Unsocialized Promotion

Lots of reporting going on today over the politically tinged BloomKlein announcement they were going to end socialized promotion in 4th and 6th grades. Who knew Bloomberg was a socialist?

Never mind.

NYC Educator lays it on in his inimical way
Bloomberg Ends Social Promotion, Makes Tests So Easy Your Dog Can Pass Them

Followed by Leonie Haimson with the research to back up what she is saying.
The Mayor commits educational malpractice, once again

Maura Walz at Gotham Schools calls it "Shooting Blind."
Social promotion’s effect in New York City still largely unknown

Mulgrew over at the UFT basically approves ("Adding the fourth and sixth grades to the city's promotion policy is clearly a step in the right direction.") with the usual whine that he hopes the kids who are left back get the help they need - wink, wink.

Oh, we know what help that means.

Credit recovery, easy tests, phony stats, mirror fogging 101.

Kids managing to not get promoted, will have their families given a one way ticket to anywhere but here by Bloomie.


Out Takes
ICE is setting up a special blog focused on the upcoming UFT elections in January 2010. ICE will be working with TJC again and is also working to incorporate people from other non-caucus activist groups. Elements of the platform should be released soon.

Needed: people to distribute materials to people in their schools, both hard copy and through email and to be an advocate for the slate. Also people to run for AFT/NYSUT delegate (800 positions available). Don't worry about winning any of these as Unity has stacked the deck to make sure they dominate the AFT and NYSUT with their "winner take all" rules. Email iceuft@gmail.com if interested.

Warning: If there was a vigorous opposition to Unity Caucus, Unity Caucus would not have been able to force so many bad policies down the throats of the rank and file. The reality of the current UFT undemocratic structure, precludes winning many positions. This is about growing an opposition - building the infrastructure so that the UFT/Unity leadership will be dragged into making the democratic changes needed. The battleground starts in your own schools.

What's wrong with charter schools?

This recent comment at Gotham Schools by Ceolaf is worth repeating in a main line post. And yes, Ceolaf, we want more, especially on the tracking issue raised. I've been thinking along those lines too. We used to track kids by reading scores and that policy changed - I hear. Though the talented and gifted programs seem to get around some of that. We used to have 600 schools to segregate kids who were troubled. Ceolaf makes the great point that charters can pick off the top performing and least troubled kids – I heard stories in LA, especially from Candi in DC, about how charters make sure NOT to have a special ed teacher on board so they can steer parents away. Thus we are heading towards a dual school system where the public schools, often in the same building as a charter, ultimately end up with the tougher kids to work with. If that is what our leaders intend then say it instead of playing the stealth game.


There is a new comment on the post "What is it about Eva Moskowitz that attracts so many enemies?"
http://gothamschools.org/2009/02/27/what-is-it-about-eva-moskowitz-that-attracts-so-many-enemies/

Author: ceolaf

What's wrong with charter schools?

Well, I would say that the first problem is that there are a whole bunch of people who believe that charters are actually answer to systemic improvement of our schools, and that clearly is not the case. Charterness, in and of itself, does not have an impact on pedagogy, instruction or the kinds of interactions and issue that make up a child's education. Charterness is a governance issue, not an instructional or staffing issue. Therefore, this charter issue, and those who perpetuate it, such so much reform attention and energy that we are not investigating or furthering the kinds of reforms that have even a theory of action for how they will improve children's educational experiences.

The second problem is really a set of problems. There have a been a lot of theories for why/how charter schools will improve the larger educational landscape (e.g. little lab schools with knowledge transfer, competition, etc.) Over and over again, research shows that these theories do not hold true on the ground, and yet charter proponents continue to clamor for more charter schools-- even though the original charter laws in most states had caps until they proved their efficacy. They haven't, and there are not even any theories of action left that have not been been disproved. (Or, if there are, I have not seen them.) Combine this with the first issue, and we lose potential gains.

More directly, we know the importance of home and peer effects on students. That is, supportive home environments (e.g. a quiet time and place where kids can do homework, parents who model bringing work home, parents who value education, etc.) help to create better student outcomes. We know that peer pressure impacts academic attitudes and work ethics. So, if charter schools attract a disproportionate share of kids with really support home environments, other kids will be hurt by the absence of those kids from their schools and classrooms. Of course, this is an old issue that applies to the tracking debates and even the elite exam schools. We've agreed in education that tracking is bad, even if not a tiny number of elite exam schools. But charter schools certainly make that a much bigger/more common issue.

Fourth, and specifically to NYC, Bloomberg and Klein appear to favor charter schools in ways that others have already documented quite well. They have turned much of it into a zero-sum game. For example, expansion of charter schools coming at the expense of space in non-charter public schools. But I'll leave that to others to explore.

More systemically, I really believe that GOP/conservative support for charter schools is very much about undermining teacher union membership. (Let me know if you need to be convinced that this is true.) This is bad for the wider educational system because teacher unions are by far the most effective political players in support of maintaining or increasing funding for education
-- locally, state-wide and nationally. They have more knowledge and experience with education, how schools and classrooms work and what children need than others who try to shape our educational legislation. Most others argue, in effect, for lower educational spending, a weakening of supports and reductions in professionalism.

Then there are some more diffuse issues. There are a lot of fools out there who think that because they have some memories of what schooling is -- and from a student's perspective, of course -- that they are qualified to made demands about educational policy. They insist on foolish ideas that clearly demonstrate that they don't know jack about schools, classrooms or those who work in them. Their success with getting charter schools and charter schools misleading faux superiority to non-charter public schools (again, let me know if you want me to
explain what I am talking about), they are encouraged to make further dumb demands of the rest of the educational establishment. (e.g. abolish requirements for substantive training for aspiring teachers, base teacher compensation of tests that have never been shown to reflect the quality of instruction).

You want more? [YES- MORE ON THE TRACKING ISSUE]

See all comments on this post here:
http://gothamschools.org/2009/02/27/what-is-it-about-eva-moskowitz-that-attracts-so-many-enemies/#comments

Related:
NYC Educator:
Charter School Deems Kid Too Dangerous to Be Around Students or Faculty, Sends Him to Public School

Come to an Ed Notes Teabag Party and Town Hall Meeting

I've had it with all that socialist government interference. Why I was just driving and had to stop at a traffic light. And a STOP sign. There were speed limits. And worst of all, I was not able to drive on the other side of the road like those people with cute accents in England and Australia do. And Japan- the English accent there is not that cute.

We need more of this

How dare they keep us from driving wherever we want!
It's all because of Obama, that socialist.

Make a stand now.

Ed Notes is organizing town hall meetings nationwide to protest restrictive traffic laws.

Join us in ending tyranny.

At Schools Matter: Commentary on: A teacher explains why she is leaving

Teacher retention, or lack thereof, is the topic of the day.

This post by teacherken, "A teacher explains why she is leaving," is so sensible and goes so deep.

But Schools Matter is a blog that always goes deep.* Read about Sarah Fine, a Teach for America recruit in a charter school in Washington DC, who leaves the classroom after 4 years. Now of course if she continues writing about teaching, TFA will count her as one of the ones who remained connected to education in some manner without addressing the reasons she left.

Actually, when Fine talks about lack of respect for classroom teachers, there is something inherent in TFAs' emphasis on their people migrating out of the classroom and into leadership positions. You know, at TFA it's all about making policy, not actually teaching kids.

After reading Fine's op ed in the Washington Post and teacherken's analysis, come back here.


So many good points were touched on. But I think a missing ingredient for many frustrated teachers is being part of an external political force for change to counter their isolation. The union could have been that force but is clearly not. And the UFT, other than in its earliest infancy, never has been since I started teaching, though it mouthed off like it was.

I was lucky when in 1970 I met a group of like-minded teachers and we banded together to publish our views and reach out to others. As progressive reform educators we became somewhat of an alternative voice in the UFT to Shanker. We met just about every week for 10 years. We went back to school the next day with renewed rigor. We gained political perspective so that every day we went in to school with a better understanding of the forces that were affecting our kids and our jobs. We were probably better teachers for it because we didn't tend to blame our kids or their parents or ourselves.

Did we accomplish the reform we sought? Not at all. But we kept each other sane and in the system, myself for 35 years working in one of the more depressed areas of Brooklyn.

But we taught each other to be equipped to fight our administrations more effectively and also to fight our own union, which unfortunately, often teamed up with admins against political activists. (There is nothing to toughen you up like having your district UFT rep and your district superintendent visit your assistant principal together and suggest he find ways to give you a U rating).

I put a piece in the side panel from Chicago CORE's co-chairperson Jackson Potter that relates to this issue. CORE reminds me of the group I was with in the 70's:

Jackson spoke about how CORE is effectively changing the culture of the Union. He spoke about how CORE came from a group of teachers who were not interested in leaving the classroom, but were interested in using our brotherhood and sisterhood within the Union to make the classroom a place where we can better serve our students. CORE wants to put a stop to the culture of “the further you get away from the classroom, the bigger the rewards.”

Go to Chicago Sarah Fine and seek out CORE. You would live to teach many more years. Or just come to NYC and hang out with GEM and ICE.

Recently, I've been meeting some young teachers with a social justice political perspective in Teachers Unite and GEM. Hopefully they will band together in ways that will keep them in the game– and in the classroom. That is part of what TU is doing with its teacher activism courses and the monthly chapter leader support groups.


*Recent posts on charters schools at Schools Matter
Governor Patrick Intervenes in Corrupt Charter Approval in Gloucester

Charter Alliance Owes $400,000 to District; Accountability, Oversight, Responsibility Lacking

The Great Healthcare Debate

I was going to write this as an addendum to another post, but since NYC Educator put up this great post today (In Which I Face Down the Grim Socialist Machine), comparing his experiences in emergency rooms in the US and the dreaded Canadian single payer system (MUST READ), I'll put my 2 cents in here.

We went into the city to meet a group of friends at the Metropolitan Museum yesterday afternoon. Someone should have sent us to an emergency room for leaving a beautiful Rockaway on a sunny afternoon, but traffic was smooth and we made it in about 40 minutes and I found a parking spot on 86th street off 5th Ave. Not bad.

We met up with our friends, did some museum stuff and then on to the main event - dinner a few blocks away - $35 restaurant week, 3 course delicious dinner.

One couple, a former teacher and a former cop, started talking about all the anti-Obama health care emails they were getting, especially from other teachers. "He has to be stopped," our friend said. "Before the government takes over our health care."

This is not some town hall meeting where people are riled by right wing agitators. These are people from Brooklyn.

My wife, who works in health care, got that look in her eye. She works with all the scuz ball thieving insurance companies and says flat out, medicare is the most efficient and easiest to work with. Thus her support for a single payer system.

The former cop has medicare and his wife will have it fairly soon. So we ask, gently, do they want to give that up? "No, of course not," they say. "Did you know that is a government program?" They didn't. Obama has screwed up big time if they don't.

Did we change their minds? I doubt it.

My take on this? Real health care reform is basically dead. Obama waffled in trying to be a centrist and satisfy all parties and he will end up with tiny changes that will do little good and keep costing a fortune. Now, in the face of the right wing town hall attacks, there are attempts to mobilize that same spirit that he had in the campaign. But I can say as an educator who watched Obama accept the corporate driven ed reform agenda hook, line and sinker - the one area he didn't have to waffle on because he had the teacher unions sucking up – the thrill is gone. I'll just move to Canada or France when I get sick.


Addendum

We got on the line that suggests paying $20. Now I get museumitis after less than an hour and I figure an hour in the museum is worth about 3 bucks. When I hand over $6 and say "two" I get that "cheap bastard" look of disgust. But she hands me two little blue pins.

We go past the security guard who glares at us. The pins look like everyone else's but I'm sure it has an invisible dye that broadcasts "THESE PEOPLE ARE CHEAP."

Well, to make a long story short, the temple of Dendur was ok. Lots of space for such a small temple. I was looking for the Nile to flood while we were standing there.

When I used to take my classes to the MET in the 70's, I think I took them out to pretty much that very spot that the part of the MET houses it when it was still an open field and kids could roll around on it. Then we were off to the great playground across the street on 85th St, where my kids got to mix with all the kids there with their nannies, while I joined them on the benches. Once in a while it felt nice to be nanny for a day. Except they had one and I had 25.

UFT Contract Questionnaire and UFT Cast of Thousands Contract Committee

The cone of silence descends on the UFT negotiating committee.

Here is a follow-up to our post on the UFT Survey on Thursday (The UFT Survey Says (Gag, Gag).....) which included an analysis by TJC and an opportunity to get a copy of Marian Swerdlow's point by point comparison titled

2006 vs. 2009: A Section-by-Section Guide to What Can We Learn from Comparing Two Questionnaires

Marian said it was ok to include some quotes. Here is a sample of this insightful analysis:

I. Negotiating Priorities
Twenty out of twenty-two of these questions are identical to the 2006 survey. Mostly, this is because we did not get any of the "priorities" we were asked about three years ago. (Examples: "an enforceable process to identify and reduce excessive workload," "less restricted use of sick days," "stronger contract language requiring supervisors to honor program preferences.") The changes are instructive. Gone is a question about "improved medical benefits." This omission, and other changes I'll describe below, make it clear to me that there is a de-emphasis on our medical benefits. My guess is that this is because we are about to make concessions on our medical benefits. Also omitted is "maintaining current pension benefits." As of June 22, that patient died.

She does this for every section. Email me for a copy at normsco@gmail.com.

ICE's Vera Pavone also did some analysis:

A couple of points to add to the discussion on the Contract Questionnaire and the Contract Committee. Maybe they were made and I missed them:

1. The contract questionnaire has been distributed to all working members including nurses. Pages 1 through 7 are to be answered by everyone, and then subsequent pages are for different job titles. The questions for every member include items on: class size; adequate equipment and supplies; the 37 ½ minutes; improved working conditions in after-school and summer activities; relief from involuntary coverages; safety and discipline; training and materials for mandated programs; money for instructional materials; hours spent outside school for calling parents, preparing lessons, grading papers. Why should nurses be weighing in on these questions?

2. The issue of class size is posed in the usual divisive manner that we have come to expect from the Unity leadership: We are asked to rate in terms of importance:

“5. lower class size as a part of the contract, but not if it takes money from salary” and

“6. lower class size as a part of the contract, even if it takes money from salary”

Why were questions on class size coupled with salary? Why not all other questions that involve costs—improved facilities, salary supplements, adequate equipment and supplies, improved working conditions in after-school and summer activities, reducing excessive workload?

Of course for almost 40 years the Unity Caucus leaders have consistently posed lower class size against salary as a way of confusing and dividing teachers from one another.

3. The only item on the 37-1/2 minutes is “address concerns regarding use of 37 ½ minutes”. What about the choice of calling for the elimination of the 37 ½ minutes?

4. “School-wide bonus programs should be expanded.” (p. 10) So the choice is between expansion and leaving as is. Shouldn’t teachers have a chance to weigh in on “School-wide bonuses should be eliminated.” Or “School-wide bonuses should not be tied to student test scores.”

4. Student Assessments and Tests (p. 11):

What about the elimination of the high-stakes aspects of tests?

Questions on the Negotiation Committee: How are people chosen to be on this committee? Of the 350 committee members how many are in Unity Caucus? Does secrecy mean that Unity Caucus members don’t discuss the issues brought up for discussion among themselves? Are we to believe that the only discussion that takes place among Unity Caucus members is in the committee room?

Good questions Vera. Ahhh, the negotiating committee and the cone of silence or gag order. I didn't cover some of the aspects of the undemocratic nature of the 350 (it might as well be 3000) negotiating committee. I got this email from someone on the committee:

Each member (secret cult) had to sign a contract that swears them to secrecy. They may have to leave work (school) and if they are requested to do so, they will be paid. Members have to promise to attend all meetings. The issue of discussing what goes on at the meetings is strictly prohibited. That part was in the contract several times.

I'll do more on this farce in the future but here is another interesting email I received:

I have a newbie teacher friend. Very, very new to the UFT and not aware of half the things we have struggled with forever. Anyway, was invited to participate on the UFT Negotiation Committee. What's the story on that?? How are they "choosing" random teachers to work on the new contract? Not to mention brand new people who know nothing about the contract and how members have been sold out over the years. I think this is crazy!

LIFT THE CONE OF SILENCE. CALL FOR OPEN NEGOTIATIONS THAT WILL KEEP THE MEMBERS INFORMED ALL THE WAY AND STOP BACKROOM DEALS

UPDATED: Six More Years of Mayoral Control...

The battle to kill it forever starts NOW!!!!!

Join the resistance. Contact GEM, ICE, TJC.

Next time teachers and parents must be out in force.

STARTING MONDAY AT 12 NOON AT CITY HALL:


THE COALITION FOR PUBLIC EDUCATION
....is holding a Press Conference on the steps of City Hall at NOON on Monday August 10, 2009 to expose that Mayor Bloomberg and his media friends are giving us the false impression that Mayoral Control is the current rule of law for our public schools.

As of today, New York City public schools do not have Mayoral Control.

THE COALITION FOR PUBLIC EDUCATION understands that in order for the bill passed on August 6 by the NY State Senate to become law, it must first be debated and voted on and approved by the full NY State Assembly. Then it must go to Governor Patterson for review and signature. Until that happens, we have a decentralized system as enacted in 1969, not Mayoral Control as enacted in 2002. Since the NY State Assembly will not convene until sometime in September at the earliest, we will begin the new school year under a decentralized system without Mayoral Control. All reports to the contrary are false and misleading.

Joining us on the steps of City Hall will be elected officials who are opposed to Mayoral Control as well as educators, parents and students. They will explain how this deception is being used to help promote Bloomberg’s bid for a third term as mayor and help legitimize the privatizing of our public education system.

The UFT Survey Says (Gag, Gag).....

There's been a load of discussion on the current 35 page UFT survey on blogs and listserves. Accountable Talk is urging people to send it in blank in this post How to Fill Out Your UFT Contract Survey with this proviso:

But I am going to do one thing: I am writing across the front cover, in red marker, two simple words: PROTECT US. I urge you to do the same. Tell your friends and colleagues. Email this post to them. If the powers that be at the UFT HQ see enough of these, perhaps they will get the message.

Sorry, AT. Once the UFT allowed the cow of total principal power is out of the barn, there is no way to stuff it back in. At least not without a powerful rank and file movement that is willing to go to the mattresses with BloomKlein: NO COOPERATION ON ANYTHING

Merit pay? NADA.

Agreeing to data reports? NEVER.

Bullshit paperwork? NOT ONE STUPID BINDER WILL BE HANDED IN.

Call it a Winston Churchill WWII attitude. We will fight them on the beaches, etc.

But you know the answer. The UFT is incapable of this attitude. So you might get tough rhetoric from Mulgrew, but the UFT is so far in bed with BloomKlein he could not extricate it even if he wanted to.

One of the things I enjoyed the most when ICE's Jeff Kaufman was on the Executive Board was his take no prisoners approach, which infuriated Randi and the UFT/Unity Caucus suck-ups. I'll be the first to admit that when Jeff was chosen to run I barely knew him and had no idea he would bring this former cop/lawyer attitude to the table. But watching that show for three years was worth the shlep into Manhattan every two weeks. And of course the free buffet.

Anna Philips at Gotham Schools quoted Jeff :

Jeff Kaufman, a member of ICE, an opposition party within the UFT, sat on the union’s negotiating committee in 2005, but he said he never saw the survey results.

“If they get 10% response, I would be shocked. And the response they get back, you can’t tabulate — there’s no way they sit for hours putting these numbers together and reading the comments,” he said. “We do everything else electronically. I am certain a good percentage of these end up in the garbage.”

The survey, which at a bulging 35 pages long barely fits in its return envelope, lists a series of desirable changes to the contract under headings like “Class Size,” and “Respect and Professionalism,” and asks respondents to rate the importance of each on a scale of one to five. It must be returned by August 13, and may surprise more than a few union members who could return from summer vacations to find the deadline has passed.

Absent from the survey is any mention of tenure or the Absent Teacher Reserve — the pool of over 2,000 teachers who have lost their jobs and have yet to find work within the city’s school system.

Note the way the class size question is formulated. Did it ask if teachers want it as part of contract negotiations? Does it explain that there have been no significant changes in class size since it was last negotiated - in the late 1960's. I think the Beatles were involved on those negotiations.

ICE's partners in the upcoming UFT election, Teachers for a Just Contract (TJC) has takes a different position than Accountable Talk.

Note that Marian Swerdlow has an additional analysis on the UFT attempts to make it look like they are democratic and will send it out to those who ask, but she doesn't want it published on the internet. Email me and I'll forward your request to Marian.


TEACHER FOR A JUST CONTRACT: QUESTIONING THE QUESTIONNAIRE
The "Member Contract Questionnaire" sent to all UFT members is a beginning, however belated. But if membership input stops here, this will be a bad mistake. We hope there will be more complete follow-up questionnaires designed for use in and with discussion in chapters.

First of all, the timing of this questionnaire could scarcely be worse. Received the first week of August, it must be returned by August 13. This is the heart of most UFT members' vacation times, when the greatest number will be on vacation or out of touch. Why is it done now, with such a ridiculously short "window period" for return? Furthermore, the administration of this questionnaire to individuals by mail during vacation precludes collective discussion and sharing which always optimizes group decision-making. TJC is going to try to remedy this by offering some input of our own, via email, and encouraging more from you. We hope and expect our sister opposition group, ICE, will do the same with its email and its blog.

It's great that this questionnaire provides some opportunities for the respondents in "write in" their concerns. We want to encourage TJC supporters to think about the following writing in their thoughts on these issues when answering the questionnaire:

Excessing Procedures -
In 2005, the UFT started allowing principals to decide whether they will allow a teacher into their schools. The result has been an explosion in the number of teachers relegated to "ATR." This questionnaire basically ignores this problem. We need rights, protections and guarantees for excessed teachers.

Negative Material in the file -
Also in 2005, the UFT gave up the right to grieve a letter in the file on the basis of it being"unfair and inaccurate." This has made it much easier for administrators and supervisors to harass, intimidate, U-rate, remove and fire UFT members. The questionnaire does refer to this problem, but in ways that are too vague. For example, page 2, question 9 asks the respondent to rate "strengthen the grievance procedures" as a "negotiating priority." On page 9, it asks whether the respondent "strongly supports" 10 statements including "Restore Letter in the file grievance procedures." This is not clear enough. It should at least say, "Restore the right to grieve a letter in the file if it is unfair or inaccurate."

The Grievance Procedure in general:
Another specific way the grievance procedure could be strengthened is by imposing penalties on the D.o.E. for lack of timeliness. As of now, all the penalties for timeliness are on the UFT member: if we don't grieve on time, it is too late. However, the principal or the Chancellor's office can stall forever before rendering a decision, and there's no penalty. The result is that people can wait years until they get a decision on a grievance. In the mean time, the abuse can go on and on. If a lack of a decision within a time limit meant the grievant would win, we would get timely decisions, and violations could be curbed.

The 2005 so-called "Open Market Transfer Plan"
Does it serve our needs? Should we be fighting to restore the seniority plan, or aspects of it that could put checks on principals' arbitrary powers?

Rights of accused members
Do we want better protections for members against allegations? One important example: When there is an allegation against a member, the D.o.E. carries out an investigation. However, the accused member has no corresponding right to carry out an investigation, and doesn't even have the right to know the charge while the investigation is going on. This puts our members at a tremendous disadvantage and all the evidence is one-sided. Do we want better enforcement of due process rights and other rights of reassigned (removed) members?

New professional and administrative assignments
The only question here about this is whether there are too many of the latter as compared to the former. But do we want administrative assignments at all? The old way, both union and principal had to agree to add an activity to the menu, and what the "expectations" should be, and disputes went to a union-management committee. Now the principal has final say. Do we want to go back to the old way?

Sabbaticals
There is no mention of sabbaticals. Members are often denied sabbaticals and the explanations are irrational and/or violative. The union seems powerless to protect our sabbatical rights. Repeatedly, we hear sabbaticals are an endangered species. How important is it to us to have stronger protections for sabbatical rights and to make sure sabbaticals are preserved for our newest UFT members to enjoy as they accrue seniority?

Perhaps these issues can be included in follow-up questionnaires and discussions.

Individual questionnaires, and even group discussions, are important but not enough. It's great to go into a contract struggle with demands for generous raises and no givebacks. But sometimes a choice is unavoidable between taking one giveback or another, or launching or continuing a strike. It is imperative to consult the membership at such junctures. Even when you are making gains, during negotiations unforseen choices arise over which gains the membership wants more. The importance of membership control grows as negotiations intensify. In addition to Delegate Assemblies, membership meetings on the regional, borough and even union-wide level should be introduced to implement this control.

Unfortunately, the UFT's past record in this regard leaves much to be desired. For the present contract, there was an almost identical survey in August 2006. We had slightly more time to fill it out. There was no follow-up. When the contract was settled prematurely in October 2006, it had hardly any relationship to anything in the questionnaire, as evidenced by the fact that this questionnaire is practically identical to its predecessor: There seems to be only a single instance of winning the many priorities and issues we were asked about in the questionnaire: the five-year longevity. In the light of this, we have the right to feel skeptical over how much this questionnaire will mean.

2006 vs. 2009: A Section-by-Section Guide to What Can We Learn from Comparing Two Questionnaires

How has the questionnaire changed? What does this show us about our union's trajectory? What clues can the changes give us about what lies in the future? To get a copy of Marian Swerdlow's comparative analysis of these two UFT attempts to "look democratic," reply to this email. (EMAIL ME AT NORMSCO@GMAIL.COM)

Leonie Slaps Flypaper Over Class Size

Is there not stopping this woman? Yesterday she takes down the NY Times. Today she wipes out the Fordham Institute.

Leonie Haimson reports on the NYC Ed News Listserve:

See this nasty column in Flypaper – put out by the right-wing Fordham Institute, attacking my Huffington Post column on Frank McCourt posted here:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leonie-haimson/what-frank-mccourt-could_b_241331.html

Check it out at http://www.edexcellence.net/flypaper/index.php/2009/08/no-offense-frank-mccourt/ and please leave a comment.

The author actually argues that smaller classes are “unsubstantiated remedies….- Rather than adhering to rigorous research standards, we resort to sweeping generalizations and sentimental stories about children’s lives.”

Hogwash! Actually, the research is stronger for class size reduction than for nearly any other education reform – and certainly stronger than the favored remedies of the Fordham Institute crowd.

My comments are below.

Thanks,

Leonie Haimson

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leonie-haimson

I'm glad that my column is being so widely read and cited, even by hidebound contrarians.

Actually, the scientific and empirical research is so strong for class size reduction that it is cited as only four evidence-based education reforms that have been proven to work by the Institute of Education Science -- the research arm of the US Dept. of Education. You can check it out yourself by googling the title: "IDENTIFYING AND IMPLEMENTING EDUCATIONAL PRACTICES SUPPORTED BY RIGOROUS EVIDENCE"

There are literally scores of studies indicating that smaller class sizes lead to better results -- not just STAR, which was one of the few large scale, randomized experiments in the history of education reform -- the gold standard according to most researchers.

Over and over again, smaller classes have been shown to lead to fewer disciplinary referrals, more learning, more student engagement, and less teacher attrition. Class size reduction has also been proven to be cost-effective. A recent study showed that in terms of health care, the economic cost-benefits would be expected to surpass childhood immunization.

Alan Krueger, formerly of Princeton and now the chief economist of the US Dept. of Treasury, has demonstrated that the number of positive studies on class size reduction far outnumber the negative ones. The links you provide above do not show otherwise.

Why ideologues and zealots put so much energy into disputing the simple fact that teachers can reach their students better and students learn more in smaller classes is beyond me. Why anyone would seriously argue that only student load matters and not class size -- as though the only learning and personal connection between teachers and students happens outside of the classroom -- I cannot possibly understand.

And Frank McCourt was a huge champion of smaller classes, as evidenced by his frequent comments on the subject as well as his agreement to be honorary chair of the campaign to lower class size in NYC public schools.

Perhaps its because unlike their own favorite strategies, such as privatization, vouchers, the expansion of charter schools and/or teacher incentive pay, none of which has any backing in the research, class size reduction has been proven to work, over and over again. Thus it is the dragon that they are unable to slay.

If anyone would like some fact sheets on this issue, including recent papers with findings about the importance of smaller classes in the middle and upper grades, you can email me at leonie@att.net.

I just took a look at the three links above -- supposedly research studies that weakens the case for smaller classes. One of the studies contains the following statement:

"Studies that used high-quality experimental data have consistently demonstrated the positive effects of small classes on average student achievement-for all students....The findings also indicated that although all types of students benefited from being in small classes, reductions in class size did not reduce the achievement gap between low and high achievers."

{This conclusion, by the way, is not shared by other researchers -- who have shown that class size reduction narrows the achievement gap between racial groups by more than 30%.)

The second is an EdWeek summary of the first article.

The third, an unpublished "discussion" paper by Boozer and Cacciola, also does not dispute the effects of smaller classes, but appears to divide class size into direct and indirect effects, with some of the significant gains exhibited by students in smaller classes attributed to peer effects.

Thus students who are in classes with other students who are doing better because of smaller classes also benefit because their peers are doing better. At least that is what the article seems to conclude: "Small class type treatment induced not just potentially a boost in that child's test score outcome, but an indirect or spillover effect on the child's classmates through the peer group effect. This is what we mean by the feedback or social multiplier effect of the Small class type treatment."

There are many positive feedbacks that occur in smaller classes. The smaller the class, the more engaged are its students, and fewer disciplinary problems occur. The fewer disruptions, the easier it is for teachers to teach and low-performing students to focus and model their behavior on more engaged students. Also there is less stereotyping in both directions -- from teacher to students and students to teacher.

Teachers can figure out quicker who is or is not responding to a specific technique, style or approach, and alter their methods more quickly and effectively to reach specific students; and students feel as though their teachers understand and care about them more, and are willing to put back into the classroom their focus and energy.

None of this is surprising, and none of it is difficult to understand.

In any case, according to my reading of these articles, not one of them weakens the case that smaller classes leads to better outcomes.

Thanks,

Leonie Haimson
Executive Director
Class Size Matters
www.classsizematters.org
http://nycpublicschoolparents.blogspot.com/

Please make a tax-deductible contribution to Class Size Matters now!

Pakter Whacked Her

The David Pakter open 3020a hearings continues today and tomorrow and it's a show that is worth the price of admission. Open hearings are rare, so this may be a rare opportunity. It's all about giving out watches for achievement and buying plastic plants for the school. Serious matters that require 2 DOE (or more) lawyers. I'm sorry I can't make it tomorrow. And probably not Thursday either, but if someone does go send a report. I'm sure there will be other chances - right until the next century, most likely.

I wrote about a previous visit to Pakter hearing (David made them open to the public) at which the Principal of Fashion Industries HS, after telling just slightly distorted stories, suddenly realized upon cross examination that there was a transcript of a meeting with David and went rigid as she asked, "You mean he taped the meeting?" (June 3rd.) (Note to all teachers who have to meet with principals under weird conditions, get a flower with a mic. Check out these I Spy stores.)

I also commented here. And in more places on this blog.

I went back a few weeks later and heard the Assistant Principal testify about Pakter putting trees in front of the auditorium doors, thus blocking their access. He gave the impression they were giant redwoods. In fact, they were plastic plants David had carried over himself from Home Depot, a few blocks away. The plants kept shrinking as the AP testified. So did he.

I made a return visit July 23. I am sorry I missed the road trip the day before when the hearing officer Douglas Bantl -- a gentleman and nice guy who is being axed as a hearing officer after this case for being too fair -- and the lawyers all went up to Harlem to visit the rubber room.

You see, another serious charge is that Pakter refused to report to the RR because he said it was pointless to sit there and do nothing and the place was harmful to people's health. He didn't mind not getting paid and the DOE didn't mind not paying him. But they are still charging him with not reporting. I guess they really do want to pay people for doing nothing even if they don't want to be paid. But watch the NY Post scream about the awful waste and blame the UFT.

There was a new DOE lawyer who was barely familiar with the case. His name is Phil Oliveri. And there was another DOE lawyer named Wilson Sia with him. You see, it takes two lawyers to talk about watches and plastic plants.

I was only able to stay for the morning and there was one witness - a guidance counselor who testified he saw Pakter showing some watches to a student monitor in the main office while the counselor was heating up his lunch in the microwave.

He thought it odd but not enough to say anything to anyone, until a week later when at a guidance meeting chaired by AP Olivier Poor, who mentioned that some teacher had bought plants for the school. The GC spoke up asking if it was the same guy who was showing watches. Poor perked up and asked him about it.

Soon after Poor wrote an email to the principal Hilda Nieto that the GC has told her he saw Pakter selling watches to a school aide in the school store.

Poor poor. She made 3 errors of fact in one sentence. But the day before she testified that what she wrote was true. Unfortunately for her, when the GC was shown the email, he stuck by his original story that Pakter was just showing the watches to a student in the main office. "Did it seem he was trying to hide that he was doing it," asked NYSUT lawyer Chris Calergy? "No," said the GC.

Now we must remind you that one of the major charges against Pakter is that he was selling watches to the kids. Nada.

That these events took place in November 2006 and it's now -- hmmm, I think August 2009.

That all this time has passed is a sign of

a) dysfunction at the DOE

b)a willingness to spend whatever it takes and however how long to snuff Pakter, who is way past retirement and has ooodles of moolah with his watch company (skip the intro - if you dare) but is way too stubborn to give up.

I wish he'd show me some of them watches. But first I have to look for my high school report cards to prove I had a 90 average.

Damn, just checked and it came to 89.7 over my last 3 years at Thomas Jefferson HS in East NY Brooklyn from 1959-1962. Can I get marked on a curve like they seem to be doing today? Better yet, how about giving me some of that credit recovery stuff? I can fog a mirror with the best of them.

Related
South Bronx School had been tracking the Pakter case.

And NYC Rubber Room Reporter did a long piece back in December chronicling the case up to that point.

Out takes:
Follow up to this morning's post on my new suits.
I already got invited to a school but if they see another suit in any way related to the UFT they will get out the tar and feather. I guess its back to jeans. Anyone got a Bar Mitzvah to invite me to?

I'm Practically Orgasmic

Earlier I wrote that criticism NY Times education coverage makes me hot –The NY Times Should Just Stop Trying to Cover Education.

As I suggested, they shouldn't waste time trying to cover education. Maybe use the resources on food. Or moon rocks.

The Times responded to Leonie and she then deliciously takes them to pieces.

Read all about it at Leonie's blog

The NY Times response, and my reply

Raging Inferno on PS 123/HSA Controversy at Gotham

When I saw Francis Lewis HS Chapter Leader Arthur Goldstein's piece at Gotham Schools last week while I was in LA, I figured it would inspire a lot of controversy. So I was surprised that after a few days, there was not much reaction. Until blogger Ken challenged some of Arthur's facts yesterday. Since then there has been a battle between defenders of public education and pro charter commenters - almost all anonymous. (Do you think there are some HSA PR people lurking?)

Patrick Sullivan has weighed in with some great responses as has Murray Bergtraum HS CL John Elfrank-Dana which begs for a blog post all its own.

One of the edges of the debate has been whether the DOE slips data to charter schools like HSA so they can cream fours and threes (scores) or early childhood ECLAS test results. Sullivan reveals some amazing stuff gleaned by CEC One (lower east side parents council) president Lisa Donlan. More on this later today, but you can read it all at

http://gothamschools.org/2009/07/30/more-equal-than-others/#comments

I did do a bit rewriting of the Emma Lazarus poem for the occasion in this comment:

I would argue there is a generic use of the terms 3’s and 4’s to come to mean students who would be successful. The renovation of the Statue of Liberty now reads:

“Give me your tired, your poor

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,

I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

As long as they can score a three or a four.

Out takes (a new feature to celebrate the start of our 4th year in the blogosphere):
I bought 2 suits at L&T great August sale because of great prices. Joseph Aboud for about $200 each. Now when you invite me to visit your schools to talk about ICE or GEM or charters or used cars, I can look like the suits at the UFT, only better because these suits actually fit.

The NY Times Should Just Stop Trying to Cover Education

I'll admit it. I actually get hot when someone takes down the NY Times on the way it covers education. Today, Leonie did the deed over at the NYC Parents blog.

Today’s New York Times article on the Bloomberg/Klein record on test scores is incomplete, biased, and in some cases inaccurate.

The Times biased? Shocking. They're still looking for those weapons of mass destruction in Iraq they reported on in such depth.

Leonie has 5 examples,which you can read with a little click:
NY Times falls in line with the Bloomberg PR spin control

Related:
Mike Antonnucci* reports in EIA on the NEA branch using Randi Redux arguments to sell merit pay to the members: What Happens in Tulsa, Stays in Tulsa. and has some comments on the Greg Toppo USAToday article on charters which caused Rotherham to freak: Tempest in a Toppo.

* Never forget that Mike has a dog in the race and looks to make unions the bad guys. But he also covers things none of the press does, particularly you know who.

Prisco Report on SI Charter School Hearing

by Loretta Prisco

Tonight on Staten Island there was a "Public Hearing" on 2 charters being proposed - the Barak Obama Community Charter and the New World Charter.

Thanx so much to Mark, who came by public transportation from the Bronx to SI, and spoke so well against charters.

Thanx to Dom, who made the trip from Queens to SI and dittoed Mark's remarks.,

And finally, thanx to Imani, who spoke from her personal experience about what is happening at P.15. She spoke about how promises are made and just as quickly broken. We found out that we are Staten Island neighbors.

Interesting format. Michael Duffy, Director of Charters, spoke. The Parent Engagement Deputy showed up late. They spoke during the business meeting. The CEC asked tough questions during the Business Meeting. Many of his responses were "will check that out", "we are checking that out", "we will have that information soon". The 2 charters presented their plans during the Calendar or Regular Meeting. Before the public was able to comment, Duffy and the Parent Engagement person left!!!! We were offered the opportunity to write to them.

Some interesting comments from Duffy: they will not go into overcrowded schools. Then he mentioned the schools that were being considered. Many of us laughed - they are overcrowded. He said that the law demands that public hearings be held.. He said that some charters are welcomed and some have been contentious. He was a former member of the board of a Boston Charter and then a principal of a charter.

Duffy explained that charters that do not meet their goals in 5 years will be closed. 3 have been closed so far. But he did admit that most schools are in existence only 1-2 years so that they have not run out of time yet. The jury is still out, but they keep pushing ahead.

Staten Island is a small place and we knew many of the people involved. It was hard for us to attack - but we did. We think that they are sincere people that don't see the public schools working for their kids or their clients. The Barack Obama was the weaker of the 2 - they don't like the elementary school for which they are zoned. My daughter went to that school and did very well. I supervised student teachers from CSI when I taught in the Ed. Dept. The teachers are fabulous. It is what is often described as a "mom and pop" charter. They do now have the weight that New World has. Basically, the parents want options. One of the leads was a parent coordinator of the school they want out of.

The New World was a bit tougher to argue against. They want to serve the immigrant kids that are not doing well in the middle schools. Many of the people behind it are well respected in the community. Retired principal John Tobin is one of them. The kids are dropping out, on the streets, falling into gangs. The programs are really concerned about the Mexican kids and with good reason. Space is being offered by Richard Nicastro who owns the Staten Island Hilton and other properties. While they say that they will serve all immigrants, ( Liberians, Nigerians, Russians and Spanish speaking) it is quite obvious that they will serve Mexicans. We work with Liberians in Park Hill- they speak English!
The "cooperating design' group for the New World Charter is Victory Schools, Inc. The CEO is Margaret Harrington, former HS Supt. in Queens and had to leave for some scandalous reason. Does anyone remember?

A Board Member, Dennis Kelleher is the Founder and CEO of Wall Street Access and very wealthy. He donated the funds for a large beautiful building on the St. John's Campus on SI.

Also on the Board is the wife of the Pres. of Wagner College, a priest, a film maker, a parent, a teacher and sports columnist (I think private school teacher) and an attorney.

Anybody know anything about Victory, Wall Street Access?

Attached is my statement

We made the case that the work must be done to create answers within the public schools, creating institutes with the existing schools to serve special populations.

UFT endorsed Michael McMahon, through his rep, spoke heartily in favor of charters.

Charter school children do get busing! They must follow the same eligibility requirements for all kids - but of course, if they are out of their zoned school, they are eligible. So a parent who wants busing (busing is big issue on Staten Island as our schools are not close together and the streets around the schools are jammed at 3) need only go to a charter to get transportaton.

We also found that the John Lavelle charter approved and scheduled to open in September, while presented to us as a charter school for emotionally disturbed children, will only have 15% of that population.

But the best comments of the night came from a teacher who teaches in Soho and talked about the terrible conditions at her school. She compared that with the Petrides School(she obviously did not know that it was a public school!). And let's face it, she went on, the UFT protects teachers. In a charter school, she explained, those teachers who are not working get thrown out and "I should know I have been one of those teachers protected for 32 years".. Genius.

Of course, the best argument we made was that the reasons for these schools were worthy - so put the programs into the public schools, follow the rules of public schools.

Also note, charter schools went to court saying that they couldn't be audited, and won. It was taken to the next court and overturned. That was reported in NYSUT paper. It was then ruled against in a higher court - they need not be audited.

Loretta

Related:
More on Duffy and on these questionable hearings at: http://grassrootseducationmovement.blogspot.com/2009/08/charter-school-hearings-study-in.html.

Closing the Shoelace Tying Gap: UPDATED

This item from Gotham Schools caught my eye:

On the TA question, a teacher argues that leveling the playing field by lowering it isn’t great for kids.

I checked the NY Times piece from July 30:

City education officials have angered hundreds of parents in recent weeks after cracking down on an informal system of hiring teaching assistants, in which nonunion members were paid hourly wages to assist teachers with reading, supervising recess, even tying shoelaces. Elementary schools on the Upper East Side and Upper West Side have routinely raised hundreds of thousands of dollars from parents to supplement their staff with these aides as their classrooms grew more crowded.

They would now have to do so under DOE supervision and must turn the money over to the DOE, which would have a role in doing background checks. I'm not sure this is such an outrageous demand. There also is the issue of going around union rules. There is a rumor there is some kind of collective bargaining agreement laying around all dusty somewhere.

Since the UFT made the complaint, they have taken a hammering. But school aides are not UFT people, though paraprofessionals are UFT. School aides belong to DC 37 (check the history books to review the hysteria when Al Shanker tried to poach on school aide territory in the early 70's and DC 37 head Victor Gotbaum's – yes, current NYC Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum's husband– more than nasty response, which led to a decade long rift).

Gotham linked to comments from the Teachable Moment blog:

We have to keep in mind that our goal is not just educational parity. Our goal is the best possible education for every student. That includes the rich kids. So while we should focus our efforts on raising the level of achievement for those on the bottom end of the spectrum, our efforts should not try to limit the options available to those on the top end.

This is a little disingenuous.

Who is going to tie the shoelaces of the kids in Bed-Stuy?

Throwing around "achievement" with shoelaces when in fact those of us who taught in urban schools found a shoelace tying gap does exist and has an impact on the so-called achievement gap. But people focused on the AG like focus solely on teacher quality while downplaying all the other gaps. Someone should come up with stats as to what percentage of kids in kindergarten in rich and poor neighborhoods need help in tying their shoelaces.

If rich schools are raising so much money from parents, let the NYCDOE try an experiment in at least some struggling schools they seem so eager to close by matching the highest level of money raised by rich schools and hiring many more classroom assistants. My guess is poor schools need twice as many as rich schools to be in the ballgame.

The Times reports there is a solution:

Under Mr. Klein’s proposal, essentially a technical change, the assistants would now be employed under the title of “substitute aide,” an existing departmental position that pays $12.30 an hour, with no benefits. The city’s current hiring freeze would not apply to them, as the positions would still be paid for with donations.

Mr. Klein made his proposal during a closed-door meeting with parent representatives from a dozen Manhattan schools, and three City Council members, Daniel R. Garodnick, Jessica Lappin and Gale A. Brewer. Michael Mulgrew, the newly elected president of the United Federation of Teachers, also attended.

Solution? Note how there were no parents from areas of the city which raise only a few hundred dollars. I agree with Teachable Moment that we would should raise the level of poor schools, something Joel Klein, that self-proclaimed civil rights advocate, did not do in this case. Also note that some guy named Mulgrew was at the meeting. (Wasn't he elected to something recently?) Do you think he even raised this issue? The UFT takes the narrowest view, so I think not.

There is no real solution until we close the shoelace tying gap.

Or Klein could just get every school a shoelace tying machine shown in the graphic above.

A Manifesto from The Coalition for Public Education/coalicion por la educacion publica

Posted by Bronx teacher Mark Torres:

By any means necessary...as long as it educates, agitates

and mobilizes people into action,

and it constructively empowers the people.

Our group, the coalition for public education/coalicion por la educacion publica, is made up of different groups and individuals, with different talents and passions, that have come together to create a potent force against the bloomberg-klein corporate dictatorship. That's why our group can address the people's work using different, yet complementary, tactics.

Details of the CPE on the legislative front, direct action front, media front, and the internal organizing front at Norms Notes: By Any Means Necessary and see side panel of Ed Notes for upcoming actions to support.

Next meeting Thursday August 6th, from 6pm-8pm, at DC-37.

AMAZING, MUST SEE Video as Chicago's George Schmidt and CORE Shred Arne Duncan and the Chicago Corporate Model

CORE (Caucus of Rank and File Educators) has only been around for about a year and is capturing the imagination of Chicago teachers, parents and students. And George Schmidt has been doing his Substance thing forever. Teaming up Substance and CORE will shake the pillars of the ed deformers in Chicago.

Obama got Arne got out of town just in time. Maybe Obama decided to rescue his basketball buddy from what is coming. Obama will not escape unscathed as the Chicago model of corporate/ed deformation is examined and protests grow. CORE is expected to challenge the Randi-like CTU leadership in union elections next May.

It is probably no accident that Chicago, the city with the longest history of mayoral control (since 1995), and with a collaborative union leadership (sound familiar, kiddies?) is facing the biggest pushback from the rank and file. Having just spent a bunch of time in LA with some of the leaders of this resistance movement, I am enlightened and encouraged. My guess is New York is a few years behind Chicago in building this movement, though I'll write more about these remarkable people as the weeks go by as we look for ways to support each other and activists in other cities.

Spend 28 minutes watching this Labor Beat video of Chicago-based Substance editor George Schmidt and my new best friends from CORE (Caucus of Rank and File Educators) challenge Arne Duncan and the Chicago model being imposed on the entire nation. Watch Arne gulp and break into a rash when a black student rakes him over the coals. George's comments are featured throughout and CORE members are prominent. CORE gave me a dvd which can be reproduced if you want to show it to people in your school. Or just watch it together online.

The best PD you can do to inform your colleagues as to what is coming down and the corporate rationale behind and demonstrate a model of how resistance can form in the absence of teacher unions. Let me amend that. Not the absence. The UFT/AFT is very present – on the wrong side. (See Schmidt's comments on CTU President Marilyn Stewart applauding Duncan as he outlines the plans to decimate the teachers in her union and the children they teach.)

The video is titled: Secretary of Education Duncan: Pushing the Chicago Plan

Here is the Labor Beat intro:

Before President Obama appointed Arne Duncan Secretary of Education, Duncan was the CEO of the Chicago Public Schools. Under his control there, Chicago Public Schools endured a relentless wave of privatization, school closings, militarization, union busting and blaming teachers for the problems of urban schools. Now, the war on public education pursued during the Bush administration will only continue and intensify under the new Secretary of Education Duncan. His Chicago Plan, as former teacher and editor of Substance News George Schmidt explains, is the template for a national strategy to dismantle public education. Through revealing footage and comments from Chicago teachers, this video shows the resistance that has been growing among teachers and community organizations.

Here is a national alert for everyone who cares about the future of public schools, threatened now by Arne Duncan and his corporate vision for the nation's school systems.

The video is hosted on blip.tv: http://blip.tv/file/2428857

Photo: Labor Beat

Caucus of Rank-and-File Educators try to talk to Secretary of Education Arne Duncan at his recent Chicago speech at the Hyatt, but are turned back [ED NOTE: also threatened with arrest if they enter the hall.]

LA Confidential

Well, I got back from LA on the red eye this morning and it was quite a stimulating few days meeting teacher activists from around the nation. And so many young ones. Lots to report on.

I'm not sure exactly what I can say about our meetings in case some of the issues and people present require some anonymity (you know, with that old AFT machine looking to kill militancy and resistance), so I will hold off on details until I check and will put out whatever I can throughout the week. Maybe some individual city views and then an overall conference view. NYC was represented by myself (GEM, ICE), Sally Lee (Teachers Unite) and Megan Behrent (ISO, TJC, GEM).

Candi was Dandy
Candi just posted at the Washington Teacher a brief note about being in LA. Though it was the first time we met in person, I felt I knew her forever through the blogging world. She was even more impressive in person with her knowledge and perspective on the DC situation. She has some news about the DC contract talks, which we got some updates on in LA. I'll leave it to her to keep us up to date on what I am sure will be an NYC modeled sellout, with DC teachers about to face market-based, ATR hell.


In the meantime, without much computer access in LA, lots of stuff accumulated on this end. So expect the ed Notes output over the next few days to be fast and furious. If you are a feedblitz subscriber and don't care for lots of emails, try the digest which you can receive once a day or even less frequently.

While I was there, NYC teacher Arthur Goldstein put out a fabulous piece comparing PS 123 and Harlem Success at Gotham Schools (PS 123 & Harlem Success Academy: More Equal than Others). A must read article that should get national attention, but will probably be suppressed because of the implications it raises about separate and unequal. Don't you wish we had a union that would tell so this kind of reporting? Not as long as they pushed their own two charter schools into public school buildings.