UPDATED:
Public hearings are required for for charter schools in each district. Brooklyn Dreams has applied to more than one. Here are videos of the hearing at Shell Bank MS in District 22 in south central Brooklyn held on July 16, 2009. There is a growing movement to make these hearings battlegrounds for charters, as exemplified by the battle at Marine Park MS in May where the Hebrew Language Academy attempt to take space in the school was shot down (Ed Notes coverage is here).
Not very charter school has the resources to turn out busloads of people to these hearings like Moskowitz' Harlem Success, which requires parents to come out to these rallies. Brooklyn Dreams said they had 1100 signatures, but few showed up.
There was a small group of supporters and from a visual estimate, they were mostly black. I have some tape of some of the back and forth but it is disjointed, so I am not uploading it. I did have a good conversation with one of the parents who spoke in favor of Brooklyn Dreams and there was some common ground, but there are a lot of discussions that have to take place.
We hear the major arguments presented are about giving people a choice - a choice by setting up a school with more resources, free from many of the requirements to educate every child, with lower class sizes- and using public money to do so. This is a bogus choice. (I know this is stretching the analogy, but what if in areas with higher crime, a private police force with high private funding was set up to compete with the local precinct?)
I am not pretending to present a fair and balanced view. Charter schools have plenty of slick advertising plus the total support of Tweed and many other resources to do that. There were a few arguments made in favor of Brooklyn Dreams from the audience, but they were not well presented. I do have 10 minutes on the Brooklyn Dreams presentation, which was trashed by many commenters as being very poor.
Don't forget to view the GEM presenters (moi and Gloria) where we try to move the debate from "Put charters in other places, but not here" to "No charters anywhere. FIx the public schools." We handed out a GEM leaflet.
The videos are cut into six short pieces based on the subject or the particular speakers. (Light and sound system– not great.)
City Councilman Lou Fidler, one of the few politicians who stand squarely against charter schools.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a10eoySR0Lc
Class size and unions
A back and forth between the CEC panel and Brooklyn Dreams over class size and unions. Don't miss this one as the Brooklyn Dreams people say they are not against unions but since they are not required why have them? And the class size stuff is at the core of things.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCSsPe0xeME
Two parents and a principal
The best statements from parents I heard and a supervisor who identified himself as being with the CSA (Supervisors union).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kG1qmmYcFNc
Grassroots Education Movement (GEM) speakers Norm Scott and Gloria Brandman, both also with the Independent Community of Educators (ICE). Check out the GEM blog for lots more.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfY-gGF1s7s
A UFT rep made a decent presentation, pointing to the connection of Brooklyn Dreams with an organization that promotes the teaching of Creationism. But the fatal weakness for the UFT in these situations is that the UFT has charter schools that have taken over parts of two public schools in East NY, something even Brooklyn Dreams is not asking for (supposedly.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EOX9iorjzw
The Brooklyn Dreams presentation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3j-cfNKv3ac
Coverage at Sheepshead Bay Bites which makes it appear to be a UFT fest in Gotham's words.
My comment there:
For the record, it cerainly seemed to me there were only a few UFT people who spoke. More parents than teachers spoke. And a few principals and CSA. I and another teacher spoke but we are vehement critics of the UFT leadership.
And I would check whether BDCS has actually signed the deal for that Parkville St address. They didn't even seem sure exactly where it was.
Monday, July 20, 2009
Today at PS 123: The Resistance Grows in Harlem, 12:30
UPDATE 2: ACORN JUST CALLED TO SAY THEIR NAME SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ON THIS LEAFLET!!UPDATE 1:
Monday, July 20th
- Demonstration at PS 123
Time: Gather at 12:30pm / Start at 1:00pm
Location: 301 West 140th Street ( 8th ave) NY, NY 10030
Until recently, BloomKlein claimed the high ground of civil rights. They spent enormous amounts of time going to black churches selling their program. And they did get support. The early resisters to BloomKlein seemed to come from the whiter, more affluent areas of the city, areas that seemed to be doing fairly well in pre-mayoral control days when activist parents were able to have a role but now feel totally shut out.
Parents in Harlem and other areas with struggling schools were not as worried about the role they played as much as the state of the schools. The BloomKlein appeal worked – for a while, at least.
But in recent months, the black community seems to be rising up. The old community control struggles of the 60's seem to be re-emerging where black activists are asking the same questions about dictatorial control of the schools as the white activists. The heavy hand of the Moskowitz invasion of Harlem schools has not helped BloomKlein. I bet they are rethinking things a bit and HSA might even look to lower her profile and put in more blacks as figureheads. But can Eva's ego handle that?
GEM has been serving a role in trying to bring teachers. parents and community activists together in a black/white/Hispanic united front. We have been taking a firm stand against mayoral control (NO TWEAKS) and against charter schools in any form.
Here is the latest
UPDATE FROM SENATOR BILL PERKINS OFFICE based on a meeting that was held on Weds (07/15).
The following is a reminder concerning the meeting times and locations for this upcoming week.
Monday, July 20th
- Demonstration at PS 123
Time: Gather at 12:30pm / Start at 1:00pm
Location: 301 West 140th Street ( 8th ave) NY, NY 10030
CANCELLED:
Tuesday, July 21st
- Demonstration at PS 375
Time: Gather at 12:30pm / Start at 1:00pm
Location: 141 East 111 Street ( Between Lexington and Madison) NY, NY 10029
DOUBLE CHECK OF UPDATES
Wednesday, July 22nd
- Demonstration at PS 197
Time: Gather at 12:30pm / Start at 1:00pm
Location: 2230 5th Avenue (136th Street) NY, NY 10037
DOUBLE CHECK contact Cordell Cleare in our office at 212-222-7315
- Meeting at Senator Bill Perkins Office
Time: Starts at 5:30 pm
Location: 163 West 125th Street (9th Floor) NY, NY 10025
STILL ON AS OF NOW
Thursday, July 23rd
- Demonstration at Tweed Courthouse
Time: Gather at 1:00pm/ Start at 2:00pm
Location: 52 Chambers Street NY, NY 10007
Thank you for meeting yesterday and we look forward to seeing you next week.
If you have any questions feel free to contact Cordell Cleare in our office at 212-222-7315 or respond to this email.
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Paul Moore on the "Narrowing" Achievement Gap
Ed Notes wrote about this item (The Study That Should Make Milwaukee Famous)
the other day and we mentionned "poor" Kati Haycock. Nice to see this piece from Paul in response to a posting by Leonie Haimson.
Achievement gap in NYC has not narrowed in any grade or subject since 2003 according to the NAEPs. The new report is here: http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/studies/gaps/
Miami teacher Paul Moore's response to the NY Times article:
Back before the US Civil War, standardized tests would have measured an "achievement gap" between white children and children of color. But the abolitionists would never have allowed it to be described in such absurd terms. The Quakers, Frederick Douglass, and Harriet Beecher Stowe put the blame for the testing disparity where it belonged, on slavery! That vicious racist institution made it a crime for a child of color to pick up a book and even attempt to learn to read.
In this day and time, those of us who seek to meet the corporate attack on the public schools should be very careful about fighting that battle on the enemy's terms. The slaveholders would have loved to debate over an "achievement gap" while the existence of slavery was ignored.
Today, chattel slavery is a historical relic but its racist underpinnings are very much alive. The masters of US public education oversee an apartheid-like system where teachers of color are steadily disappearing from the classroom and a second-class education for children of color has been institutionalized. Little wonder they are so determined to make their stand on the "achievement gap" while the society's fundamental racism and the profound and disproportionate effects of severe poverty on children of color are ignored.
Look at the all-star line-up of public school bashers who publicly cry crocodile tears over the "achievement gap" and pose as civil rights crusaders before deciding to play the game on their terms.
George W. Bush
Rod Paige
Margaret Spellings
Ruby K. Payne
Eli Broad
Joel Klein
Michelle Rhee
Arne Duncan
Bill Gates
Paul Vallas
Jeb Bush
Wendy Kopp
Newt Gingrich
Rush Limbaugh
Michael Bloomberg
Armstrong Williams
Judging by the New York Times article of today, you can add the name of someone named Kati Haycock to the list. She apparently makes a lot of money pretending that something called the Education Trust gives a hoot about Black and Latino children.
Paul A. Moore
Teacher
NY Times, July 14, 2009: Regional Shift Seen in Education Gap
the other day and we mentionned "poor" Kati Haycock. Nice to see this piece from Paul in response to a posting by Leonie Haimson.
Achievement gap in NYC has not narrowed in any grade or subject since 2003 according to the NAEPs. The new report is here: http://nces.
Miami teacher Paul Moore's response to the NY Times article:
Back before the US Civil War, standardized tests would have measured an "achievement gap" between white children and children of color. But the abolitionists would never have allowed it to be described in such absurd terms. The Quakers, Frederick Douglass, and Harriet Beecher Stowe put the blame for the testing disparity where it belonged, on slavery! That vicious racist institution made it a crime for a child of color to pick up a book and even attempt to learn to read.
In this day and time, those of us who seek to meet the corporate attack on the public schools should be very careful about fighting that battle on the enemy's terms. The slaveholders would have loved to debate over an "achievement gap" while the existence of slavery was ignored.
Today, chattel slavery is a historical relic but its racist underpinnings are very much alive. The masters of US public education oversee an apartheid-like system where teachers of color are steadily disappearing from the classroom and a second-class education for children of color has been institutionalized. Little wonder they are so determined to make their stand on the "achievement gap" while the society's fundamental racism and the profound and disproportionate effects of severe poverty on children of color are ignored.
Look at the all-star line-up of public school bashers who publicly cry crocodile tears over the "achievement gap" and pose as civil rights crusaders before deciding to play the game on their terms.
George W. Bush
Rod Paige
Margaret Spellings
Ruby K. Payne
Eli Broad
Joel Klein
Michelle Rhee
Arne Duncan
Bill Gates
Paul Vallas
Jeb Bush
Wendy Kopp
Newt Gingrich
Rush Limbaugh
Michael Bloomberg
Armstrong Williams
Judging by the New York Times article of today, you can add the name of someone named Kati Haycock to the list. She apparently makes a lot of money pretending that something called the Education Trust gives a hoot about Black and Latino children.
Paul A. Moore
Teacher
NY Times, July 14, 2009: Regional Shift Seen in Education Gap
Press Conf Today at City Hall to Congratulate State Senators
Some things I just don't get. There will be a press conference today on the steps of city hall sponsored by the senators who voted for the best of the mayoral control bills offered, but not a great one. This press conference is about supporting a set of fairly mild tweaks on mayoral control. No one involved wants to end it.These senators do need some support since the Bloomberg gestapo are making robo calls to their constituents to turn the population against them. So if only for that, I'm all for this press conference as a way to fight the Bloomberg machine.
Generally, I'm not for wasting time organizing or catering to politicians. Let them play in their playpen. I'm not saying ignore politicians, but let's not cater to the least offensive.
I spoke to an aide from Bill Perkins' office last week at the PS 123 demo and Lynch also doesn't oppose mayoral control but seems open to listening. I like what he is doing this week with demos and meetings all week in Harlem on the charter school issue, culminating in an action at Tweed on Thursday (see sidebar.) He is tailing a movement that got started without politicians, but he is trying to take some leadership. Charles and Inez Barron have also been taking strong positions opposing mayoral control. And Tony Avella is garnering more and more support from teachers in his campaign for mayor.
This is a sign that if people start taking action, politicians will jump on board. It all depends on the numbers and organization. Build it and they will come. The question I still have: Do we really care if they do or don't? Their involvment will often lead to subversion as people look to them for solutions. The solutions lie with a movement of rank and file parents and teachers that can build credibility to force policians to act in their interests.
Fernandez: More city grads lacked basic skills under Bloomberg
Gotham's Green in Explosive Interview with Bronx Bd of Ed Rep Fernandez
Part one of the interview:
Part one of the interview:
Part two:
Saturday, July 18, 2009
Responding to Obama Admin's Joanne Weiss' Threat to NY Tenure
UPDATED:
Ed Notes addressed this issue recently:
Obama Admin Hits New Low on Ed Deform as it Seeks to Gut NY State Tenure
Here are some further responses by Susan Ohanian and Mark Torres based on this Gotham posting.
Obama official to New York: Change your tenure law or else
Gotham Schools, 2009-07-09
http://gothamschools.org/2009/07/09/obama-official-to-new-york-change-your-tenure-law-or-else/
Comment by NYC teacher Mark Torres of People Power Coalition
Sisters and Brothers,
The article above makes it clear, despite all of the data indicating that state's are manipulating test scores and statewide exams, that president obama is behind the curve on this one. his insistence on making testing and charter schools (the privatization of public education), the center piece of his education policy will put us on a collision course with his administration. Making tenure decisions based on test scores will only constrain what we can teach in the classroom. There is pressure now to raise test scores and only teach to the test, imagine what it will be like when our tenure will depend on it. This is part of a consistent effort to destroy the rights of teachers and our unions. why destroy our ability to organize and defend our profession? Because it facilitates the ability of corporations, yes the same entities that pushed our economy over the edge, to install charter schools while taxpayers pick up the tab.
Charter schools represent the privatization of public education, not a movement to better education or provide for greater parental, student or teacher involvement. According to the research, charter schools are more expensive to run but produce mixed results. Some are great, some are mediocre and some don't improve learning at all. The research shows that charter schools produce these mixed results at a much higher cost.
To whom do these costs (profits) go? of course, to the private corporations who have invested in charter schools. instead of using public money to fund charter schools we should have used that money to continue replicating public school models that work. Let's look at what works in one school and copy those good administrative and teaching practices in order to replicate success. let's get parents, students, educators and the community to take a stake in education. Instead, Obama wants us to feed the lie and steal corporate mentality that is destroying this nation.
It is unfortunate that obama's historic election will not be known for supporting public education but instead for supporting the corporations that are heavily invested and reaping the benefits of the drive to create more and more charter schools. He should know better than to support the same corporate forces that were the "base" of the bush administration. It appears that the democrats and republicans have agreed that supporting corporate america is more important than supporting the united states of america. The few good apples in the democratic or republican parties should not keep us tied to those parties, we need a new political party that will look to promote the interests of the whole nation not just the interests of a very small group of bankers and corporate elites.
It appears that the meeting Obama had on wall street before his election, his unflinching support of the bank baillout, and his continued support of wars overseas show his willingness to support wall street corporations even when it jeopardizes our country as a whole.
We have a long struggle ahead to defend our public schools and improve the quality of education for our students. Only by understanding what is going on and what we need to do will allow us to be successful.
Thank you,
Mark A. Torres
Member of the People Power Coalition
"Pray for the dead and fight like hell for the living."
Mary Harris "Mother" Jones
Commentary by Susan Ohanian:
Here is Joanne Weiss's official biography at New Schools Venture Fund. Read it and weep. Then get angry and resolve to fight back. When will we take to the streets? [Note to Susan: people in NYC are beginning to take to the streets.]
Susan Ohanian
Ed Notes addressed this issue recently:
Obama Admin Hits New Low on Ed Deform as it Seeks to Gut NY State Tenure
Here are some further responses by Susan Ohanian and Mark Torres based on this Gotham posting.
Obama official to New York: Change your tenure law or else
Gotham Schools, 2009-07-09
http://gothamschools.org/2009/07/09/obama-official-to-new-york-change-your-tenure-law-or-else/
Comment by NYC teacher Mark Torres of People Power Coalition
Sisters and Brothers,
The article above makes it clear, despite all of the data indicating that state's are manipulating test scores and statewide exams, that president obama is behind the curve on this one. his insistence on making testing and charter schools (the privatization of public education), the center piece of his education policy will put us on a collision course with his administration. Making tenure decisions based on test scores will only constrain what we can teach in the classroom. There is pressure now to raise test scores and only teach to the test, imagine what it will be like when our tenure will depend on it. This is part of a consistent effort to destroy the rights of teachers and our unions. why destroy our ability to organize and defend our profession? Because it facilitates the ability of corporations, yes the same entities that pushed our economy over the edge, to install charter schools while taxpayers pick up the tab.
Charter schools represent the privatization of public education, not a movement to better education or provide for greater parental, student or teacher involvement. According to the research, charter schools are more expensive to run but produce mixed results. Some are great, some are mediocre and some don't improve learning at all. The research shows that charter schools produce these mixed results at a much higher cost.
To whom do these costs (profits) go? of course, to the private corporations who have invested in charter schools. instead of using public money to fund charter schools we should have used that money to continue replicating public school models that work. Let's look at what works in one school and copy those good administrative and teaching practices in order to replicate success. let's get parents, students, educators and the community to take a stake in education. Instead, Obama wants us to feed the lie and steal corporate mentality that is destroying this nation.
It is unfortunate that obama's historic election will not be known for supporting public education but instead for supporting the corporations that are heavily invested and reaping the benefits of the drive to create more and more charter schools. He should know better than to support the same corporate forces that were the "base" of the bush administration. It appears that the democrats and republicans have agreed that supporting corporate america is more important than supporting the united states of america. The few good apples in the democratic or republican parties should not keep us tied to those parties, we need a new political party that will look to promote the interests of the whole nation not just the interests of a very small group of bankers and corporate elites.
It appears that the meeting Obama had on wall street before his election, his unflinching support of the bank baillout, and his continued support of wars overseas show his willingness to support wall street corporations even when it jeopardizes our country as a whole.
We have a long struggle ahead to defend our public schools and improve the quality of education for our students. Only by understanding what is going on and what we need to do will allow us to be successful.
Thank you,
Mark A. Torres
Member of the People Power Coalition
"Pray for the dead and fight like hell for the living."
Mary Harris "Mother" Jones
Commentary by Susan Ohanian:
Here is Joanne Weiss's official biography at New Schools Venture Fund. Read it and weep. Then get angry and resolve to fight back. When will we take to the streets? [Note to Susan: people in NYC are beginning to take to the streets.]
Susan Ohanian
Prior to joining New Schools Venture Fund, Joanne was CEO of Claria Corporation, an e-services recruiting firm that helped emerging-growth companies build their teams quickly and well.
Before her tenure at Claria, Joanne spent twenty years in the design, development, and marketing of technology-based products and services for education. She was Senior Vice President of Product Development at Pensare, an e-learning company that created business innovation programs for the Fortune 500 market. Prior to Pensare, Joanne was co-founder, interim CEO, and Vice President of Products and Technologies at Academic Systems, a company that helps hundreds of thousands of college students prepare for college-level work in mathematics and English.
In the early 1990s, Joanne was Executive Vice President of Business Operations at Wasatch Education Systems, where she led the product development, customer service, and operations organizations for this K-12 educational technology company. She began her career as Vice President of Education R&D at Wicat Systems, where she was responsible for the development of nearly 100 multimedia curriculum products for K-12 schools.
Joanne has a passion for education, and has spent much of her career pioneering innovativ e ways of using technology to increase the effectiveness of teaching and learning processes. She holds a degree in biochemistry from Princeton University.
Reminder: Since its founding in 1998, NewSchools has raised over $125 million from grants and donations from private individuals, corporations, and philanthropic foundations. NewSchools’ major fundraising milestones have included:
May 2007: $5 million grant from The Broad Foundation to invest in public charter school management organizations and other entrepreneurial ventures working to increase the number and quality of public charter schools nationwide[20].
June 2006: $22 million grant from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to help develop additional charter schools[21].
December 2002: $4.74 million grant from The Broad Foundation to support Aspire Public Schools in creating seven new charter schools by 2007.
A Blueprint for Teachers to Take Back Ed Reform
by Seung Ok
One of the main pillars by which bloomberg and all other privateers stand on, is fraudulent statistics. If these non pedagogues can achieve results (which we know are fake), then the average citizen could not care less about whiny teachers, closing schools, and union busting.
One of the main pillars by which bloomberg and all other privateers stand on, is fraudulent statistics. If these non pedagogues can achieve results (which we know are fake), then the average citizen could not care less about whiny teachers, closing schools, and union busting.
Right now, in most parents' and voters' eyes, the conversation about improving schools is mainly coming from those that we know are not pedagogues - all the way from Obama down. They see teachers as another interest group looking out for themselves.
In order for us to win this battle against the attack on public education - we need to expose and over-turn the strategies for these false increases in statistics (test scores, graduation rates, remediation in college rates, credit recovery, efficacy of charter schools).
Secondly, we need to be at the forefront of the conversation demanding a superior education for all public school students - lower class sizes, equitable funding compared to suburban schools, new building contstruction, etc. And for that to happen, we need to make inroads with parent groups and organizations.
Lastly, we need to take back our union- so that our UFT president actually promotes policies benefitting our children instead of self serving politics.
Lastly, we need to take back our union- so that our UFT president actually promotes policies benefitting our children instead of self serving politics.
Friday, July 17, 2009
Are Charters Beginning to Run Out of Kids to Cream?
Dorothy asked this yesterday on the NYC Ed News List:
Seung responded:
Here is my response:
My guess is that they see signs of running out of kids to cream and are now reaching a point where instead of only competing with public schools they are now beginning to compete with each other. Thus the search for fertile new territory and where better than reaching into areas of the city with a bigger population of threes and fours pool to access?
Last night at Shellbank, Brooklyn Dreams came off as looking pathetic as they search through south Brooklyn for the right sweet spot. Asked to define what they offer that public schools don't, the only thing they could come up with is "smaller class sizes". Duhhh!
Facing vehement resistance, they seem to be aiming for the northern part of Dist 22 and southern part of Dist. 17.
There were some excellent speeches made, mostly by parents. But Lou Fidler nailed them.
(Video in the next day or two.)
The UFT is somewhat pathetic in these situations. Brooklyn Dreams not asking for space in a public school (which we know is often just a ploy to get approval before coming up with the "we looked and looked" argument. But the UFT didn't look. They just occupy space in two public schools. So the UFT people can only say, "Why this district which doesn't need charter schools because it is so successful."
Thus they have to skulk around behind the scenes when teachers start screaming.
They can't really stand up to Eva Moskowitz's land grab when they also grabbed land. I'm surprised the Moskowitz PR machine which called PS 123 a UFT school.
Of course the HSA stuff is a joke when it says,
"The UFT knows that parents are choosing to abandon the UFT schools in Harlem in droves."
UFT schools? How about Joel Klein/Mike Bloomberg schools?
Will there be a day soon when the Harlem charter schools start fighting it out with each other?
Look for the heavyweight match of KIPP vs. HSA. (David - time to get that cartoon machine going.)
I know everyone is aware that there is a meeting tonight in D-22 over a new charter school, Brooklyn Dream. Now i understand there will be another meeting July 30 (amazing all this in the summer when so many of us are away or travelling) they want to bring 3 new charter schools at that meeting. All of them supposedly targeted for Dist 22, which if any one feels like checking is one of the highest performing districts in the city. Even with all the DOE has done, any child attending ANY elementary school will get an excellent education. Why all the charters?I think right off the bat they fear that governance will stay the way it is, (one can only pray) and that there will be legitimate school board elections. Once those boards are in place, even assuming the mayor and his people will ignore that law as they ignored all the other laws, but I don't think it will be as east to bamboozle a legally elected csb.I have advised our presidents council to start contacting Albany and find out why the push to stick all these charters in an area that does not want them.
Seung responded:
Dorothy does raise a good question. Why are the powers that be, trying to infiltrate A performing schools? I would presume they would have an easier time invading building of struggling schools where parent involvement is a problem? Any theories?Possible theories: Charters do not want parents to apply (even by lottery) from areas plagued by unemployment and low income?Building size? The primary factor being, only a few select public school buildings are big enough to even pretend to justify an invasion?Seung
Here is my response:
My guess is that they see signs of running out of kids to cream and are now reaching a point where instead of only competing with public schools they are now beginning to compete with each other. Thus the search for fertile new territory and where better than reaching into areas of the city with a bigger population of threes and fours pool to access?
Last night at Shellbank, Brooklyn Dreams came off as looking pathetic as they search through south Brooklyn for the right sweet spot. Asked to define what they offer that public schools don't, the only thing they could come up with is "smaller class sizes". Duhhh!
Facing vehement resistance, they seem to be aiming for the northern part of Dist 22 and southern part of Dist. 17.
There were some excellent speeches made, mostly by parents. But Lou Fidler nailed them.
(Video in the next day or two.)
The UFT is somewhat pathetic in these situations. Brooklyn Dreams not asking for space in a public school (which we know is often just a ploy to get approval before coming up with the "we looked and looked" argument. But the UFT didn't look. They just occupy space in two public schools. So the UFT people can only say, "Why this district which doesn't need charter schools because it is so successful."
Thus they have to skulk around behind the scenes when teachers start screaming.
They can't really stand up to Eva Moskowitz's land grab when they also grabbed land. I'm surprised the Moskowitz PR machine which called PS 123 a UFT school.
Of course the HSA stuff is a joke when it says,
"The UFT knows that parents are choosing to abandon the UFT schools in Harlem in droves."
UFT schools? How about Joel Klein/Mike Bloomberg schools?
Will there be a day soon when the Harlem charter schools start fighting it out with each other?
Look for the heavyweight match of KIPP vs. HSA. (David - time to get that cartoon machine going.)
Thursday, July 16, 2009
The Resistance Grows: GEM News and CAPE Press Release
GEM finally met some members of Brooklyn-based CAPE at the GEM meeting on July 14. And a group from PS 123 in Harlem. Kismet.
GEM formed committees – a Brooklyn-based committee to fight charter school invasions in that borough and an ATR/Teacher Reassignment Center committee to address those concerns. Also a Harlem-based group to focus on PS 123, the school being invaded by Moskowitz' Harlem Success virus. There were reps from other schools in Harlem dealing with charter schools.
Contact GEMNYC@gmail for details. Or check the GEM or Ed Notes blogs for details of meetings.
Here is the CAPE press release, which could serve as a bible for the resistance.
CAPE: Concerned Advocates for Public Education
Educators and Parents Organize to Protect and Preserve Public Education
“The Bloomberg administration’s long-term goal is to cut the number of public schools in half and double the number of charter schools.” This claim was recently made in a Helen Zelon article quoting long time administrators and DOE officials. It is a claim that is quite disturbing and has motivated a group of educators and parents to organize for the protection and preservation of public schools and public education.
This group, Concerned Advocates for Public Education, seeks to lend their voice to the education policy and reform debate, a voice that has been marginalized and silenced, a trend that we will stand for no longer.
We see public education and public schools as a civic practice, a human right, and the pillar of our democracy. Any policy or ideology that threatens our ability and our right to provide free, fair, and quality public education for our children must be addressed. All too often, especially during the tenure of the Bloomberg administration, parent and educator voices have been silenced in the education reform movement and in terms of policy in general. This silencing has subordinated the voices of the stakeholders in education in favor of the voices of lawyers, corporations, and those most privileged in our society. The perspectives of those whom these policies impact the most are absent and there is no substitute for our perspective. If our voices are not welcomed in the current climate of education reform and policy, we will not be complicit nor will we fight against it, instead we will fight for what we know to be best for our children and we will not be intimidated or undermined by an ideology or administration who insults and threatens those who disagree with them.
At the center of the fight to protect and preserve public education is the Bloomberg administration’s obsession with charter schools. This is not simply a discussion about the merit of charter schools; there is a place in education for any school possibility that opens a door for children. However, we do not believe that this administration’s charter school agenda serves children in any other capacity other than to divert money away from public schools and strain and stress public schools by forcing them to share space with charter schools setting up unfair and unbalanced corporate-style competition. Furthermore, the kinds of charter schools this administration promotes deprofessionalizes the teaching profession through its privilege of prescriptive programs and inexperienced teachers, their militaristic style of discipline and procedures, the silencing and victimization of parents and communities by forcing these schools into areas without due process and community involvement, and the racial implications of targeting minority areas therefore weakening community public schools and marginalizing those who are already most marginalized in our society. This agenda does not promote critical thinking. This agenda does not promote the whole child. This agenda does not promote thoughtful, democratic citizenry. This agenda does promote the systematic deterioration of our public school system in favor of a system that will segregate and underserve our neediest students.
The Bloomberg administration will argue that public schools have been failing our neediest children for years and that teachers and unions do not want competition and simply want to avoid change. Parents and educators are frankly insulted by these claims. While it is true that some public schools have been failing our students, blanket claims are erroneous and dangerous and are the kind of propaganda that promotes extreme executive control and power and disempowers citizen voice and perspective. There are many examples of exemplary public schools that serve underserved populations and have been doing it for years. If the intention is to improve education in the neediest areas, why not access existing successful schools and use their models, techniques, and expertise in a real reform agenda? This administration promotes claims of the success of charter schools, often using test scores as evidence. The scores are not comparable to public schools as they represent a lower number of students in special education, English Language Learners, and our most challenging students who charter schools often discharge at will and send back to public schools. This is a shell game aimed at privatizing education. It comes from a free market mentality that serves the capitalist agenda, but when did capitalism move from an economic philosophy to a social philosophy? There is no place in education, the largest and most important social policy and structure we have in this country, for this kind of corporate ideology that we have seen frankly fail economically in the last year and will certainly fail when it comes to educating our most valuable asset in a democracy: our children.
The second claim, again political propaganda, that seeks to subvert teachers’ unions is simply a power grab and flatly false. Teachers and their unions are by no means a perfect body, but the large majority dedicate their lives fighting for what is best for children and schools and to insinuate that they only want to protect themselves, at the expense of children, is cynical and disingenuous. To further suggest that the solution is to insert business minded folks and inexperienced teachers as a means to best educate our students is simply ridiculous. The Bloomberg administration has an expertise in marketing, but even the best marketing cannot continue to sell a product that is faulty and based on a premise that defies truth and logic.
If you want solid evidence for all of the above claims, make the trip to Red Hook, Brooklyn. There you will find a gem of a school, P.S. 15, nestled in one the largest housing projects in Brooklyn that is a AAA school, has some of the highest test scores in the city, offers a wide range of intervention, enrichment, and health and social services, and has some of the most dedicated administrators, teachers, and staff you could ever hope to find. This school, a successful, well established, corner stone in one our most needy communities is being threatened with a takeover from one of Bloomberg’s hand selected charter schools, PAVE Academy. This charter was placed in P.S. 15’s building, is crippling their ability to best serve their children, and has announced plans to stay put for years to come even though the community, who fought against them coming in the first place, was guaranteed that they would only stay two years. The intent here is clear, push out a successful public school and replace it with a charter school. This does not support an agenda that supposedly addresses claims of what is best for children and communities by closing unsuccessful schools. It does support and highlights an agenda rooted in a clear obsession charter schools as a way to undermine and destroy our public education system.
Concerned Advocates for Public Education seeks to bring an authentic voice to the current policy and reform movement in education. To contact us please email us at CAPEducation@gmail.com or visit us on Facebook and Twitter.
For Immediate Release: Any information provided here may be published on behalf of CAPE.
GEM formed committees – a Brooklyn-based committee to fight charter school invasions in that borough and an ATR/Teacher Reassignment Center committee to address those concerns. Also a Harlem-based group to focus on PS 123, the school being invaded by Moskowitz' Harlem Success virus. There were reps from other schools in Harlem dealing with charter schools.
Contact GEMNYC@gmail for details. Or check the GEM or Ed Notes blogs for details of meetings.
Here is the CAPE press release, which could serve as a bible for the resistance.
CAPE: Concerned Advocates for Public Education
Educators and Parents Organize to Protect and Preserve Public Education
“The Bloomberg administration’s long-term goal is to cut the number of public schools in half and double the number of charter schools.” This claim was recently made in a Helen Zelon article quoting long time administrators and DOE officials. It is a claim that is quite disturbing and has motivated a group of educators and parents to organize for the protection and preservation of public schools and public education.
This group, Concerned Advocates for Public Education, seeks to lend their voice to the education policy and reform debate, a voice that has been marginalized and silenced, a trend that we will stand for no longer.
We see public education and public schools as a civic practice, a human right, and the pillar of our democracy. Any policy or ideology that threatens our ability and our right to provide free, fair, and quality public education for our children must be addressed. All too often, especially during the tenure of the Bloomberg administration, parent and educator voices have been silenced in the education reform movement and in terms of policy in general. This silencing has subordinated the voices of the stakeholders in education in favor of the voices of lawyers, corporations, and those most privileged in our society. The perspectives of those whom these policies impact the most are absent and there is no substitute for our perspective. If our voices are not welcomed in the current climate of education reform and policy, we will not be complicit nor will we fight against it, instead we will fight for what we know to be best for our children and we will not be intimidated or undermined by an ideology or administration who insults and threatens those who disagree with them.
At the center of the fight to protect and preserve public education is the Bloomberg administration’s obsession with charter schools. This is not simply a discussion about the merit of charter schools; there is a place in education for any school possibility that opens a door for children. However, we do not believe that this administration’s charter school agenda serves children in any other capacity other than to divert money away from public schools and strain and stress public schools by forcing them to share space with charter schools setting up unfair and unbalanced corporate-style competition. Furthermore, the kinds of charter schools this administration promotes deprofessionalizes the teaching profession through its privilege of prescriptive programs and inexperienced teachers, their militaristic style of discipline and procedures, the silencing and victimization of parents and communities by forcing these schools into areas without due process and community involvement, and the racial implications of targeting minority areas therefore weakening community public schools and marginalizing those who are already most marginalized in our society. This agenda does not promote critical thinking. This agenda does not promote the whole child. This agenda does not promote thoughtful, democratic citizenry. This agenda does promote the systematic deterioration of our public school system in favor of a system that will segregate and underserve our neediest students.
The Bloomberg administration will argue that public schools have been failing our neediest children for years and that teachers and unions do not want competition and simply want to avoid change. Parents and educators are frankly insulted by these claims. While it is true that some public schools have been failing our students, blanket claims are erroneous and dangerous and are the kind of propaganda that promotes extreme executive control and power and disempowers citizen voice and perspective. There are many examples of exemplary public schools that serve underserved populations and have been doing it for years. If the intention is to improve education in the neediest areas, why not access existing successful schools and use their models, techniques, and expertise in a real reform agenda? This administration promotes claims of the success of charter schools, often using test scores as evidence. The scores are not comparable to public schools as they represent a lower number of students in special education, English Language Learners, and our most challenging students who charter schools often discharge at will and send back to public schools. This is a shell game aimed at privatizing education. It comes from a free market mentality that serves the capitalist agenda, but when did capitalism move from an economic philosophy to a social philosophy? There is no place in education, the largest and most important social policy and structure we have in this country, for this kind of corporate ideology that we have seen frankly fail economically in the last year and will certainly fail when it comes to educating our most valuable asset in a democracy: our children.
The second claim, again political propaganda, that seeks to subvert teachers’ unions is simply a power grab and flatly false. Teachers and their unions are by no means a perfect body, but the large majority dedicate their lives fighting for what is best for children and schools and to insinuate that they only want to protect themselves, at the expense of children, is cynical and disingenuous. To further suggest that the solution is to insert business minded folks and inexperienced teachers as a means to best educate our students is simply ridiculous. The Bloomberg administration has an expertise in marketing, but even the best marketing cannot continue to sell a product that is faulty and based on a premise that defies truth and logic.
If you want solid evidence for all of the above claims, make the trip to Red Hook, Brooklyn. There you will find a gem of a school, P.S. 15, nestled in one the largest housing projects in Brooklyn that is a AAA school, has some of the highest test scores in the city, offers a wide range of intervention, enrichment, and health and social services, and has some of the most dedicated administrators, teachers, and staff you could ever hope to find. This school, a successful, well established, corner stone in one our most needy communities is being threatened with a takeover from one of Bloomberg’s hand selected charter schools, PAVE Academy. This charter was placed in P.S. 15’s building, is crippling their ability to best serve their children, and has announced plans to stay put for years to come even though the community, who fought against them coming in the first place, was guaranteed that they would only stay two years. The intent here is clear, push out a successful public school and replace it with a charter school. This does not support an agenda that supposedly addresses claims of what is best for children and communities by closing unsuccessful schools. It does support and highlights an agenda rooted in a clear obsession charter schools as a way to undermine and destroy our public education system.
Concerned Advocates for Public Education seeks to bring an authentic voice to the current policy and reform movement in education. To contact us please email us at CAPEducation@gmail.com or visit us on Facebook and Twitter.
For Immediate Release: Any information provided here may be published on behalf of CAPE.
Arne and Randi Get Out the Collaborationist Shovel
See video of an exchange at QUEST between the U.S. education secretary and AFT members on educational issues, with Randi Weingarten moderating.
Note the format allows Arne to pontificate without follow-up.
Remember, Arne's Chicago school system fires ATRs after one year. And after 14 years of market-based mayoral control in Chicago, the Chicago Teachers Union Unity-like collaborators have left the union in shambles.
Randi's follow-up speech about the financial meltdown is the upmost in hypocrisy as she accepted the "there's no money to reduce class size" argument while a few blocks away from UFT HQ, Wall street was getting trillion dollar bail-outs.
Note how often the term "collaboration" is used.
Here is part of the Wikipedia entry:
Since the Second World War the term "Collaboration" acquired a very negative meaning as referring to persons and groups which help a foreign occupier of their country—due to actual use by people in European countries who worked with and for the Nazi German occupiers. Linguistically, "collaboration" implies more or less equal partners who work together—which is obviously not the case when one party is an army of occupation and the other are people of the occupied country living under the power of this army. In order to make a distinction, the more specific term Collaborationism is often used for this phenomenon of collaboration with an occupying army.
YEP! That just about says it. The UFT/AFT/Unity Caucus in face of the army occupying our public schools has chosen collaboration in the most negative sense. Just as in France and other parts of Europe in WWII, a tiny resistance to both the corporate invaders and the collaborator unions has begun to spring up. (More on the resistance in NYC and nationally in upcoming posts.)
Thanks to Hugh, who can be seen at around minute 12 asking a question, for the tip.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
The Study That Should Make Milwaukee Famous
Remember that much praised Milwaukee school system voucher program that got so many ed deformers salivating? (Check out this Rethinking Schools article from 2006 for background.)
The NY Times article today on a report on the closing of the white/black achievement gap includes this nugget:
By 2007, the state with the widest black-white gap in the nation on the fourth-grade math test (not counting the District of Columbia) was not in the deep South, but in the Midwest — Wisconsin. White students there scored 250, slightly above the national average, but blacks scored 212, producing a 38-point achievement gap. That average score for black students in Wisconsin was lower than for blacks in Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi or any other Southern state, and 10 points below the national average for black students, the study indicated.
Wisconsin was the only state in which the black-white achievement gap in 2007 was larger than the national average in the tests for fourth and eighth grades in both math and reading, according to the study.
Kati Haycock, president of the Education Trust, a nonprofit group in Washington that works to close achievement gaps, said principals in Wisconsin were “stunned” when shown the results.
“Black kids in Wisconsin do worse than in all these Southern states,” and the reason, Ms. Haycock said, was that Wisconsin educators “haven’t been focusing on doing what’s necessary to close these gaps.”
Patrick Gasper, a spokesman for the Wisconsin Department of Education, said, “We know that we have a pronounced achievement gap and that we have to continue focusing our efforts on eliminating it.”
The public schools in Milwaukee, the city with Wisconsin’s largest African-American population, have missed federal achievement targets for five years straight, Mr. Gasper said. Tony Evers, Wisconsin’s new education superintendent, delivered his inaugural speech on July 6 in Milwaukee instead of the state capital, Madison, to emphasize the urgency of new approaches, Mr. Gasper said.
Gee, the article didn't even mention the voucher program or any links to the results. Sort of like talking about the results of a ball game without mentioning the teams. Poor ed deformer Ed Trust head Kati Haycock. The schools haven't been focusing on doing what's necessary to close the gap - you know, lots of test prep, cheating, credit recovery, massaging stats. We know the drill, Kati.
Check out this 2006 CSM article on the voucher program. Suddenly, parental choice is not the panacea.
Advocates are getting past the ideological posturing, saying 'choice will fix everything.' Parental choice is a precondition for a quality education, not a panacea."Choice is something lower-income Milwaukee parents definitely have. Families who make below a set income can get a voucher (worth up to $6,500 in the coming school year) to send their school-age children to a private school, including a religiously affiliated school. In addition to some 125 schools that participate in Milwaukee's program, there are numerous charter schools in the city, and an open-enrollment program through which a few thousand students attend suburban schools.
And check out these choices parents had:
The voucher program has given new life to venerable Catholic and Lutheran schools in the city, and has spurred the creation of dozens of new schools - many of them religious - that rely solely on voucher students. All told, about 70 percent of the voucher schools are religious. Some of those schools, like Hope, show signs of excellence, but not all.
In one of the worst instances, a convicted rapist opened a school, which has since shut down. Reporters from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel tried to visit all 115 schools then in the program last year, and found a mixed bag. Nine schools refused to let reporters in, and the paper cited "10 to 15 others where ... the overall operation appeared alarming when it came to the basic matter of educating children."
One school was opened by a woman who said she had a vision from God to start a school, and whose only educational background was as a teacher's aide. Others had few books or signs of a coherent curriculum. Yet they've been able to enroll students.
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Seung and Steve Slap Goliath David (Cantor)
People on the NYCEd News listserve actually get hot when DOE press chief David Cantor decides to respond to a posting,which is what he did on GEM's Seung OK's comment on credit recovery. Seung has enormous credibility because he is on the front lines and daily sees the results of the disastrous policies of Cantor's boss.
Seung made a mark recently with his calling out during Randi's farewell address and the Unity Caucus hack machine is trying to lift his delegate position. (See UFT Delegate Assembly, Democracy NOT Unity Hack Attack Part 2, Seung Sings with lots more to come I haven't reported on yet)
Seung has been a teacher for 11 years and just recently became involved with GEM due to his outrage.And what an involvement as he has thrown both feet into the fray with gusto. If there were even 50 more like him out there we'd have BloomWeinKlein on the run.
Will Seung be getting visits at his school from the both the UFT and the DOE over his outspokeness? Frankly, I would be more sorry for the goons than I am for Seung.
For the record, I personally like David Cantor, as do most people who have met him. No matter how much the people opposed to BloomKlein disagree, he has always been a gentleman. His willingness to throw himself into the debate, even though he is always wrong, is something to be admired. I always encourage him to do so. It gives us so much material.
Seung Ok says in response to the NY Times article on credit recovery:
The only issues I have about this article - is it doesn't question the improvement showing that less city college students need remediation courses. The reason for that is the high prices of state colleges. Many higher level students who would have previously attended state colleges are now attending the cheaper city colleges. This is not due to mayoral control.
The other problem is that it should have mentioned that the state education department were recently looking to make recovery courses even more lax. They proposed to get rid of seat time requirements for students, to allow the school to determine what is and is not credit recovery, and to hide the source of credits on students transcripts so no outside observer could discern a regular credit from recovery.
Plus, they did not mention that regents standards are so low, that it is not a measure of anything anymore. Only 33% and 46% respectively on the Algebra and Biology regents is needed for a scaled score of 65.
Otherwise, I think this article is very good at exposing all the loopholes Klein and Bloomberg are allowing to happen for their own stats. I'm not hopeful that they will reign this practice however, because improvement in statistics is the bedrock of their argument to voters to keep in control of DOE.
DOE Press Secretary David Cantor responds:
Seung slaps back - brilliantly, I might add
Parent Steve Koss jumps into the fray
Dear Mr. Cantor,
I normally try my best to refrain from responding to the comments you submit to this listserv, but your most recent posting was so feckless and off the wall, I simply couldn't stand by and let it pass uncountered. I have to tell you that I've never seen anyone put their foot in their mouth so often and so readily as you seem to do; "tribalism" was truly a gem, I must say. Remarkable that they pay you for whatever it is you're doing. A bit of professional advice before I move ahead with responding to your email? Stop trying to defend the indefensible. It's difficult enough to do as it is, but you make complete hash out of it every time you attempt it. If I was your boss, I'd frankly tell you in no uncertain terms to shut the hell up and stay off the Internet.
Now, as for your comments, which I personally find (as both a math major and as a former NYC high school math teacher as well as public school parent leader) so preposterous as to be beyond laughable. They really make me wonder if you have any clue whatsoever as to how the NYC and NYS school systems and exam structures work. It's eminently clear that you don't. What you wrote is some of the most patently ridiculous and intellectually bankrupt stuff I've ever seen from someone who ostensibly speaks on behalf of a major city public school system.
I see that others have already responded regarding CUNY, including statements issued by CUNY itself as to their increasing enrollment due to their "good value for the money" education. Interesting to see the number of students who went to CUNY from the specialized high schools. When I taught at Lab School, some of my best students (especially first generation Americans from immigrant families) also went to CUNY because their families just didn't have the money for something more renowned. I'll leave that argument for others and focus on what I know best (advice I'd highly recommend to you) -- the Grade 3-8 and Regents first level Math exams.
The scaled passing score on Integrated Algebra is a 30 out of 87 points. Period. There's no if's, and's, or but's, no way of dancing around the fact that a 34.5% raw score earn you a 65 and hence the "math credit" toward a (now meaningless) Regents diploma. That fact has nothing to do with how the rest of the exam is scaled. Scaling creates all sorts of issues, but none of them are pertinent to the central argument Ms. Seung Ok was originally making. And nothing in this argument even begins to address all the other aspects of score inflation built into the Regents: narrowed scope, simpler questions, repetition of question content and format, opportunities for systemic cheating, etc.
Regardless, in order to help educate you, I've included below the cut scores for a 65 (passing grade) on every Math A and Integrated Algebra exam since June 1999. The second column is each exam's maximum possible score, the third column is the cut score for a 65 based on that exam's conversion table, and the last column is the percentage of the maximum raw score that it took to get the 65 (e.g., 43 out of 85 in June 1999 was 50.59%, and that was converted to a 65).
MATH A
Jun-99 85 43 50.59
Jan-00 85 44 51.76
Jun-00 85 41 48.24
Aug-00 85 41 48.24
Jan-01 85 46 54.12
Jun-01 85 46 54.12
Aug-01 85 47 55.29
Jan-02 85 48 56.47
Jun-02 85 52 61.18
Aug-02 85 53 62.35
Jan-03 85 52 61.18
Jun-03 85 51 60.00
Jun-03 85 36 42.35
Jan-04 84 37 44.05
Jun-04 84 37 44.05
Aug-04 84 36 42.86
Jan-05 84 34 40.48
Jun-05 84 36 42.86
Aug-05 84 34 40.48
Jan-06 84 33 39.29
Jun-06 84 35 41.67
Aug-06 84 34 40.48
Jan-07 84 35 41.67
Jun-07 84 35 41.67
Aug-07 84 34 40.48
Jan-08 84 34 40.48
Jun-08 84 36 42.86
Aug-08 84 36 42.86
Jan-09 84 35 41.67
INTEGRATED ALGEBRA
Jun-08 87 30 34.48
Aug-08 87 30 34.48
Jan-09 87 31 35.63
Jun-09 87 30 34.48
Seung made a mark recently with his calling out during Randi's farewell address and the Unity Caucus hack machine is trying to lift his delegate position. (See UFT Delegate Assembly, Democracy NOT Unity Hack Attack Part 2, Seung Sings with lots more to come I haven't reported on yet)
Seung has been a teacher for 11 years and just recently became involved with GEM due to his outrage.And what an involvement as he has thrown both feet into the fray with gusto. If there were even 50 more like him out there we'd have BloomWeinKlein on the run.
Will Seung be getting visits at his school from the both the UFT and the DOE over his outspokeness? Frankly, I would be more sorry for the goons than I am for Seung.
For the record, I personally like David Cantor, as do most people who have met him. No matter how much the people opposed to BloomKlein disagree, he has always been a gentleman. His willingness to throw himself into the debate, even though he is always wrong, is something to be admired. I always encourage him to do so. It gives us so much material.
Seung Ok says in response to the NY Times article on credit recovery:
The only issues I have about this article - is it doesn't question the improvement showing that less city college students need remediation courses. The reason for that is the high prices of state colleges. Many higher level students who would have previously attended state colleges are now attending the cheaper city colleges. This is not due to mayoral control.
The other problem is that it should have mentioned that the state education department were recently looking to make recovery courses even more lax. They proposed to get rid of seat time requirements for students, to allow the school to determine what is and is not credit recovery, and to hide the source of credits on students transcripts so no outside observer could discern a regular credit from recovery.
Plus, they did not mention that regents standards are so low, that it is not a measure of anything anymore. Only 33% and 46% respectively on the Algebra and Biology regents is needed for a scaled score of 65.
Otherwise, I think this article is very good at exposing all the loopholes Klein and Bloomberg are allowing to happen for their own stats. I'm not hopeful that they will reign this practice however, because improvement in statistics is the bedrock of their argument to voters to keep in control of DOE.
DOE Press Secretary David Cantor responds:
This is bogus. Not only has the enrollment rate of NYC high school graduates gone up 50% at CUNY schools since 2002, it has gone up modestly at SUNY colleges as well.
Also, the reference to Regents test scoring is completely bollixed. Students do not need to score "33%" on the Algebra test in order to pass. They need a raw score this year of 30 out of a possible 87, but the test isn't divided into equal intervals. For example, a raw score of 19 yields a scale score of 49, while a raw score of 20 yields a scale score of 51; looked at another way, raw scores of 63, 64, 65, and 66 all yield a scale score of 84.
Additionally, the raw score needed to pass changes each year depending on the difficulty of the test's questions; while a student in 2009 needed a raw score of 30, next year a student may need a raw score of 40. Using the mistaken calculation below, and assuming 87 were to remain the high raw score, students would need to score "46%" to pass. By the logic here the State would deserve praise for raising standards.
David Cantor
Press Secretary
Seung slaps back - brilliantly, I might add
To Mr. Cantor,
Fine, if you don't want see the obvious - that there is a recession, and higher level students are in fact opting for CUNY rather than SUNY - then lets look at a report released by CUNY itself:
"In difficult economic times, students and their families especially appreciate the high value of an education at a CUNY college," said Chancellor Matthew Goldstein. "We are investing in CUNY by attracting world class faculty, building modern facilities and creating innovative academic programs in the most exciting city in the world. The University today is among the best values in higher education."
That same report by CUNY goes on to say:
Five elite New York City public high schools – Bronx High School of Science, Brooklyn Technical High School, Staten Island Technical High School, Stuyvesant High School and Townsend Harris High School – sent 505 freshmen to CUNY colleges this fall, a 27 percent increase compared with the number enrolled in baccalaureate programs in 1999.
And as far as your scaled scores on standardized testing is concerned, you missed the point completely. The issue is not that every student's grades will be inflated. You remark that a 62,63, and 64 raw score ( out of 87 possible questions) are all scaled at a test score of 87.
The issue is the MINIMAL standards of what you consider proficient (30 correct out of 87 possible credits). So, yes, if this were the physician's licensing exam, those that did great wouldn't get a 140% on an exam. The problem is that the lowest performing group (30 out of 87 questions), would still be graduated as doctors. Let's use common sense here, as someone else just mentioned, would you want anyone - your doctor, bus driver, barber, astronaut, waiter, proctologist to get 30 out of 87 in anything in their training?
And let me tell you why these tests are becoming easier than ever. I ran tutoring sessions for several hours 3 days prior to this years Living Environment exam. There were many students who attended who failed it in the past, and had not taken a single course related to this subject all year. Why did they come and thank me right after the test? They thanked me because every question I crammed into them was on that exam. Of course, because many of the questions appeared last year, and the year before that. These tests are getting narrower in scope, and exact forms of questions are being repeated year after year.
Any test in which one can predict the questions, does not measure what it claims to.
Seung Ok
Parent Steve Koss jumps into the fray
Dear Mr. Cantor,
I normally try my best to refrain from responding to the comments you submit to this listserv, but your most recent posting was so feckless and off the wall, I simply couldn't stand by and let it pass uncountered. I have to tell you that I've never seen anyone put their foot in their mouth so often and so readily as you seem to do; "tribalism" was truly a gem, I must say. Remarkable that they pay you for whatever it is you're doing. A bit of professional advice before I move ahead with responding to your email? Stop trying to defend the indefensible. It's difficult enough to do as it is, but you make complete hash out of it every time you attempt it. If I was your boss, I'd frankly tell you in no uncertain terms to shut the hell up and stay off the Internet.
Now, as for your comments, which I personally find (as both a math major and as a former NYC high school math teacher as well as public school parent leader) so preposterous as to be beyond laughable. They really make me wonder if you have any clue whatsoever as to how the NYC and NYS school systems and exam structures work. It's eminently clear that you don't. What you wrote is some of the most patently ridiculous and intellectually bankrupt stuff I've ever seen from someone who ostensibly speaks on behalf of a major city public school system.
I see that others have already responded regarding CUNY, including statements issued by CUNY itself as to their increasing enrollment due to their "good value for the money" education. Interesting to see the number of students who went to CUNY from the specialized high schools. When I taught at Lab School, some of my best students (especially first generation Americans from immigrant families) also went to CUNY because their families just didn't have the money for something more renowned. I'll leave that argument for others and focus on what I know best (advice I'd highly recommend to you) -- the Grade 3-8 and Regents first level Math exams.
The scaled passing score on Integrated Algebra is a 30 out of 87 points. Period. There's no if's, and's, or but's, no way of dancing around the fact that a 34.5% raw score earn you a 65 and hence the "math credit" toward a (now meaningless) Regents diploma. That fact has nothing to do with how the rest of the exam is scaled. Scaling creates all sorts of issues, but none of them are pertinent to the central argument Ms. Seung Ok was originally making. And nothing in this argument even begins to address all the other aspects of score inflation built into the Regents: narrowed scope, simpler questions, repetition of question content and format, opportunities for systemic cheating, etc.
Regardless, in order to help educate you, I've included below the cut scores for a 65 (passing grade) on every Math A and Integrated Algebra exam since June 1999. The second column is each exam's maximum possible score, the third column is the cut score for a 65 based on that exam's conversion table, and the last column is the percentage of the maximum raw score that it took to get the 65 (e.g., 43 out of 85 in June 1999 was 50.59%, and that was converted to a 65).
MATH A
Jun-99 85 43 50.59
Jan-00 85 44 51.76
Jun-00 85 41 48.24
Aug-00 85 41 48.24
Jan-01 85 46 54.12
Jun-01 85 46 54.12
Aug-01 85 47 55.29
Jan-02 85 48 56.47
Jun-02 85 52 61.18
Aug-02 85 53 62.35
Jan-03 85 52 61.18
Jun-03 85 51 60.00
Jun-03 85 36 42.35
Jan-04 84 37 44.05
Jun-04 84 37 44.05
Aug-04 84 36 42.86
Jan-05 84 34 40.48
Jun-05 84 36 42.86
Aug-05 84 34 40.48
Jan-06 84 33 39.29
Jun-06 84 35 41.67
Aug-06 84 34 40.48
Jan-07 84 35 41.67
Jun-07 84 35 41.67
Aug-07 84 34 40.48
Jan-08 84 34 40.48
Jun-08 84 36 42.86
Aug-08 84 36 42.86
Jan-09 84 35 41.67
INTEGRATED ALGEBRA
Jun-08 87 30 34.48
Aug-08 87 30 34.48
Jan-09 87 31 35.63
Jun-09 87 30 34.48
As you can clearly see, the cut score percentage actually rose somewhat in the few years before NCLB turned education on its head and politicized the outcomes of state standardized exams. Since 2002 though, the cut score percentage has been declining steadily, reaching an abysmal and embarrassing low of 30 out of 87 in three of the four Integrated Algebra exams (which, by the way, are filled with questions that belong in middle schoolers' exams). So your contention that "next year a student may need a raw score of 40" is patently absurd -- it's never happened, and it's not going to happen until folks like you and your bosses who've politicized all of this get out of the middle of something none of you understand and let real educators and parents take charge of their children's education. You only have to look at what happened in June 2003, when the passing score was dropped precipitously due to "anomalies" in that exam but then never re-raised in the years and exams following to see what's going on.
The State has never significantly raised standards since the inception of NCLB. In fact, they've consistently gone the opposite direction, and not just for the high school Regents. The cut scores for Level 3 in Math have been lowered consistently at every grade level, almost one point per year, since 2006 (when full Grade 3-8 testing was implemented -- if you want those numbers, I have them and will happily provide you with them so you don't make a fool of yourself yet again).
Interestingly, the Regents have kept the bar for a "high pass" (85%) pretty much constant. But then again, nobody's looking at that because who cares about kids doing more than just climbing over the lowest bar we can possibly set for them? In point of fact, the 2008 CIR's from NYS make it clear that the percentages of kids scoring over 85% on Integrated Algebra (which requires a raw score equivalent of 77-78%) are horrifyingly low, zero percent in dozens of NYC high schools (I've already found 46 schools where that happened, a total of 81 schools out of 142 I've looked at where the 85% bar scaled score bar was crossed by 2% or less of the students, and a total of 106 out of 142 schools where less than 10% could manage a raw score that reached 75% of the raw score points available to them). Lest you think I'm cherry-picking, my 142 schools included Townsend Harris, LaGuardia, Cardozo, Bayside, Edward R. Murrow, Bronx Science, Brooklyn Tech, Stuyvesant, Millenium, Eleanor Roosevelt, Baruch, Hunter Science, School of the Future, Staten Island Tech, Pace HS, Forest Hills, Midwood, Manhattan Center for Science & Math, NEST+M, Bard Early College, Manhattan Village Academy, HS for Dual Language and Asian Studies, Murry Bergtraum, Leon Goldstein, PPAS, and many others that are considered to be among the city's best public schools.
Before you embarrass yourself with another sparkling revelation of your lack of knowledge and apparent unwillingness to study the data in order actually to support your statements with something substantative like some of the rest of us do, I suggest you think twice about what you say on the listserv and how you say it. When you speak, you are not David Cantor, citizen, you are David Cantor, NYC DOE. If you are going to make arguments on behalf of the Chancellor that are utterly bereft of both common sense and supporting fact, you are going to have to deal with responses from people who have spent time studying these things and understand what's really going on despite all the "feel good" P.R. that comes out of both SED and the NYC DOE.
If the tone of this email is insulting, it was meant to be. I'm outraged beyond bounds by what you wrote, not because it's in any way personal, but because it's so nonsensical and demonstrates so clearly how those of you at Tweed simply don't get it. As a presumably responsible representative of the DOE, you cannot just say anything you want (sorry, you're not Rush Limbaugh, at least not yet) and expect knowledgeable parents simply to roll over and say thank you. This listserv isn't one of your silly subway posters that can claim anything without having to deal with public responses. Do your homework and check your facts next time if you don't want to enrage people who actually know what they're talking about.
Steve Koss
David, the ball is in your court. Or did Seung and Steve serve an ace?
NY Times article link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/13/nyregion/13credit.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&ref=education
More comments on the article posted at Norms Notes:
Credit Recovery
The State has never significantly raised standards since the inception of NCLB. In fact, they've consistently gone the opposite direction, and not just for the high school Regents. The cut scores for Level 3 in Math have been lowered consistently at every grade level, almost one point per year, since 2006 (when full Grade 3-8 testing was implemented -- if you want those numbers, I have them and will happily provide you with them so you don't make a fool of yourself yet again).
Interestingly, the Regents have kept the bar for a "high pass" (85%) pretty much constant. But then again, nobody's looking at that because who cares about kids doing more than just climbing over the lowest bar we can possibly set for them? In point of fact, the 2008 CIR's from NYS make it clear that the percentages of kids scoring over 85% on Integrated Algebra (which requires a raw score equivalent of 77-78%) are horrifyingly low, zero percent in dozens of NYC high schools (I've already found 46 schools where that happened, a total of 81 schools out of 142 I've looked at where the 85% bar scaled score bar was crossed by 2% or less of the students, and a total of 106 out of 142 schools where less than 10% could manage a raw score that reached 75% of the raw score points available to them). Lest you think I'm cherry-picking, my 142 schools included Townsend Harris, LaGuardia, Cardozo, Bayside, Edward R. Murrow, Bronx Science, Brooklyn Tech, Stuyvesant, Millenium, Eleanor Roosevelt, Baruch, Hunter Science, School of the Future, Staten Island Tech, Pace HS, Forest Hills, Midwood, Manhattan Center for Science & Math, NEST+M, Bard Early College, Manhattan Village Academy, HS for Dual Language and Asian Studies, Murry Bergtraum, Leon Goldstein, PPAS, and many others that are considered to be among the city's best public schools.
Before you embarrass yourself with another sparkling revelation of your lack of knowledge and apparent unwillingness to study the data in order actually to support your statements with something substantative like some of the rest of us do, I suggest you think twice about what you say on the listserv and how you say it. When you speak, you are not David Cantor, citizen, you are David Cantor, NYC DOE. If you are going to make arguments on behalf of the Chancellor that are utterly bereft of both common sense and supporting fact, you are going to have to deal with responses from people who have spent time studying these things and understand what's really going on despite all the "feel good" P.R. that comes out of both SED and the NYC DOE.
If the tone of this email is insulting, it was meant to be. I'm outraged beyond bounds by what you wrote, not because it's in any way personal, but because it's so nonsensical and demonstrates so clearly how those of you at Tweed simply don't get it. As a presumably responsible representative of the DOE, you cannot just say anything you want (sorry, you're not Rush Limbaugh, at least not yet) and expect knowledgeable parents simply to roll over and say thank you. This listserv isn't one of your silly subway posters that can claim anything without having to deal with public responses. Do your homework and check your facts next time if you don't want to enrage people who actually know what they're talking about.
Steve Koss
David, the ball is in your court. Or did Seung and Steve serve an ace?
NY Times article link:
http://www.nytimes.
More comments on the article posted at Norms Notes:
Credit Recovery
Monday, July 13, 2009
AFT Hack Attack on Portland Local 5017
Some of you may not be paying attention to this "small" story in Portland, Or. But the role being played by the AFT against a local daring to discuss leaving the AFT is indicative of the kinds of desperate attempts to keep people in line. Let's say an entire chapter at a school decided to withdraw from COPE. Will the UFT come in and depose the elected union officials? Don't be surprised.Let's say you're a relatively small laid back union office in just as laid back Portland, Oregon and one day 20 guys in suits – and no one wears suits in Portland – barge in and take over your office, seizing all records and computers. They say they are from the national AFT (sent by Queen Randi) and are deposing the elected representatives of the Local. Having dealt with Unity Caucus goons for 40 years, what would I do? Call the cops and charge them with breaking and entry. But this is laid back Portland and people are polite.
Here's a follow-up on the Ed Notes report on the AFT takeover of Local 5017 in Portland, Oregon (Randi Goes to Portland As AFT Threatens Local Considering Disaffiliation).
There's a new blog for Local 5017: Take Back Local 5017
This blog is about union democracy. On July 7, 2009 Oregon Federation of Nurses and Health Professionals, Local 5017, a small healthcare local in Portland, Oregon was taken over by its parent union and put under trusteeship. We want Local 5017 back!
The first I knew something was up in Portland was when Randi facetiously asked me if I wanted to go with her to Oregon at her farewell speech to the UFT Ex Bd meeting, the one where Mike Mulgrew was crowned. Randi is due in Portland next week to try to put out the fire.
The Oregon Federation of Nurses and Health Professionals, Local 5017, has 3500 members, health care workers like lab techs and nurses. They have been in the AFT for 30 years, during which time their concerns have been mostly ignored by the AFT hierarchy. The more active members felt the AFT looked at them as a cash cow, sucking up their dues. One of them even showed up at an AFT convention dressed as a cow covered with cash.
The last straw came when the AFT pulled funding for an important lobbying campaign for a bill that would not allow hospitals to cut staff under a certain level, a lobbying campaign that received little support from the AFT all along. The Local had put much time and effort into the campaign and wasn't even informed by the Oregon AFT lobbyist that the bill had been dropped.
They had been watching from next door the effectiveness of the California Nurses Association led by Rose Ann DeMoro, a left progressive unionist and a dirty word to some union leaders, who is a VP on the AFL/CIO Exec Bd where she gets to rub elbows with Randi. (Hopefully, Randi's collaborationist agenda will not rub off on Rose Ann.) Dreams of actually having a union that would fight for them began to drift through Local 5017's Exec Bd and a decision was made in late May to explore their options, including disaffiliation from the AFT.
Some moles on the 5017 Exec Bd spilled the beans to AFT central and Randi sent a letter to the leaders, along the lines of "please come back, but if you don't, you're dead." Local 5017 elected leaders, upon legal advice, refused to talk to her. Off came the glove. One of the major charges? Their Constitution says they don't hold meetings in July and they called a general membership meeting to discuss - not vote - on the concept of whether disaffiliating from the AFT made sense and what were their other options. Wow! Another was misappropriation of union dues, a more serious charge – until you get the actual details. Like money spent to hold a meeting to discuss the issue of disaffiation. In the UFT, you see, discussing issues openly is considered subversive.
The AFT is like COPE in the UFT, or a black hole – once you get in, there is no getting back out. Ever.
It would be like ICE contacting the AFT and charging the UFT with a total lack of democracy, with manipulating school elections to assure Unity Caucus control wherever possible, for using member dues for personal political agendas, for running a massive patronage machine, etc. And having Randi Weingarten send in a team of AFT goons to take over the UFT and depose the union leadership – led by Randi Weingarten or her hand-picked successor Michael Mulgrew.
Never mind.
Now, we've been down this road before with the FMPR in Puerto Rico, whose 40,000 member actually did disaffiliate five years ago and was dragged into court (unsuccessfully by the AFT) for years. Ed Notes followed the story and used a bunch of stuff from Mike Antonucci at the Educational Intelligence Agency. Stories like this that make teachers unions look like goons make Antonucci salivate and he did a good job of covering the PR story over a period of time. (I collated the EIA stuff in chronological order. It is posted at Norm's Notes here. In addition, I posted more info - search using "FMPR" to find them all.)
Antonucci blogged about it today at EIA.
AFT Running the Puerto Rico Playbook in Oregon.
The officers and board of the Oregon Federation of Nurses and Health Professionals made the fatal mistake of planning to hold a meeting in July – something contrary to the union's bylaws. On the agenda was whether to ask the rank-and-file about remaining affiliated with the American Federation of Teachers.
A few former officers found out about the plan and went to AFT national headquarters with the news. AFT proceeded to remove the duly elected officers and the entire board, and establish a trusteeship. AFT tried this once before in Puerto Rico under similar cicumstances, but it didn't work so well.
Now we learn that the Oregon local officers haven't even seen the formal charges against them, and they claim the alleged unauthorized use of union dues has to do with the money spent to set up the meeting.
Supporters of the ousted officers have created a web site called Take Back Local 5017. My advice? First, get a good labor attorney. Second, contact the Association for Union Democracy. Third, get the members in the streets.
Get numbers in the streets? In laid back Portland? Our reports are that the AFT invaders (shades of Eva Moskowitz at PS 123) are using the Randi velvet fist, treating people real nice and trying to win enough people over to kill the insurgency. All in prep for Randi's visit next week (and wouldn't she be surprised to find me out front handing out Ed Notes).
Which will go like this:
All sweetness and feeling their pain and letting bygones be bygones. She will be like sugar and have almost everyone purring. Randi's brilliance is her understanding that you can buy most people with not much more than paying them some attention and promising more of the same (see New Action Caucus). Nothing much else will really change, but people will feel they are being listened to. Thus, the major insurgency will end, there will be a few months of being paid attention to and then it's back to the beginning.
My advice to Local 5017? Stay in the AFT (that I see as a fait accompli already) and join with other emerging dissidents to make Randi rue the day she bothered to try to lock you in.
Related
An earlier report from EIA: AFT Stages Coup (or Counter-Coup?) in Oregon.
Note his interesting final point: no member can be entirely comfortable with the summary removal of their elected officers based on the accusations of a handful of opponents. Exactly the tactic Unity Caucus uses to challenge chapter elections when they don't like the winning chapter leader or delegate.
... a small army of American Federation of Teachers officials and staff walked into the headquarters of the Oregon Federation of Nurses and Health Professionals (OFNHP) and took control of the union. The affiliate represents about 3,000 nurses and health care workers in both Washington and Oregon.
AFT put the union under a “protective order,” removing from office OFNHP President Kathy Geroux, three other officers, and the entire 16-member executive board.
“OFNHP’s leaders forgot what business they are in,” said AFT-appointed trustee Mark Richard. Richard previously served as an AFT-appointed trustee over the United Teachers of Dade after the Pat Tornillo scandal. ”They were supposed to protect members rights, create democracy in the workplace and the union hall and ensure that contractual language were protected. Instead, they engaged in a campaign of falsehoods, ignored members rights, violated their fiduciary responsibilities and placed their contract with Kaiser at risk.”
AFT asserts it was “approached by several members of the Oregon affiliate, including former elected officers, who presented a petition asking for assistance from the national union.” The current OFNHP leadership team was accused of “using union dues without proper authorization and taking actions in violation of the union’s local and national constitutions to change the bargaining status of OFNHP’s members and possibly switch union affiliations.”
“There was no other avenue left, so we acted,” said AFT spokesman Jamie Horwitz. “This is a rare circumstance triggered by a large number of local members contacting us and saying their local was out of control. The local has every right to leave the AFT, they just have to follow the rules.”
The situation may be exactly as AFT describes, but we should reserve judgment until we hear from the ousted union officers. AFT action’s are eerily similar to those it took in Puerto Rico in 2005, but the FMPR defied the trusteeship and successfully seceded from the national union.
AFT has the responsibility to protect members from the actions of unscrupulous local leaders – something it has had difficulty doing in the past – but no member can be entirely comfortable with the summary removal of their elected officers based on the accusations of a handful of opponents.
There will be more to come.
Yes there will. We're efforting to get ahold of Randi's letter to Local 5017 elected officials and hope to have reports on her visit.
Brooklyn Dreams Charter School Update
According to a Sheepshead (Bay) Bites update, the information on Brooklyn Dreams Charter School was inaccurate.
Some excerpts:
Hmmm. Does anyone smell a creationism rat? Or other duplicity? Charters routinely declare they will be seeking space, only to come back after getting approval saying they had no luck (see one Hebrew Language Academy). and one minute it's District 22 (where Shell bank is located) and the next they are looking in Dist. 21. Wherever the path of least resistance, I guess.
There will still be a public hearing at Shellbank MS on July 16
Charter Applicant Hearing
I.S. 14 – Shellbank MS 2424 Batchelder St.
Brooklyn, New York 11235
(Between Avenue Y & X)
The original article at SBB are here and at E.Notes here.
Some excerpts:
Officials overseeing the application process for the school told us that the BDCS is not planning on using public school facilities at Shell Bank J.H.S. or any other in any district. In the application details and executive summary we received in a pdf file from the NYC Department of Education Chancellor's office, the BDCS stated, "The founding group anticipates leasing renovated space for the school through NHA in CSD 21, and do not intend to seek space through the New York City Department of Education."
We were told that applications could take two to three years to write up and even more time to be approved, so it is difficult for a school to establish an address or physical facility before the application is submitted for approval. We were reminded that all charter schools are public schools that do not charge any tuition, and as such these schools, once approved, do have a right to use public school facilities -- so long as there is a justified need and permission is granted by the community's school district.
We found that although the school has listed as their educational service provider the National Heritage Academies -- a Grand Rapids, Michigan,-based group that advocates teaching Creationism as scientific theory -- a representative we spoke with on the phone at the NHA was not aware of this relationship with the BDCS. Still, the BDCS's Board of Directors has officially stated that, if approved, the school will be under the NHA's administration. The school's application summary also states this.
Hmmm. Does anyone smell a creationism rat? Or other duplicity? Charters routinely declare they will be seeking space, only to come back after getting approval saying they had no luck (see one Hebrew Language Academy). and one minute it's District 22 (where Shell bank is located) and the next they are looking in Dist. 21. Wherever the path of least resistance, I guess.
There will still be a public hearing at Shellbank MS on July 16
Charter Applicant Hearing
I.S. 14 – Shellbank MS 2424 Batchelder St.
Brooklyn, New York 11235
(Between Avenue Y & X)
The original article at SBB are here and at E.Notes here.
Staten Island CEC Takes Stand on Charter Schools
Staten Island is getting its first charter school. And there has been a reaction. This reso from the Staten Island Community Education Council (what used to be the local school board) is really worth checking out for its call for limits on what charter schools can pay and lots of other goodies. Thus Eva Moskowitz would lose her charter if she wants to make $375,000 a year. The argument that the money did not come from public funds is bogus. If they had the money to pay her, then why are we the public being forced to subsidize her schools by giving her space in public schools?
The following resolution was presented to the public at the Community Education Council 31 Calendar Meeting held on July 6, 2009 at the Petrides Educational Complex, Staten Island, New York. A vote was taken and the resolution approved unanimously by voice-vote of the CEC members present, as reflected in the Minutes.
RESOLUTION # 55 ~ CEC 31 REQUESTS THAT DOE & SUNY-BOARD OF REGENTS DENY CHARTER INCORPORATION TO ANY APPLICANT THAT DOES NOT: LIMIT SALARIES & SALARY INCENTIVES FOR CHARTER SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS; AND FOLLOW STANDARDS OF CONDUCT THAT ALL PUBLIC EMPLOYEES MUST FOLLOW REGARDING USE OF PUBLIC FUNDS
WHEREAS, there are currently 78 NYC charter schools, with a total of 24,000 students, and at least 20 additional charter schools have been approved to open in fall 2009; and
WHEREAS, every NYC charter school receives taxpayer money for each student it educates - for the 2008-2009 school year, the per pupil allocation (PPA) for charter schools in New York State is $12,432 – in addition to several state and federal grants; the vast majority of funding that charter schools receive — more than 95 percent — is from public school districts – approximately $150 million statewide and growing; and
WHEREAS the NY State Charter Schools Act of 1998 (Education Law § 2850-2857) clearly states that charter schools are considered to be “within the public school system” but also states that charter schools “operate independently of existing schools and school districts” (Article 56, § 2850, 2ff); and
WHEREAS the NY State Charter Schools Act of 1998 further describes a charter school in the following manner:
· As an “education corporation” (§ 2853, 1a); and
· For purposes of local zoning, land use regulation and building code compliance, “a charter school shall be deemed a nonpublic school” (§ 2853, 3a and 4a); while at the same time
· “Employees of a charter school may be deemed employees of the local school district for the purpose of providing retirement benefits, membership in the teachers’ retirement system and other retirement systems open to employees of public schools” (§ 2854 3c); however
· “An employee of a charter school shall be an employee of the education corporation and not an employee of the local school district” (§ 2854, 3a); and
· “A charter school shall be subject to the provisions of the public officers law” (§ 2854, 1e); but
· Aside from public schools’ health and safety, civil rights and student assessment requirements, “a charter school shall be exempt from all other state and local laws, rules, regulations or policies governing public or private schools, boards of education and school districts,
including those relating to school personnel and students, except as provided in the school’s charter” (§ 2854, 1b); and
· Each charter school may create its own “code of ethics” in its application for incorporation (§ 2851, 2v); and
WHEREAS it is obvious to the Community Education Council of District 31 (CEC 31) that the NY State Charter Schools Act of 1998 is inconsistent in regard to whether a charter school is treated as a public or nonpublic school, private corporation or city employer, all of which seems entirely dependent on whatever designation is most convenient for charter schools’ boards of trustees; and
WHEREAS CEC 31 believes that the lack of consistency in the law governing charter schools results in the board of trustees of these schools being allowed to establish their own policies and manage their schools’ finances as they see fit, and that their decisions allow them to flaunt NYC Department of Education regulations and NY state laws regarding conflicts-of-interest, use of public taxpayer funds and codes-of-ethics; and
WHEREAS CEC 31 believes that the carte blanche given to charter schools has led to situations such as:
· Misuse of taxpayer funds by a Bronx charter school rewarding its teachers with all-expenses-paid “staff retreats” to the Caribbean, Cancun and the Dominican Republic from a bank account that mixes public taxpayer dollars with privately raised donations
· A former director of a Brooklyn nonprofit charter-school management organization that oversees 2 charter schools was paid nearly $700,000 in her last year on the job -- almost triple the salary of the NYC schools chancellor
· The current chief executive of a fast-growing chain of Harlem charter schools – currently overseeing 4 schools with plans to eventually have 40 such schools within 10 years – received compensation of $310,000 last year - $250,000 in salary and $60,000 as a bonus as the “director”, chief executive officer’ and “independent contractor” for the same 4 charter schools. By managing the 4 charter schools she earned more than the NYC schools chancellor, who gets $250,000 to run 1,400 schools. She even surpassed the former SUNY chancellor, who manages 70 campuses with nearly 300,000 students.
· A Bronx charter school paid $400,000 to lease space in a building owned by its founder, whose director is a trustee of the school and whose wife is the school’s principal
· At the same Bronx charter school, a another trustee’s wife earned $55,000 in salary as a paid consultant helping set up a school fund-raising operation
· A NYC charter school set to open in 2009 in Washington Heights with plans to offer significantly higher pay for teachers, $125,000 per year, plus a potential bonus based on schoolwide performance
· The NYS Court of Appeals currently hearing arguments in a lawsuit brought by charter schools associations to prevent the NYS Comptroller from being able to perform audits of public charter schools, on the basis that that “the Comptroller’s audits of charter schools are duplicative and unfair”
Education Law § 2850-2857 clearly stipulates that the charter authorizer (DoE and/or NYS Education Department) and the Board of Regents provide oversight of charter schools, including fiscal accountability; however charters, which are publicly financed but independently operated, face less oversight from school districts and fiscal authorities such as the NYS Comptroller’s Office; THEREFORE BE IT
RESOLVED, that CEC 31 hereby requests that the NYC Department of Education and the SUNY Board of Regents withhold granting of incorporation as a “charter” to any school that seeks to pay a charter school administrator, principal or teacher an annual salary - including salary incentives such as bonuses – in an amount which exceeds the current salary of a comparable public elementary school or middle school administrator, principal or teacher. The annual salary, including bonuses, for charter school elementary school administrators should not exceed $140,000 per year and $175,000 per year for middle school administrators; and BE IT
FURTHER RESOLVED, that the NYC Department of Education and the SUNY Board of Regents withhold granting of incorporation as a “charter” to any school that does not adhere to standard conflicts-of-interest regulations and codes-of-ethics rules that apply to all NY city and NY state employees and elected officials.
Explanation: We believe that since charter schools receive taxpayer money, they should be required to follow standards of conduct that all public employees must follow regarding use of public funds. Charter schools’ trustees should not be allowed to pay whatever salaries and bonuses they wish, nor do business with relatives and friends if taxpayer money is involved. Charter schools’ financial records should be subject to audit by the NYS Comptroller, in addition to the SUNY Charter Schools Institute on a regular basis. If any charter school applicant does not wish to adhere to these stipulations, their “charter” should be denied. We do not believe that we should seek to improve schools at any price. We do not believe that anything should be allowed in exchange for improved student performance and scores. Honest standards, fairness, and transparency must exist when public funding is given to any organization.
APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY by roll call vote of all members present: 9 YES; 0 NO; (Absent for vote: Harrison)
PASSED and ADOPTED this 6th Day of July, 2009.
/s/ Kathy Baldassano
Kathy Baldassano
Administrative Assistant, CEC 31
The following resolution was presented to the public at the Community Education Council 31 Calendar Meeting held on July 6, 2009 at the Petrides Educational Complex, Staten Island, New York. A vote was taken and the resolution approved unanimously by voice-vote of the CEC members present, as reflected in the Minutes.
RESOLUTION # 55 ~ CEC 31 REQUESTS THAT DOE & SUNY-BOARD OF REGENTS DENY CHARTER INCORPORATION TO ANY APPLICANT THAT DOES NOT: LIMIT SALARIES & SALARY INCENTIVES FOR CHARTER SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS; AND FOLLOW STANDARDS OF CONDUCT THAT ALL PUBLIC EMPLOYEES MUST FOLLOW REGARDING USE OF PUBLIC FUNDS
WHEREAS, there are currently 78 NYC charter schools, with a total of 24,000 students, and at least 20 additional charter schools have been approved to open in fall 2009; and
WHEREAS, every NYC charter school receives taxpayer money for each student it educates - for the 2008-2009 school year, the per pupil allocation (PPA) for charter schools in New York State is $12,432 – in addition to several state and federal grants; the vast majority of funding that charter schools receive — more than 95 percent — is from public school districts – approximately $150 million statewide and growing; and
WHEREAS the NY State Charter Schools Act of 1998 (Education Law § 2850-2857) clearly states that charter schools are considered to be “within the public school system” but also states that charter schools “operate independently of existing schools and school districts” (Article 56, § 2850, 2ff); and
WHEREAS the NY State Charter Schools Act of 1998 further describes a charter school in the following manner:
· As an “education corporation” (§ 2853, 1a); and
· For purposes of local zoning, land use regulation and building code compliance, “a charter school shall be deemed a nonpublic school” (§ 2853, 3a and 4a); while at the same time
· “Employees of a charter school may be deemed employees of the local school district for the purpose of providing retirement benefits, membership in the teachers’ retirement system and other retirement systems open to employees of public schools” (§ 2854 3c); however
· “An employee of a charter school shall be an employee of the education corporation and not an employee of the local school district” (§ 2854, 3a); and
· “A charter school shall be subject to the provisions of the public officers law” (§ 2854, 1e); but
· Aside from public schools’ health and safety, civil rights and student assessment requirements, “a charter school shall be exempt from all other state and local laws, rules, regulations or policies governing public or private schools, boards of education and school districts,
including those relating to school personnel and students, except as provided in the school’s charter” (§ 2854, 1b); and· Each charter school may create its own “code of ethics” in its application for incorporation (§ 2851, 2v); and
WHEREAS it is obvious to the Community Education Council of District 31 (CEC 31) that the NY State Charter Schools Act of 1998 is inconsistent in regard to whether a charter school is treated as a public or nonpublic school, private corporation or city employer, all of which seems entirely dependent on whatever designation is most convenient for charter schools’ boards of trustees; and
WHEREAS CEC 31 believes that the lack of consistency in the law governing charter schools results in the board of trustees of these schools being allowed to establish their own policies and manage their schools’ finances as they see fit, and that their decisions allow them to flaunt NYC Department of Education regulations and NY state laws regarding conflicts-of-interest, use of public taxpayer funds and codes-of-ethics; and
WHEREAS CEC 31 believes that the carte blanche given to charter schools has led to situations such as:
· Misuse of taxpayer funds by a Bronx charter school rewarding its teachers with all-expenses-paid “staff retreats” to the Caribbean, Cancun and the Dominican Republic from a bank account that mixes public taxpayer dollars with privately raised donations
· A former director of a Brooklyn nonprofit charter-school management organization that oversees 2 charter schools was paid nearly $700,000 in her last year on the job -- almost triple the salary of the NYC schools chancellor
· The current chief executive of a fast-growing chain of Harlem charter schools – currently overseeing 4 schools with plans to eventually have 40 such schools within 10 years – received compensation of $310,000 last year - $250,000 in salary and $60,000 as a bonus as the “director”, chief executive officer’ and “independent contractor” for the same 4 charter schools. By managing the 4 charter schools she earned more than the NYC schools chancellor, who gets $250,000 to run 1,400 schools. She even surpassed the former SUNY chancellor, who manages 70 campuses with nearly 300,000 students.
· A Bronx charter school paid $400,000 to lease space in a building owned by its founder, whose director is a trustee of the school and whose wife is the school’s principal
· At the same Bronx charter school, a another trustee’s wife earned $55,000 in salary as a paid consultant helping set up a school fund-raising operation
· A NYC charter school set to open in 2009 in Washington Heights with plans to offer significantly higher pay for teachers, $125,000 per year, plus a potential bonus based on schoolwide performance
· The NYS Court of Appeals currently hearing arguments in a lawsuit brought by charter schools associations to prevent the NYS Comptroller from being able to perform audits of public charter schools, on the basis that that “the Comptroller’s audits of charter schools are duplicative and unfair”
Education Law § 2850-2857 clearly stipulates that the charter authorizer (DoE and/or NYS Education Department) and the Board of Regents provide oversight of charter schools, including fiscal accountability; however charters, which are publicly financed but independently operated, face less oversight from school districts and fiscal authorities such as the NYS Comptroller’s Office; THEREFORE BE IT
RESOLVED, that CEC 31 hereby requests that the NYC Department of Education and the SUNY Board of Regents withhold granting of incorporation as a “charter” to any school that seeks to pay a charter school administrator, principal or teacher an annual salary - including salary incentives such as bonuses – in an amount which exceeds the current salary of a comparable public elementary school or middle school administrator, principal or teacher. The annual salary, including bonuses, for charter school elementary school administrators should not exceed $140,000 per year and $175,000 per year for middle school administrators; and BE IT
FURTHER RESOLVED, that the NYC Department of Education and the SUNY Board of Regents withhold granting of incorporation as a “charter” to any school that does not adhere to standard conflicts-of-interest regulations and codes-of-ethics rules that apply to all NY city and NY state employees and elected officials.
Explanation: We believe that since charter schools receive taxpayer money, they should be required to follow standards of conduct that all public employees must follow regarding use of public funds. Charter schools’ trustees should not be allowed to pay whatever salaries and bonuses they wish, nor do business with relatives and friends if taxpayer money is involved. Charter schools’ financial records should be subject to audit by the NYS Comptroller, in addition to the SUNY Charter Schools Institute on a regular basis. If any charter school applicant does not wish to adhere to these stipulations, their “charter” should be denied. We do not believe that we should seek to improve schools at any price. We do not believe that anything should be allowed in exchange for improved student performance and scores. Honest standards, fairness, and transparency must exist when public funding is given to any organization.
APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY by roll call vote of all members present: 9 YES; 0 NO; (Absent for vote: Harrison)
PASSED and ADOPTED this 6th Day of July, 2009.
/s/ Kathy Baldassano
Kathy Baldassano
Administrative Assistant, CEC 31
Sunday, July 12, 2009
Stringer and Avella Speak at PS 123 Protest of Harlem Success Takeover Attempt
July 10, 2009
Stringer speaks before entering the school on a tour. See the follow-up video of what he has to say when he comes out. Avella as usual says good stuff. The Master of Ceremonies is William Hargraves, an former parent at the school. The wonderful GEM crew came out on very short notice and did some notable chanting (still to come in upcoming video.)
See previous ed notes reports:
Angel Gonzalez and George Schmidt at PS 123 Protest of Harlem Success Takeover Take 2 - July 10, 2009
Rally Fri July 10 as DOE Rules In Favor of Harlem Success Academy Charter School taking over more space at PS 123!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsRDSDGSmK0
Stringer speaks before entering the school on a tour. See the follow-up video of what he has to say when he comes out. Avella as usual says good stuff. The Master of Ceremonies is William Hargraves, an former parent at the school. The wonderful GEM crew came out on very short notice and did some notable chanting (still to come in upcoming video.)
See previous ed notes reports:
Angel Gonzalez and George Schmidt at PS 123 Protest of Harlem Success Takeover Take 2 - July 10, 2009
Rally Fri July 10 as DOE Rules In Favor of Harlem Success Academy Charter School taking over more space at PS 123!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsRDSDGSmK0
TQ and Class SIze
John Thompson has made some great comments at this debate at Gotham:
"I written about the mess four years ago when we became The Wire. How did we
solve it? We just hired more teachers the next year. All of a sudden, problems
that seemed impossible seemed manageable. Then when we we back to the normal
allotment, problems increased again."
I responded:
Just hire more teachers to solve basic problems, the notorious "throwing cash at the problem" we see debunked by the ed deformers. I wonder where you guys got these teachers from? Were they vetted for quality? This is what the deformers say- teacher quality is more important than class size. But what you did was raise the quality of all teachers because TQ does not exist in a vacuum.
When I raised this issue at a forum with Rotherham and Russo, Jennifer Medina from the NY Times, and Richard Colvin of the Hechinger Institute on Education and the Media at Teachers College, Columbia University. Colvin was incensed when I compared class size in urban areas to suburban schools, saying how the cost was astronomical. "Some people drive Mercedes but not everyone needs to drive a Mercedes," he said. "You can still get around in a Toyota."
Of course, when the financial crisis hit and Bear Sterns and AIG needed enormous funding, all the money that would have enable urban kids to sit in a Mercedes magically appeared.
In NYC they supposedly cut crime by putting lots more police on the streets. They were not vetted for quality first. Some were good and some were bad, but their very presence as a resource had an impact. I say instead of using that stimulus money to reward school systems that kill tenure or expand charter schools, try a few experiments by inundating the very worst schools with masses of teachers, social workers and other services - sort of an expansion of the Harlem Children's Zone. But no one wants to try that. Better to target teachers and unions by using the "it's so hard to get rid of bad teachers" sob story as an excuse not to reduce class size.
"I written about the mess four years ago when we became The Wire. How did we
solve it? We just hired more teachers the next year. All of a sudden, problems
that seemed impossible seemed manageable. Then when we we back to the normal
allotment, problems increased again."
I responded:
Just hire more teachers to solve basic problems, the notorious "throwing cash at the problem" we see debunked by the ed deformers. I wonder where you guys got these teachers from? Were they vetted for quality? This is what the deformers say- teacher quality is more important than class size. But what you did was raise the quality of all teachers because TQ does not exist in a vacuum.
When I raised this issue at a forum with Rotherham and Russo, Jennifer Medina from the NY Times, and Richard Colvin of the Hechinger Institute on Education and the Media at Teachers College, Columbia University. Colvin was incensed when I compared class size in urban areas to suburban schools, saying how the cost was astronomical. "Some people drive Mercedes but not everyone needs to drive a Mercedes," he said. "You can still get around in a Toyota."
Of course, when the financial crisis hit and Bear Sterns and AIG needed enormous funding, all the money that would have enable urban kids to sit in a Mercedes magically appeared.
In NYC they supposedly cut crime by putting lots more police on the streets. They were not vetted for quality first. Some were good and some were bad, but their very presence as a resource had an impact. I say instead of using that stimulus money to reward school systems that kill tenure or expand charter schools, try a few experiments by inundating the very worst schools with masses of teachers, social workers and other services - sort of an expansion of the Harlem Children's Zone. But no one wants to try that. Better to target teachers and unions by using the "it's so hard to get rid of bad teachers" sob story as an excuse not to reduce class size.
Saturday, July 11, 2009
What if NEA and AFT stop caring what other people think?
Antonucci asks the right question and we have the answer. Let's try to stop worrying what other people think and start organizing the counter revolution.
Leo Casey claims there is an ed reform - deform- train heading down the tracks and the AFT/UFT needs to get ahead of it and jump on board. We say there is a counter reactive train of teacher/parent true progressive ed reformers coming from the other direction. And we are helping to drive it.
Leo Casey claims there is an ed reform - deform- train heading down the tracks and the AFT/UFT needs to get ahead of it and jump on board. We say there is a counter reactive train of teacher/parent true progressive ed reformers coming from the other direction. And we are helping to drive it.
Intercepts
| Bad News, Bob; Even the Center Cannot Hold Posted: 10 Jul 2009 12:31 PM PDT Mickey Kaus points us to the latest report from the Citizens’ Commission on Civil Rights, titled “National Teachers’ Unions and the Struggle Over School Reform.” I thought about excerpting the stinging barbs from CCCR’s absolute flaying of NEA and AFT, but it’s really worth your time to read the entire 36-page report, then head over to this page for a list of the organization’s commissioners. Not a conservative right-wing bastard in the bunch. The public perception battle is over, and the teachers’ unions have lost. But will it have any effect on Congress and state legislatures? The NRA, tobacco companies, PETA, the ACLU and Big Oil all have negative public images they can’t shed, yet they are still effective in getting their way. What if NEA and AFT stop caring what other people think? |
Angel Gonzalez and George Schmidt at PS 123 Protest of Harlem Success Takeover Take 2 - July 10, 2009
Gem began receiving calls on Thursday evening from PS 123 parents and teachers that the DOE had ruled in favor of Eva Moskowtiz and the movers and painters were coming Friday morning. They asked us to be there and we were. That all press reports ignored our strong presence is not surprising. We'll comment more on this in a follow-up as we post more video of Scott Stringer and Tony Avella. See our earlier video of the protest on July 7 as teachers and parents tried to stop Harlem Success from squeezing them out of their space. Here are a powerful six minutes of Angel and George making the case against charter schools.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1e_2vwEn_zQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1e_2vwEn_zQ
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)