Ed Deform Partners: Farina (and UFT?) Promote E4E - an Alternative to MORE?

A district PD held in B'klyn for special ed teachers hosted a speaker from E4E and at least one teacher I know reports that her AP was distributing E4E materials and encouraging teachers to join. She reported this to her C/L who in turn passed the info on to the District Rep but neither seemed particularly concerned. I imagine this sort of stuff will mushroom in the event that the ruling in the Friedrichs case goes against public sector unions. Yet Mulgrew and Co continue to sing the praises of their new found 'partnership" with DiBlasio and Farina.---- email to MORE Discussion list

The partnership between E4E and the DOE continues from the Bloomberg years, but this time with UFT support I suspect. Behind the scenes is an alliance between E4E and the UFT/Unity leadership as E4E has modified (and hidden) its anti-union rhetoric. Like taking a position against Friedrichs (see below).

Why does E4E oppose Friedrichs? My guess is the Gates and more liberal funders want to keep Quisling unions like the UFT alive - as long as they

don't go rogue, Chicago style. And MORE poses the bigger long-term threat than E4E - if it makes headway.

Remember - both take money from a common benefactor - Bill Gates - and probably many others.

My guess is that because E4E is not directly challenging Unity in an election, they see the promotion of E4E as a much better alternative to groups like MORE since both groups have shown they can attract a younger generation of teachers, especially those interested in social justice work.

If an E4E ran against a MORE in a chapter leader election, guess who Unity would support?

For me, over the past 4 years or so, the influx of younger teachers into the opposition has been a major change in UFT politics since the 70s. As teachers age out toward the end of their careers, the long-term prospects of engaging in a battle for the ground game in Unity is not attractive. It is the older gen of people who are opposed to Unity who are more impatient than the younger ones who have long careers ahead. E4E offers a policy directed diversion from active opposition to the leadership - in essence, a partnership - which explains "She reported this to her C/L who in turn passed the info on to the District Rep but neither seemed particularly concerned".


Evan Stone to e4e membership: [TFA Evan spent 3 years at most teaching] before getting the E4E gig. I mean, why actually teach children when you don't have to?]

In just a few weeks, the U.S. Supreme Court will begin hearing arguments in a case that has the potential to disrupt the relationship between teachers and their union-which is why I wanted you to know where E4E stands and how you can learn more.  Join me on Tuesday, January 5 at 7:00 p.m. EST for a national telephone town hall to learn more about this case. In the case, Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association (CTA), ten public school teachers are arguing they should not have to pay "fair share" or "agency" fees, even though they benefit from the collective bargaining and rights those fees pay to establish and protect. This is an attack on our unions and would threaten their ability to protect and serve all teachers. That's why E4E stands with our unions in opposing this case. Here's what you need to know: First, our teacher members like you drive all E4E positions. In a recent poll of over 1,000 E4E teachers, educators support paying fair share fees by a rate of more than three-to-one and said that all teachers should contribute to the cost of the benefits we receive. Second, unions are a critical voice for teachers to elevate the profession and improve outcomes and conditions for our students. A ruling against our unions is a ruling against the collective voice of teachers. Even though E4E doesn't always agree with our unions on every policy question, we deeply believe in the right to organize and collectively bargain, and that all teachers benefit from the work of the union. It has long been E4E teachers' and our organization's stance to be both pro-union and pro-change at the same time. By working through our unions, we can elevate teaching and create lasting changes in our public schools that will benefit all students-but only if we show up and participate. As someone who believes in empowering and informing educators, I'm inviting you to a special opportunity to get the facts about this case, and find out what you can do to ensure your voice is heard. Join me for a call on Tuesday, January 5 at 7:00 p.m. EST to learn more about this case. In our poll, many of you said you wanted to learn more about this case, and what it could mean for your union and your profession. By taking just an hour to join this call, you can get the facts you need to be a resource for your colleagues and an advocate for teachers in your district and beyond. RSVP now: I'm in I hope you have a restful winter break, and I am looking forward to helping you elevate your voice in the new year. Thanks, Evan Stone Co-Founder and Co-Chief Executive Officer Educators 4 Excellence P.S. To help you learn more about the case, we've put together a new webpage that explains how we developed our stance on this case, how this case could affect teaching, and more-I hope you'll check it out.

UFT Politics: Activists and Organizers Are Not the Same Thing

If you notice the Ed Notes masthead, I use 3 key words: Educate, Organize,

Mobilize - in that specific order. Unless there are extraordinary circumstances, mobilizing people to act is impossible without engaging in educating - or as I prefer - informing people on a regular basis of what the issues are.

That process leads to the very difficult organizing stage -- building structures that last. Look at recent articles on Trump and Ted Cruz in Iowa.
Donald Trump Campaign Lags in Mobilizing Iowa Caucus Voters

---

Strong in Polls, Yet Trump Lags On the Ground -

Cruz has a ground game while Trump skips directly to mobilizing and I believe Cruz will trump Trump.

But on to the UFT and attempts to build a ground game in opposition to Unity. Many people I meet consider themselves activists and I often find that many activists are poor as organizers. They often avoid the education and organizing aspects of the tripod on a regular basis.

What is needed is a small army of organizers to build that ground game. And to my mind that hasn't happened yet which is why I can predict that the very idea of defeating Unity is fiction. Unity has a ground game over the past 50 years. Even now they have started the election campaign by sending their full-timers into schools to ostensibly do "presentations". Of course having the advantage of using our dues to pay people to do that is quite an advantage.

One thing I learned from our colleagues in Chicago - they not only were activists but also organizers and built a ground game fairly quickly with contacts and supporters in the majority of schools. At times I feel there are too many activists and not enough organizers here.

I get to observe the actions of a lot of people in the UFT, on all sides of the fence. Many people in the opposition movement to the UFT leadership brand themselves as activists. They are ready to act on a number of issues. How do they "act"? They go to meetings and support rallies. They are often so busy they don't have time to be organizers.

Some confuse activism with organizing. They are not the same thing. 

I am always interested in how organizers and activists relate to their colleagues in different ways and how they are viewed by their colleagues. I'm especially interested in the people who become chapter leaders where they get to lead an entire school as a union leader.

Are they organizers or activists?

I deal with a lot of people who feel lost when they take on the role of chapter leader. The job is hard enough but especially hard for people who view themselves as activists who feel they have to use their role as chapter leader to bring their personal  political viewpoints or the viewpoints of other organizations they belong to to the people who elected them.

This is tricky ground when (and if) you declare to your colleagues where you stand and which groups you work with. I say "if" because the key is when one runs were they open and above board with the members or hide some of their affiliations for fear they would lose votes.

The key role for a chapter leader is as an organizer engaging in education and organizing - don't even think about mobilizing - and also building relationships with colleagues and especially in elementary schools, parents and even beyond to the community. This is not easy for overwhelmed teachers who take on the role of chapter leader.

The UFT leadership actually views CLs as their tools and employees to do their selling of the Unity line disguised as UFT policy. The monthly district rep meetings are loaded with "things to do" for them, often leading to little time to do the educating and organizing.

It is the rare CL who sees beyond the UFT crap while also defending the members and working politically to make sure they get the support of the UFT.

Next: How do activists and organizers differ in UFT caucuses?

Video - NYC Principal Jamaal Bowman Defies Gag Rule on Opt Out - High Stakes Testing and the Black Community: Just Say No!

Jamaal Bowman has become a leading voice, for the opt out movement, along with MORE UFT Presidential candidate Jia Lee, who often partners with him. See the video below.

Here is the blurb posted on the Your Black Education (YBE) network on you tube

Standardized tests? Principal Jamaal Bowman says 'Know your rights'. President Obama recently spoke out against excessive standardized testing. The POTUS claimed that this issue, "takes the joy out of teaching and learning, both for them (teachers) and for the students". Long before Obama's declaration, Jamaal Bowman, Founding Principal of CASA (Cornerstone Academy for Social Action) in Bronx, NY, has been advocate for student and parent rights and the movement to opt out of standardized tests to promote more holistic approaches to assessment of student learning. Bowman speaks with YBE about the impact of standardized tests on Black and Brown students and offers his advice to their parents.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6kNcUDwjE8&feature=youtu.be

ESSA/COTH - Chop Off Teacher Heads

Installed in every public school under ESSA

One can only love the term “Every Student Succeeds Act” and its supplemental act –COTH - if every student doesn’t succeed: Chop Off Teacher Heads – unless the teacher happens to be a charter school teacher.

Forgot to post my Dec. 11 Wave column.

School Scope:
ESSA/ESEA - UFT Support of Revised Fed Ed Bill is Misguided
By Norm Scott

The ESEA Act (Elementary/ Secondary Educational Act) was initially part of a civil rights package passed in the 60s under Lyndon Johnson to counter southern racist schools systems that shortchanged schools with black kids.

Fordham College Professor Mark Naison writes in a blog post titled, “Why ESEA Must Be Fought by People on the Left as Well as on the Right”:

“There was a time when you needed the power of the federal government to counteract local tyrannies shaped by racist electoral practices and corporate control of local governments No more. Today, it is the federal government which is controlled lock stock and barrel by large corporations, insuring that any federal policy will contribute to their enrichment and an expansion of their power. A defense of federal power is no longer a "progressive" position. In education, it has led to disastrous consequences ranging from the mindless impositions of test driven curricula and assessments, to the destruction and privatization of public education in many of the nation's cities.”

While I oppose the new version, now called ESSA (Every Student Succeeds Act), I also am wary of turning things over to “local” control which really means the states, which are mostly right-wing anti-union, anti-government and pro-privatization. Even our own so-called progressive state has a governor who supports all of the above and a corrupt state legislature where even our own local Rockaway reps will jump at any chance to funnel money out of our public schools into private schools, where they often send their own children.

Bloggers opposing ESSA were out in force with titles like: ESSA--Now Less Crappy than Before, ECAA Would set the country back more than a half century, The Good News: ESEA Will Bring an Era of Open Rebellion, ESEA Will Mean 50 Fronts in the War Against Corporate Education Reform. And one blogger renamed it: Say NO to ECAA (Escalating Charter Assistance Act). And make no mistake about it – privately managed charters will flourish under ESSA.

Mandating federal money for services into poverty schools, often termed Title 1, was an attempt to level the playing field. I always taught in a Title 1 school and we received certain support services for push-in and pull-out programs, many of which had little impact because school administrators often had so little imagination or will to attack the real problems. They often misused the Title 1 people as school and even personal servants. (I once saw our ESL teacher on her knees dusting shelves in the principal’s office.)

Well, anyway, ESEA had a lot of flaws. But things only get worse in the world of education deform. First came the No Child Left Behind under President Bush in 2004, a bi-partisan bill that Ted Kennedy was behind, as were out national and state teacher unions, who were given a little stool at the table to have “input”. So they went out and sold it. I am proud that my self-published newsletter joined others around the nation and took a stand against NCLB as being a horror story, which Education Week called “universally despised.”

Then came Obama and his Education Secretary, Arne Duncan who doubled down on NCLB with Race To The Top (RTTT) which tied student test scores to rating teachers using formulas called Value Added Method (VAM), which an April 2014 Washington Post article titled “Statisticians slam popular teacher evaluation method” exposed the sham of VAM. RTTT was a fundamental assault on public schools and favored charters and a general privatization movement and also included massive amount of testing and enormous amounts of money going to consultants and testing companies.

While teacher union leadership kept their heads in the sand, opting for any money from RTTT no matter how tainted the public reacted – or at least parents reacted with a growing opt-out of the tests movement with the epicenter being in NY State where 220,000 students opted out, 20% of the total. Long Island is the epicenter of the epicenter. In New Jersey, 120,000 student opted out.

Suddenly even slime ball politicians like Gov. Cuomo, who has been pushing so hard to attack teachers and tie student test scores to their jobs, noticed and is now backing off, a temporary retreat aimed at killing the opt-out movement because so many parents listed the tying in of scores to teacher ratings as the number one reason for opting out. Make no mistake about it. With the teacher union leadership sucking up to the alter of ed deform, the major friend teachers have are the parents leading the opt-out movement. No wonder the ed deformers and our own union leaders are so opposed to opt-out.

One can only love the term “Every Student Succeeds Act” and its supplemental act –COTH - if every student doesn’t succeed: Chop Off Teacher Heads – unless the teacher happens to be a charter school teacher.

Norm blogs at ednotesonline.com.

Michael Elliot: No Threat Left Behind: New York City Stifles Opt Out

No Threat Left Behind: New York City Stifles Opt Out

 Michael Elliot 

Film Editor, Director at FluidNY and public school parent in Brooklyn NY

 Co-Writer Kemala Karmen
Deputy Director, Co Founder NYC Public

With more than 200,000 students -- or nearly 1 in 5 of all eligible test takers--refusing to sit for annual standardized tests, New York State made headlines last spring for leading the nation in sheer number of opt outs. The parent-led opt out movement worked hard to get those numbers, getting an unexpected boost from voters disgusted by Governor Andrew Cuomo's hubristic overreach in pushing the Education Transformation Act of 2015. (The legislation proposed that as much as fifty percent of a teacher's evaluation would hinge on test score "growth.")  However, if you take even the tiniest of peeks at the distribution of those opt out numbers, one thing will immediately become apparent: New York City, with a test refusal rate of only 1.4%, is not keeping up with the pack. Why? What's going on?

As parents of New York City public school children, we can tell you. And it's not pretty. Whether you are a parent in a "high performing" school with plenty of middle and upper class children or a parent with a child in a "low performing" school with a population weighed down by the stresses of poverty, there is a powerful deterrent custom-made for you when it comes to making the decision of whether or not to allow a child to take the tests.

The most dire of threats, school closure, falls heavily on the city's 94 Renewal Schools.  These schools, which serve predominantly low-income, minority, and immigrant communities, receive the "Renewal" designation largely due to their poor showing on state tests. (Graduation rates come into play for high schools.) When the de Blasio/Fariña administration introduced the Renewal Program, which is supposed to pump resources into struggling schools, it was positioned as an alternative to the unpopular school closure policy favored by Bloomberg/Klein. But a school can only be removed from the program through an improvement in test scores--on the same disastrous state tests that have been roundly criticized by parents, teachers, administrators, and now, even Governor Cuomo's own Common Core Task Force.  Parents are scared of losing their schools completely, whether to charterization or state receivership, and the test-based exit criteria pressures them into seeing testing as essential for school survival. In an effort to raise those scores come hell or high water, children who need so much more than drill-and-test are fed the narrowest test-prep workbook curriculum.

The gravest impediment to opt out that the NYC Department of Education hangs over the heads of parents and children in other communities is the middle school and high school admissions process. Unlike elsewhere in the state, New York City has a complicated, and medical-school-competitive, admissions model. (The comparison to medical school is no exaggeration; New York hired the same team who designed the system that matches medical school students to residencies to design the system that matches teenage students to high schools.) Although state law now precludes test scores from being the sole or primary factor in a school's admission formula, the city still sends student scores to the receiving institutions. This makes parents distrust even those schools who say they don't consider test scores at all. After all, if the score is right there in front of the admissions team, what's to stop them from looking and using it to make shorthand determinations about the student? Moreover, admissions rules seem to be constantly changing and no one knows what the future will bring. Currently, in all but a few instances, only 4th grade and 7th grade scores are used, respectively, for middle school and high school admissions, but will the rules change? Every principal will tell you there's no way to know. Getting into the school that is a good match for your child is on the minds of parents from the moment their children hit the 3rd grade, so the fear around this issue is enough to make any parent pause--and to make many of them think, well, even if only 4th grade counts, to be safe, I probably should have my 8 year old take the third grade test as practice. Ditto, the 5th and 6th grade tests, because 7th grade is the admissions ticket. As for 8th grade, that's practice for the new, more stringent, high school Regents exams. There are no avenues for discussion here. In many districts, there is no neighborhood middle school that you can fall back on, and few zoned high schools remain. It's school roulette, and the NYCDOE holds all the cards.

In much of the state, parents were motivated to opt out because they wanted to protect their beloved teachers. They reasoned that refusing the tests would mean there would be no spurious data for test-based teacher evaluations. (Note: No parent we know is saying, "Don't evaluate our teachers"--just don't evaluate them via this discredited test-based model.) But here in the city, Chancellor Fariña has stated that growth in test scores should weigh 30% or more in teacher evaluations. Indeed, in some ways the city has outdone the state in tying scores to evaluation: the state sets a threshold of 16 scores before it assigns a teacher rating; in the city a mere 6 scores is considered a sufficient sample for both the state and local "measures." Six scores is three students taking both the English and Math exams. Imagine: a teacher may have a classroom of 32 kids (the contractual limit for elementary school), but have the lion's share of their evaluation based on how three children perform. This understandably makes teachers nervous about who those three children might be and families may feel that burden as they weigh test refusal.

Finally, a gag order threat hangs over teachers and principals.  They are not allowed to speak to parents about opt out.  They can offer no insight into the tests themselves, they cannot advise you if the tests are inappropriate for your child, they can only ask you what you want to do.  In many instances teachers and administrators don't have accurate information themselves on the viability of opt out, so they repeat the lines given them by the NYCDOE: Take the tests!  There is a crackdown going on right now to try and strangle the New York City opt out community entirely.  Teachers and principals are threatened with being labeled insubordinate if they speak the truth about testing.  If they make any attempt to protect children from the abuses of these tests, their careers hang in the balance.  This goes for principals as well as teachers.  Watch as Anita Skop, Superintendent of Schools in Brooklyn's District 15, clearly following Chancellor's orders, explains to parents that under no circumstances should teachers or principals speak with parents about their concerns regarding the tests. 

There are no protections here, no local school board or activist union to shield teachers and parents from the wrath of city government.  Cross the line and there can be consequences, albeit vague and opaque in nature.  And all of this is coming from the allegedly progressive, education-savvy Mayor Bill de Blasio and his handpicked Chancellor Carmen Fariña. Parents are being denied their rights, educators are being silenced, and it's the kids who suffer.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-elliot/no-threat-left-behind-new-york-city-stifles-opt-out_b_8814024.html?fb_action_ids=10208600467273646&fb_action_types=og.likes

School Scope: Did Cuomo Blink on Testing? NYCDOE Gag Order on Teachers Over Opt Out?

Submitted for publication Dec. 18, 2015 in The Wave (www.rockawave.com).


School Scope: Did Cuomo Blink on Testing? NYCDOE Gag Order on Teachers Over Opt Out?
By Norm Scott

When 220,000 children, 20% of all students in New York State, didn’t take the tests last spring, the highest percentage of any state in the nation, politicians like Governor Cuomo take notice.

Did Cuomo blink over his draconian teacher evaluation policies when facing a growing parent opt out movement over the extreme testing policies in New York State? Well, the UFT leadership is crowing that Cuomo backed down, taking an undeserved victory lap since it was the actions of parents, not the UFT, that is making waves. In fact, the UFT/Unity Caucus leadership has opposed the opt-out movement and urges teachers to stay out of it.

UFT President Mulgrew crowed in yet another triumphant email (they’re also taking credit for the current warm weather) claiming, “Governor Cuomo's Common Core Task Force issued its report. “In essence, the task force report urges a fundamental reset of education policy in New York State, including a four-year ban on the use of state growth scores to evaluate both teachers and students.”

Not so fast, boys and girls. Some bloggers actually read the Cuomo task force report. Sullio, who writes “The Pen is Mightier Than the Person” blog led with this headline:

Don't be Fooled by Cuomo's Mea Culpa on Testing
“As New York Governor Andrew Cuomo pretends to listen to parents and teachers, he hopes they don't know how to read. Buried at the bottom of a recent press release announcing the ‘recommendations’ of his education task farce is proof that Cuomo is open to changing nothing:
‘The Education Transformation Act of 2015 will remain in place, and no new legislation is required to implement the recommendations of the report, including recommendations regarding the transition period for consequences for students and teachers. During the transition, the 18 percent of teachers whose performance is measured, in part, by Common Core tests will use different local measures approved by the state, similar to the measures already being used by the majority of teachers.’ Yes, tests will still count for 50% of a teacher's evaluation….everything else in the Lobbyist for the Student's (Cuomo) infamous Education Transformation Act remains, including receivership and weakened due process rights. As Cuomo maintains, the law will not change. The test is still king.” Read Sullio’s full post: sullio.blogspot.com/2015/12/dont-be-fooled-by-cuomos-mea-culpa-on.html.

Cuomo, trying to undermine an opt out movement which is partially fueled by parents’ objections to having their children’s teachers judged by test scores, is pulling a bait and switch by calling for a moratorium on “using state tests” to judge teachers but leaving other measures in place.

Opt Out, the Teachers’ and Parents’ Best Friend
Clearly, the opt out movement has become a major threat and with testing season coming in the spring, it will be interesting to see if the movement keeps expanding around the state, but more importantly, here in the city, which has had a much lower opt out rate, due in large part to repressive policies of the NYCDOE and a complicit UFT. On December 9, I attended a testing forum in District 15 (Park Slope and Sunset Park) which had the largest number of opt outs in the city last year. District Superintendent Anita Skop declared that teachers would be violating the law if they discussed opt out and the negative aspects of the testing all the time program with parents, equating discussing opt out with parents as being political. Parents in the audience objected. Filmmaker Michael Elliot captured the moment: https://vimeo.com/148527338.
Change the Stakes, the leading opt out parent movement here in the city (full disclosure – I am on the steering committee), issued a statement.

IS TESTING EDUCATIONAL OR POLITICAL?

In a grassroots effort, more than 1,000 parents whose children attend 228 schools (in every borough and in 31 of the city’s 32 school districts) signed a letter (attached) asking for a meeting with NYC’s Mayor and Chancellor to discuss their concerns about the absence of free and open dialogue around high-stakes testing in city schools, their request for engagement yielded no response.

Now, in an indication of the NYCDOE’s true regard for parents and parent rights, a superintendent has been caught on videotape telling families at a public forum that their children’s teachers and principals cannot share their honest and expert opinions of the state’s standardized testing program. The superintendent claimed that such speech would be “political,” and therefore prohibited by the state since educators are public employees.

“To form my own opinions about the state tests,” said Tim Dubnau, a District 15 parent who attended the panel, “I need to hear what my children’s principal and teachers think. They know my kids, and they have actual on-the-ground experience seeing how testing affects children and what goes on in the classroom.”

Parent Kemala Karmen sees this as a failure of the NYCDOE to prioritize the interests of children and their families. “By silencing educators, the NYCDOE and NYSED are making a conscious choice to deny parents information. If not, why did the de Blasio/Farina DOE refuse to amend the 'Parents’ Bill of Rights' to include the right of test refusal, even though the City Council voted unanimously in Spring 2015 to insert right to opt out language in the bill?” District 15 parent Johanna Perez makes clear why this omission is so crucial, “My sister was the only one in her Bronx school who had even heard of opt out--and that was only because I told her about the movement to opt out in her niece’s D15 school. Many parents, especially those in communities of color, aren’t even aware that they have a right to refuse!”

When a superintendent of schools says that teachers, as representatives of the state, cannot talk about the educational value of the tests that they administer to children, we have to question who exactly is being political. When Chancellor Farina and Mayor de Blasio define a conversation between parents and teachers about an educational matter as political, parents feel disregarded, and children lose.

Mulgrew Punches Himself in the Face as he Celebrates End of Common Core

Report from December UFT Delegate Assembly:

Mulgrew took total credit for the improvements in the new federal education bill lessening the impact of testing as well as the recent report from the Cuomo commission.  I couldn't stand it, and yelled out, 'What about the opt-out movement"....he did not respond, besides being "upset" that someone had not followed the meeting procedures by calling out.  A few people around me did smile and nod their heads in agreement. 

Also he was taking "credit" for NY state not using the Common Core Standards going forward.  Wait, Wasn't I at the AFT convention and heard him say he would punch someone in the face if they took his Common Core away???.... Lisa North, MORE

 I hope Mulgrew's face is healing after punching himself for taking away his common core - see video below.

Mike Antonucci reported on the confrontation between what he calls the militants in the union (Chicago, etc) and the capitulators (my word) to ed deform:

The militant wing is mostly hostile to CCSS, seeing the standards as part and parcel of the corporate education-reform agenda. The establishment wing has been forced to triangulate by defending the standards but attacking the way they have been implemented.
The split between the two factions was illustrated at the 2014 AFT Convention. The delegation from Chicago introduced a resolution to place the AFT in full opposition to CCSS, but it was handily defeated in committee, a committee dominated by New York City’s United Federation of Teachers, the backbone of the AFT’s establishment wing.
Instead, AFT delegates passed a resolution stating the union would “continue to support the promise of CCSS, provided that a set of essential conditions, structures and resources are in place.”...

.....The War Within

#AFT14 Video - Sarah Chambers and The Speech that Triggered Mulgrew "Punch in Face"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSv34FPBIB8

Michael Mulgrew defends Common Core: 'You sick people ...

www.nydailynews.com/.../michael-mulgrew-defends-commo..... 

Michael Mulgrew defends Common Core: 'You sick people ...
www.nydailynews.com/.../michael-mulgrew-defends-commo...
Daily News
Aug 8, 2014 - Teachers union honcho Michael Mulgrew 

unleashed a venomous screed directed at anyone who would dare 
threaten his beloved Common Core agenda. 

... “And I’m going to punch you in the face and push you in the dirt
 because this is the teachers’!”. 

... United Federation of Teachers ...

Edwize Donates its Body to Mad Science

A perfect resting spot for an organization that believes in junk science like VAM

...if NYC Educator hadn’t posted about it who would have even known Edwize was gone?"... EIA, Not With a Bang, Or Even a Whimper

A top-down union, uncomfortable with anything but command-and-control, will likely never succeed in cyberspace...." .... Journal of Labor Research on the union’s experiments in cyberspace, cited by EIA Intercepts

NYC Educator reported on the late, unlamented and unnoticed death of the UFT's blog, Edwize (RIP Edwize).

Mike Antonucci connects some more dots at EIA and opens with a real knee slapper:

Remember Edwize? It was a blog started by the United Federation of Teachers in 2005 as an effort to engage the then-burgeoning education reform blogosphere on equal terms.
 
One of the first posts informed us “that teacher unions are democratic institutions, and that we consider dissent a necessary component of democratic conversation.”

 We have to stop for a minute and clutch our sides as we laugh our heads off. Mike continues:

Actual dissenters didn’t find this to be the case and thanks to one of them – NYC Educator – we learned that sometime in the last few months Edwize was shut down.

Of course various forms of social media have largely supplanted blogs as interactive methods of communication, but if NYC Educator hadn’t posted about it who would have even known Edwize was gone?

Teacher unions’ use of the Internet has much improved over the years (remember OWL.org?) AFT president Randi Weingarten has been tweeting 1,000 times a month for five years and has 53,000 followers. But they still fail to fully embrace two-way communication with their own members – a problem that predates blogs, Twitter and Facebook.

Well, you can read about this on the blogs every day - and as there is a UFT Delegate Assembly on Wednesday I'm looking forward to more of this:



Mike hits on some interesting aspects of top-down unionism and how it is threatened by bottom up that touch home:

Back in 2002, three NEA staffers wrote an article for the Journal of Labor Research on the union’s experiments in cyberspace. They concluded, “With modern cyber software, in short, content creation can be decentralized and democratized. Members can be empowered. But first, of course, members need to be trusted. A top-down union, comfortable with command-and-control internal information-sharing processes, might be unnerved by this prospect. A top-down union, uncomfortable with anything but command-and-control, will likely never succeed in cyberspace.”

And so it has come to pass as they predicted.

At the time, I felt this was an encouraging view, but didn’t go far enough.

Sigh. All NEA can think about is how cyberspace will help it get members to do something. Completely unexamined (perhaps even unimagined) is what if cyberspace helps members to get NEA to do something? What if members share internal information not previously filtered through the communications staff? What if they decide to support or reject legislation not included in the union’s legislative program? What if they become unhappy meeting once a year in a group of 9,000 and would prefer a different arrangement? A membership truly engaged in NEA’s workings might make it a stronger union, but it would be a fundamentally different union from the one that exists now, and in ways utterly unpredictable to those who hope to harness that power.

WOW! Mike gets the essence of bottom up unionism in ways that even some of our allies don't. He ends with this point linking to the social justice union movements.

Even 13 years later we haven’t reached that point, but we’re closer to it than we have ever been.

Note Mike's links to many of our pals. He is the only ed reporter to actually notice things brewing underneath. And that's something coming from a guy funded by anti-union forces. I can't imagine what he will write if that vision of the NEA ever came to pass in the UFT/NYSUT/AFT, but boy would I love live to see it.

NYCDOE Gag Order - Political Repression at the DOE - District Supt. Claims Teachers Who Discuss Opt Out Violate Law: Must See Michael Elliot Video

Is MORE UFT Presidential candidate Jia Lee violating state, city and DOE laws by talking opt out? Come and get her.

Michael Elliot made this brilliant 3 minute extract of the District 15 Town Hall Testing event we attended on December 9 with panelists Carol Burris, Kathy Cashin, Jennifer Jennings, Dist. 15 Supt Anita Skopp and a principal and Assistant principal - see my pre-report here.

Skop claimed it was against the law for teachers to share political views with parents or students, equating opt out with political views  - with former NY State principal of the year Carol Burris who has been talking opt out for years, sitting a few seats away.

• [See Carol's latest WAPO blog on The Cuomo Common Core report: hint, more hype than relief.
  https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2015/12/14/how-far-will-n-y-gov-cuomo-really-go-in-overhauling-common-core/]

One of our ace opt-out parents Janine Sopp pointed this out from the audience - how come Carol does it? Another parent called out  to say how can Skop equate a discussion with parents on the quality and impact of tests and pointing out they did have the option to opt out with endorsing political candidates, pointing out that was as much an educational issue as talking about homework. See Skop's lame response in Michael's video. (I have video of the entire event and will get off my ass and post unedited versions of each panel member -- Carol Burris is just dynamite and Cashin was pretty good too -- and made sure to give Change the Stakes' Fred Smith some recognition.)

Cashin did point out that Skop was part of a chain of command linked to Farina and de Blasio - so though the buck stops there, let's not let Skop off the hook with the "I was only following orders excuse" excuse which so many people under Joel Klein claim now.

And what will the UFT tell you about these outrageous claims to muzzle teachers?

Arthur Goldstein has a few words for them at NYC Educator:

You Can Fool Some of the People Some of the Time, but You Can't Fool Opt-Out NY

Even as UFT leadership breaks out the champagne over NY State's largely meaningless Common Core recommendations, Governor Cuomo ought to keep worrying. Because the fact is UFT leadership has played virtually no part in opt-out. They've delayed and prevented meaningful resolutions, and backed up reformy claims that aid would be withheld if not enough kids took tests that Cuomo himself called meaningless, except for rating teachers.

Arthur closes with the reason MORE chose the leading teacher voice for opt-out, Jia Lee, for its presidential candidate to run against Mulgrew.

We need to take a stand with the opt-out movement, a true grassroots movement fueled by truth, passion and a desire to do what's right for our children. If Michael Mulgrew and his loyalty-oath signing sycophants are unwilling or unable to do the right thing, they should move over and endorse opt-out activist Jia Lee for UFT President. 

If you are a teacher without a union to protect you, get on your knees and thank an opt out parent for defending you.

https://vimeo.com/148527338




Also see Alan Singer:

Opt-Out Campaign Must Continue

www.huffingtonpost.com

The parent and teacher campaign to have children opt-out of high-stakes Common Core aligned testing is remarkably successful.

Wonderful Video - Seen Them Opting Out on Broadway - Alan Schwartz - The Bald Piano Man

-- Or how teachers' asses are being saved by the parent opt out movement.
"The unions didn't accomplish this. Parental anger at an arrogant state executive forced the change. To the power of parents everywhere."

Brilliant lyrics and performance by Alan C. Schwartz, The Bald Piano Man, December 11, 2015, https://www.facebook.com/alan.c.schwartz.3/videos/10153748881142889/

A Billy Joel parody reboot to celebrate Andrew's Cuomo's humbling about face on high-stakes testing. The unions didn't...
Posted by Alan C. Schwartz on Friday, December 11, 2015

Some of my high school friends tell me that teachers in their schools couldn't care less about the opt out movement because most high school students don't opt out of regents and other tests. But high school teachers have been swept up in the outcomes of the existential threat opt out presents to the ed deformers. Witness Cuomo's (temporary) retreat in an effort to cut the legs out of opt-out. Don't be fooled. Every teacher should do what they can (without getting into trouble with their admins) to spread news of opt out. Ie. contact Change the Stakes to have someone stand outside your school with leaflets at dismissal.

UFT Election Update: Take the Long March

There are so many comments out there on FB and blogs about how important it is to get rid of Mulgrew - and there is no time to waste.

They are so wrong to focus on Mulgrew rather than the Unity machine, which has been around for 55 years with only 4 leaders. But the important thing to note is that the machine endures while leaders don't - both Al and Sandy died way too young which seems to be the reason leadership changes - Sandy followed Al to the AFT and Randi followed Sandy when she died and the assumption is that when Randi leaves for greener pastures (we do wish her good health) Mulgew will move up to her place and someone is now sitting at the UFT who will be the next Mulgrew - and after a short honeymoon where things don't change, there will be desperate calls to get rid of Mr./Ms. X. I mean, who ever heard of Mulgrew until Randi chose him as her successor when it became clear that she would be leaving the UFT for the AFT -- only Shanker tried to do both jobs as president for a decade from 1974-1985 -- and no one else can get away with that today. So there will be a new UFT president at some point in the future. Just not this year.

The point is - focus on the machine, not the person at the top. And to beat the machine you cannot use drones from the air - or the internet/social media/blogs etc. Ground troops are needed to root out the rot at the school and district levels. That is a long view and teachers nearer to retirement don't have the time or patience to fight that ground game. So they often scream and rant and call for shortcuts - like let's sue them - over anything.

Hopefully, the 20, 30 and 40 something activists and organizers are willing to build a ground game and endure the trials and tribulations of doing so.

UFT elections are just temperature checks of where the ground game is at. And over the past 25 years, the ground game has been a zero-sum game with slight ebbs and flows, even as caucuses come and go.

The UFT Election Committee
Each election a committee is formed and each caucus is invited to send a rep. Not much is decided by the committee, other than setting election time tables and rules. But if there is a dispute, the committee decides and since Unity stacks it, we know how they will decide - like let's say every retiree vote is lost in the mail and MORE wins - Unity will go to the committee to protest the election - that procedures they set up themselves were somehow violated. If stacked courts must decide, so be it.

Amy Arundell chairs the UFT election committee and overall I would say that most people in the opposition find her one of the positive forces in Unity to deal with. I reported on who is on the committee (How Many Unity Slugs Does it Take to Run an election) and that in my estimation the election process would begin at the January DA based on the historic timetable before the last election, which was pushed back to February in 2013 due to the effects of hurricane Sandy. If the early Jan. scenario is followed ballots will go go out in March, if the latter February timetable, in April - which will include one week off for the holidays, thereby taking away some important campaigning time for the opposition to Unity Caucus. Ballots should be counted in late April-early May or mid-late May depending on when petitions are officially released.

What is important about the time frame is that from the day petitions are made available until the day ballots are counted, sometime in April or May, is that any UFT member can go into any school and put election materials in the mailboxes.

The standard campaign tactic is for every slate to race around to as many schools as possible stuffing 40 or 50 thousand leaflets into boxes, which apparently few bother to read - based on the election turnout. Some say the reason is these leaflets sucked - I don't agree - they may have sucked but I think people just dump stuff out of their boxes and even if they read the leaflets the election is irrelevant to most.

Unity will stuff 4 different glossy ads into every mailbox in the city, using their Unity Caucus machine and their full-time employees like District reps where they don't have people. Yet their vote totals are also abysmal.

MORE cannot reach every school and I contend that if it could stuff every box it wouldn't change very much.

The key is having people in the schools on the ground. But wait, you say. Unity has that and still can't get out the vote. And that is an interesting point.

Given the votes the opposition has gotten in the past, I estimate that a lot of them are coming from schools with MORE/ICE/GEM (and New Action from 1991-2001) people who are respected and work hard to tell people about the election. There just aren't enough of them - yet.

This time Unity will put lots of money into getting votes that they deem favorable to them out. They will send people into schools where MORE has strength to try to siphon off what they can and Unity CLs will be adopting some of E4E tactics - treating the staff to pizza parties for those who bring in the ballots for a mass vote.

By the way, each slate running does get a 2-page spread in the NY Teacher, which apparently few bother to read.

Next time I will tell you why much of this effort is a waste of time - unless it fits into a long-term strategy - which hopefully is a framework MORE is operating within - though there are times I am not so sure.

The key is for a caucus to establish a regular communication network reaching out to hundreds of schools, not just for the elections, but on a regular basis at the very least every 2 months throughout the year.

Jia Lee, UFT Presidential Candidate, Chastizes Mulgrew Over ESSA Support Alert

We have been reporting on ESSA:

• Massive Charter Giveaways in ESEA/ESSA Re-Write, P...
• ESEA/ESSA Pushed by UFT/AFT/NYSUT After Supporting...
• Randi/AFT/Mulgrew/UFT/E4E Join Deformers in Suppor...

Is ESSA a Hoax?

Ravitch, who supported ESSA but is posting all sides, just posted:
Nicholas Tampio, a professor of political science at Fordham University, argues that the Every Student Succeeds Act is a sham.

Jia Lee, MORE's presidential candidate is on the case:

ON ESSA:
Cross-Post from MORE

The Disturbing Action Alert from Michael Mulgrew

by Jia Lee, Chapter Leader, The Earth School
MORE/New Action 2016 Candidate for President of the UFT

Here is the disturbing email that all UFT members received on Tuesday, December 1, a day before the Federal HELP Senate Committee was to vote on the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), called Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). UFT President Michael Mulgrew urges us to contact our senators to “Vote Yes” and I can only stare in shock at the screen.

In what is being touted as a fix for the many problems of No Child Left Behind, members have a right to know that the full 1,059 page reauthorization came out only a few days before the vote. While it includes removal of teacher evaluations based on test scores and leaves the decision to the states, this does not do enough to disconnect misguided “accountability” measures from schools through the use of standardized testing. Further, there are grave problems that reek of catering to private interests. By now, we know that since NCLB, education policies have been rooted in the interests of private corporations and groups, such as ALEC, the Waltons, Rupert Murdoch, Bill and Melinda Gates and others. Read on to find out more that is being uncovered as the public has a chance to read and digest the densely packed document.

The logical “Action Alert” we would hope to expect would not just include a call to contact our elected officials to “Vote No”, but we would have been given the chance for some kind of analysis, even if there is a lack of time for discussion. There is a deja vu in the feeling of being rushed to take a position on something we hardly know enough about, such as the last contract negotiation.

Here are just some of the reasons why any UFT member in NYC, if given the chance to fully understand for ourselves the implications of ESSA, would never take an action to support its passing. Linked are the numerous articles by trusted and respected education experts in the movement to save our schools, responding to the the problems within this legislation that will most likely go into law. ESSA is riddled with language that opens the way for continued benefits for edu-corporations and venture philanthropists who the UFT leadership purports to fight against:

• The bill was issued for review on November 30 and then rewritten and redistributed one day before the vote. That hardly gave time for senators to exercise protocols for democratic debate over the 1,000+ page document. That alone should raise red flags, and in a world where folks are really following the presidential election, it makes sense that the UFT and AFT would support the passage of this bill, since it removes the federal role in how states determine testing and accountability. After all, the AFT announced an early endorsement of Hillary Clinton, whose connections to the elite would benefit from taking the issue off the table altogether.
• There is still annual testing mandated for grades 3-8 and high school science, with reporting based on race, class and English Language acquisition. The federal government did not remove the 95% standardized test participation rate currently necessary for schools and districts to avoid potential penalties, and has doubled down on heavily discouraging parents from choosing to opt their children out of standardized testing. Annual testing is, above all, a cash cow for testing and ed corporations. This will now be continued at the state, rather than federal level.
• Under Title I, Part D, “Pay for Success” investors can earn money for not referring students for special education services. This is alarming since, across the city, state and nation, our most vulnerable students are not receiving the services they are legally entitled to and need as it is. Read more here, in a piece that is posted on Diane Ravitch’s blog.
• Under the rewrite, teacher preparation programs now incentivize programs organized by the very venture philanthropists who have churned out short-term teachers for placement in poor urban districts with the goal of increasing student achievement through test scores. Read the Washington Post piece by Kenneth Zeichner, member of the National Academy of Education and professor of Education at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. and another must read piece by Mercedes Schneider here.
• Taking a step back, the entire process was political, with little to gain for our students, teachers and public schools. In fact, many of the components provide the space to increase charter caps, create an influx and incentivization of Teach for America type programs, alignment of tests to standards (Common Core or state produced), and the biggest hits are to our students who are English Language Learners and to special education mandates under IDEA. Read for yourself.

Instead of doing this analysis, the leadership credits the UFT, AFT and parents across the country for putting pressure on elected officials to remove the mandates for teacher evaluations based on value added metrics. This is incorrect. The UFT and AFT never placed any such pressure. In fact, they whole heartedly agreed to No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top. 

It was the grass roots organizing of parents, teachers of conscience and supporters of public education who made the opt out movement a force of change. Mulgrew once stated at a delegate assembly in June of 2015 that 19 teachers in a Brooklyn high school were being rated “ineffective” by their administrator. According to him, their VAM score saved them. We say that there is clearly some other problem that needs to be addressed at the school when an administrator is gunning for 19 teachers. Many teachers in our city can attest to the micromanagement so prevalent in our schools. Instead of addressing this most pressing issue for his members, Mulgrew tells us it’s fine when it works in his favor politically. 

Call to Action: If you feel compelled, United Opt Out has created an online petition where you can add your name to the list of people who are calling for senators to Vote NO.

Join MORE caucus as we continue to call for a broader analysis of the ESEA reauthorization to understand how this will impact our schools, communities, students and our profession. 

Today, the Senate passed the bill and Obama is expected to sign it. Mike Antonucci at EIA lays out the next 15 years under ESSA:


 

Randi Invades Detroit

Randi sends in shock throops in Detroit union takeover

How does one rally the membership against a state takeover of local schools with a national takeover of the local union?... Mike Antonucci, EIA

About 6 or so years ago Randi parachuted into Detroit to help negotiate another sell-out contract along with retired DFT president Keith Johnson. That worked out as well for DFT as for Newark, Washington DC, Philly, etc. 

David Bellel's graphic

Over the past decade, EIA's Mike Antonucci and I have chronicled AFT takeovers of local unions, not only over corruption like Washington DC but over locals that want to leave the AFT or because AFT leaders don't like the politics of the elected union leader, like Detroit which we reported on in August

Ed Notes Online: The Trial of Steve Conn: Is Attack on ...

ednotesonline.blogspot.com/.../the-trial-of-steve-conn-is-attack-on.html

Aug 4, 2015 - The Detroit Federation of Teachers executive board put president Steve Conn on trial this morning for conduct detrimental to the union. Even though Steve won 2 elections, they just threw him out of the union.

Last August, the executive board of the Detroit Federation of Teachers ousted its perennially agitated president, Steve Conn. When the rank-and-file had an opportunity to weigh in, a majority favored Conn’s return, but the margin fell short of the necessary two-thirds.

Oh, democracy. Even though Steve had the majority, they just decided to throw him out of the union so he could not win again.

In past AFT takeovers they sent in shock troops which Mike hinted at:
 there’s still the danger that AFT could airdrop the locksmiths and take over the whole operation.”

But that wasn't necessary:

Well, the airdrop wasn’t required because the DFT executive board opened the gates and let the army in.

And the best part:

“Internal elections would be temporarily postponed to permit all DFT leaders and members to focus, for now, on the goals of the campaign.”
Conn couldn’t run again for the presidency because he was also booted from the union, but certainly there was a danger that one of his allies could activate his base and regain the office.

You see, I often tell people in the UFT who think that taking over the union is just about beating Unity in an election that there would be consequences - they would protest the election to the AFT (Randi) and they would rule there were "issues" and then just take it over and maybe even put the elected president on trial.

How much fun will it be if they every decide to have a union election in Detroit if Steve Conn's people actually win again? Just throw all of them out of the union. I believe Steve is trying to organize a counter union and force a vote on which one teachers would choose.

Here is Mike's full report:

AFT Set to Assume Control of Detroit Local

And the Detroit News report.

And by the way, this Friday MORE is doing a support event for the Puerto Rico union, which actually broke free of what they termed the "bloodsucking AFT" a decade ago - they were too far away to drop in the troops and the AFT sued and lost.

Here are some ed notes pieces over the years on the situation in Detroit (One day I have to dig up the video of Steve Conn heckling Randi at a rally in 2012 at the AFT convention.)

Ed Notes Online: Detroit Teachers Recall of Weingarten Ally ...

ednotesonline.blogspot.com/.../detroit-teachers-recall-of-weingarten.html

Feb 14, 2010 - Detroit teachers have been fighting to recall DFT President (and major Randi Weingarten ally) Keith Johnson as part of the fight to stop the Arne ...

Ed Notes Online: Weingarten Ally, Detroit Teacher Union ...

ednotesonline.blogspot.com/.../weingarten-ally-detroit-teacher-union.ht...

Jan 15, 2010 - See comment 2 by Mike Antonucci of the EIA who checked the Detroit Fed of T web site which says the recall was illegal. Read on to where I ...

Ed Notes Online: Randi's Nightmare Continues: Steve Conn ...

ednotesonline.blogspot.com/.../randis-nightmare-continues-steve-conn.ht...

Jan 28, 2015 - Ed Notes Online: Detroit Union Election - Is Randi guy in ... Dec 06, 2010. Detroit teacher Steve Conn (above center) spoke to the Peace and ...

Ed Notes Online: Randi's Nightmare: DETROIT TEACHERS ...

ednotesonline.blogspot.com/.../randis-nightmare-detroit-teachers-elect.ht...

Jan 17, 2015 - Detroit teachers elected Steve Conn to head the Detroit Federation of Teachers today. Conn ... Posted by Norm @ ed notes online at 7:56 PM.

Ed Notes Online: January 2015

ednotesonline.blogspot.com/2015_01_01_archive.html

Jan 31, 2015 - At a demo in Detroit at the AFT convention in 2012, Steve constantly heckled Randi ... Ed Notes Online: Detroit Union Election - Is Randi guy in .

Massive Charter Giveaways in ESEA/ESSA Re-Write, Part 1 - Jim Horn

this corporate welfare bill will send billions in federal grants to segregated “no excuses” charter school companies, venture philanthropists, and real estate developers over the next six years. ...Schools Matter, Massive Charter Giveaways in ESEA Re-Write, Part 1

Why would our union leaders support a bill that will end up costing thousands of jobs for union teachers nationwide? My guess is that they know we are in the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire stage and are managing the dismantling as they lead teachers into the fire.

There was a time when some of the very same people and organizations (ahem, the UFT/AFT/NYSUT) supported NCLB. Some of the very same people are backing this ESEA rewrite which is not about local control but handing things over to increasingly rightwing, pro-privatization forces at the state level. Will these same people one day (soon?) lament their support as public education gets buried further under the charter onslaught?

federal funding favorability will go to states that do not “impose any limitation on the number or percentage of charter schools that may exist or the number or percentage of students that may attend charter schools in the State”... With a continuing federal mandate to fix the bottom five percent of schools, the ESEA rewrite will provide at least a billion dollars each year to fund charter school expansion, thus further weakening public education.  The new grant programs will be fashioned to provide minimal oversight and maximum autonomy to charter companies and their corporate support organizations, and for the first time, private non-profit corporations will be classified as “state entities,” thus eligible to apply directly for federal grant programs....grants will be funneled to states that have established infrastructure to help charter companies in facilities acquisition and/or the handing over of public properties at rock bottom prices.  Federal help in corporate real estate acquisition signals the full maturation of a charter industry that will be worth hundreds of billions

Jim Horn reports at Schools Matter:

Massive Charter Giveaways in ESEA Re-Write, Part 1

Eva is trying to build a little empire in this corner of District 14 - There are two other Success Academy schools within a three block radius of each other

No way can this school be claiming 1400 applications... Pat Dobosz

We know how Success and other charter inflate demand while seats at their schools remain empty. Call for the 1400 names to be made public - a good project for an ed reporter - foil them - and break the phony charter demand bubble. This area of south Williamsburg/North Bed-Stuy was always a rough area of District 14. In my final year I was sent to the IS 33 building to pick up a computer and we heard gunshots outside. This was around noon. Since then there gentrification bubble has moved in - Eva picks her spots.

Here is more from Pat:

Bust Success Charter Phony Demand Bubble

PS 297 is located in D14. There are two other SA schools, one at the old IS 33 building and one in PS 59 all within a three block radius of each other. No way can this school be claiming 1400 applications. The other schools from what I see in the morning are not having their doors broken down. Their numbers do not look excessively high as the children enter the buildings. Often parents apply unwittingly to SA as they do to other area schools out of the Pre-K or K programs, but have no intentions of attending
or are steered away by teachers, friends and family. Myself and a colleague have discouraged many parents from going to SA.

Eva is trying to build a little empire in this corner of D14. She is trying to slide into this school quietly and without fanfare, thinking this is a neighborhood that is asleep. She also has a SA at the other end of the district in MS 50 and her husband has Citizens of the World in the middle of the district. All in prime real estate. It's not about the children. It's about Eva
expanding her empire. please drop a note to: D14Proposals@schools.nyc.gov

Education

Success Academy Would Limit Special Needs at Bed-Stuy School, Critics Say

By Camille Bautista | December 4, 2015 4:31pm | Updated on December 7, 2015 8:56am

@CamBautista

BEDFORD-STUYVESANT — Plans to move a Success Academy charter school into Bed-Stuy would rob an existing elementary school of space used by special needs students, opponents said.

Parents and educators at P.S. 297 met to discuss the proposal Thursday, with many vowing to fight it.

Dozens of students, parents and teachers attended, with many holding handmade posters that read “Save Our School.”

Dozens of students, parents and teachers attended, with many holding handmade posters that read “Save Our School.”

Success Academy, founded by former City Councilwoman Eva Moskowitz, is looking to open a new location that would be shared with P.S. 297’s Park Avenue building at the start of the 2016 school year.

But some educators fear the proposed co-location would take over much needed space that the elementary school currently uses for its special needs students. And they said another Success Academy would not benefit the community.

Camille Bautista · DNAinfo Reporter

Does Bed-Stuy need another Success Academy? Should charter and public schools share space?

•  2
 
•  5

VOICE YOUR OPINION ON NHSQ! 

The charter school already operates two sites within a three-block radius of P.S. 297.

“As CEC members, we question the aggressive expansion of Success Academy,” said Mirian Lopez, vice president of the Community Education Council for District 14.

“As a member of the school community, we ask, why does Success Academy need any more schools?”  

Success Academy has more than 30 locations throughout the city, with plans for more over the next few years, according to reports.

Those opposed to the proposal say their main concern is the possible loss of a second-floor wing dedicated to services like occupational therapy, speech therapy and physical therapy.  

“The students with special needs would be the ones who lose the most,” said CEC 14 member Roberto Portillo, adding that it would be “irreparable to the community.”

P.S. 297 serves kids in pre-k through fifth grade. In the 2014-2015 school year, 26 percent of students were listed as special needs.

If approved, Success Academy Bed-Stuy 3 would have up to 160 students in kindergarten and first grade starting in 2016, and add one grade level each year, according to the city’sDepartment of Education.

As the proposal is still up for vote and concrete plans are not set for the layout of the co-location, Success Academy could not provide comment on the specifics for which spaces would be utilized, according to a Success Academy spokesman.

There is demand in the area, according to the charter school network. Success Academy received about 850 applications from parents who live in School District 14 and roughly 550 applications from parents who live in nearby District 16, the spokesman added.

While some detractors pushed back against a co-location, others outright protested another Success Academy in the neighborhood. Anonline petition was launched in Novemberobjecting the proposal.

Parents criticized Success Academy’s methods Thursday, recalling their children's past experiences at the schools and saying the network does not adequately provide for special needs students.

Robert Gilliam, whose 10-year-old son attended Success Academy Bed-Stuy 1 a block away on Tompkins Avenue, said his son was “broken” and “devastated” by his time at the charter school.

His son, Jordan, was in need of an Individualized Education Program (IEP) and did not receive the services he needed at Success, Gilliam said.

“For about six months, everything was fine. Once his reading comprehension went down and he had to get an IEP, everything changed,” Gilliam said. “He got disregarded like a piece of rag.”

The staff at P.S. 297 helped Jordan in his transition, he added, and the proposed new charter school would take what little space the elementary school has.

“Success is nothing but a money game. It’s nothing but about the numbers,” Gilliam said.

A Success Academy spokesman cited a survey administered by the DOE last year, in which 98 percent of Success Academy parents said they were satisfied or very satisfied with the overall education their kids were receiving.

In addition, 15 percent of Success Academy students last year were listed as children with disabilities, he said. 

The charter school chain has recently faced criticism for singling out poor-performing or difficult students. Supporters have praised the network for students' high performance.

Another parent, Shanna Charles, said her experience at Success Academy Bed-Stuy 2 was “horrible,” with her son being suspended twice a month and the staff trying to “push him out.”

“Success Academy does not need to be inside P.S. 297,” Charles said. “This community has suffered enough.

“The only thing we should try to do in this community is try to build it up — and Success Academy is not a part of that.”

Teachers and students echoed similar sentiments, with many arguing that the proposed space for the charter school could be used for P.S. 297’s expansion.

“Why shouldn’t we be afforded the opportunity to grow our students beyond the fifth grade?” asked guidance counselor Jessica Cashman.

“Why do we have to let them go when we have the space to possibly make ourselves bigger and better than we already are?”

In addition to P.S. 297, the building currently provides space for community organization Good Shepherd and previously housed The Ethical Community Charter School, whichshuttered at the end of June.

Now, the building serves approximately 256 students from the elementary school, making it “under-utilized” since it has the capacity for 659 students, according to the DOE.

Parents, teachers and community members can weigh in on the proposal by sending comments to D14Proposals@schools.nyc.gov or by calling 212-374-0208.  

The Panel for Educational Policy is scheduled to vote on the plan at 6 p.m. on Dec. 16 at the High School of Fashion Industries at 225 W. 24th St.