.edu

Charter jitters over new chief
By ERIK KRISS and CARL CAMPANILE
Last Updated: 6:58 AM, March 23, 2012
Posted: 12:59 AM, March 23, 2012

A college faculty honcho and union man has been tapped to head the powerful State University panel that approves charter schools — setting off alarm bells from advocates who fear charters will face more resistance.
SUNY Chairman Carl McCall appointed history professor Ken O’Brien, president of the University’s faculty senate, to lead the SUNY board’s committee on education and college readiness.
The panel recommends whether to approve or reject new charter- school applications.
O’Brien is a member of the Union of University Professions, which is the college affiliate of the K-to-12 teachers union that opposes charter schools.
“I am committed to making certain that we do not let charters, which constitute 2.5 percent of New York’s sc hool population, dominate our committee agenda,” O’Brien said in a letter accepting the appointment.
He also said the policy of allowing charter schools to share building space with traditional public schools — which has fueled protests and lawsuits — needs to be revisited.
Sources in the charter community — fearing retribution — expressed their worries about the O’Brien appointment anonymously. They likened it to putting the fox in the hen house.
But McCall insisted O’Brien’s union affiliation is not significant.
McCall also noted that O’Brien has been a member of the panel that has routinely approved more than 90 charter schools.
“Ken is a professional educator who has been open-minded on charter-school issues,” he said.
“Everyone on the board has been supportive of charter schools . . . I don’t know why charter -school advocates would be concerned with him.
“All you have to do is look at his record.”

Lisa Donlan follows up with:


I would like to know more about these tactics to intentionally shrink, in order to better destroy, our public schools as well as to  squeeze them out and replace them with charters.

While Eva is the force behind the most high profile and ambitious of the charters chains , she is not alone to use these tactics.

Clearly there is a handbook of best practices that the charter operators, private companies all,  share with each other, or at least imitate closely.

And it is also evident that OPP and Chancellor Walcott, like Joel Klein before him, are blatantly favoring charters schools that do not operate on an even playing with their district counterparts on so many levels.

Besides additional funding; political clout and access;, support by monied think tanks, foundations, politicians, education officials and the main stream media; the very policies and operations of the DoE are setting up our district schools to fail.

I have long heard that schools suspect that the NYC DoE's Enrollment Office is under-enrolling schools for several years and then using the declining enrollment trend, that they create and control, as justification for colocation or closure.

Has anyone else heard anything about this issue?

Is there an expedient way to investigate or FOIL the enrollment information? DoE can claim it is a function of "choice" but since their methods and algorithms are far from transparent, it is hard to believe them in this instance.

The overall lack of transparency and authentic data leaves the DoE open to these kinds of suspicions,  that one can not help but believe, after all the evidence of cooked books and biases DoE has employed to advance a political agenda.

There should not be continued or revised Mayoral control for a myriad of reasons, the least of which is autocracy has precluded public access to completely transparent data.

Except of course in the case of the politically motivated release of the flawed Teacher Data Reports!

Lisa