Video and Written Testimony of Diane Ravitch on Mayoral Control...

.... calling for an independent board that will choose the chancellor. And an independent monitoring agency. Not quite the plan of the Independent Community of Educators, but...

See below for video and links to ICE positions.

Testimony of Diane Ravitch, Research Professor of Education, New York University, Hearings of New York State Assembly Committee on Education, February 6, 2009

I am a historian of education on the faculty of New York University. My first book was a history of the New York City public schools, entitled The Great School Wars. It was published in 1974. It is generally acknowledged to be the definitive history of the school system. Since then, I have continued to study and write about the New York City school system.

When the Legislature changed the governance of the school system in 2002, I supported the change. I supported the idea of mayoral control. I looked forward to an era of accountability and transparency. From my historical studies, I knew that mayoral control was the customary form of governance in our city’s schools for many years. From 1873 to 1969, the mayor appointed every single member of the New York City Board of Education. The decentralization of control from 1969 to 2002 was an aberration.

Having observed the current system since it was created, however, I have become convinced that it needs major changes.

It needs change because it lacks accountability. It lacks transparency. It shuts the public out of public education. It has no checks or balances. It lacks the most fundamental element of a democratic system of government, which is public oversight.

Never before in the history of NYC have the mayor and the chancellor exercised total, unlimited, unrestricted power over the daily life of the schools. No other school district in the United States is operated in this authoritarian fashion.

We have often been told by city officials that the results justify continuation of this authoritarian control. They say that test scores have dramatically improved. But no independent source verifies these assertions.

The city’s claims are contradicted by the federal testing program, called the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). The federal tests are the gold standard of educational testing.

New York City is one of 11 cities that participate in the federal testing program. On the NAEP tests, the city’s scores were flat from 2003-2007 in fourth-grade reading, in eighth-grade reading, and in eighth-grade math. Only in fourth-grade math did student performance improve, but those gains had washed out by eighth grade. The eighth-graders were the product of the Children First reforms, yet these students showed no achievement gains in either reading or math. The federal tests showed no significant gains for Hispanic students, African American students, white students, Asian students, or lower-income students. The federal data showed no narrowing of the achievement gap among children of different ethnic and racial groups.

The SAT is another independent measure. This past year, the city’s SAT scores fell, reaching their lowest point since 2003, at the same time that national SAT scores held steady. The students who take the SAT intend to go to college; they are presumably our better-performing students. Yet the SAT reading score for New York City was an appalling 438, which is the 28th percentile of all SAT test-takers. The state SAT reading score was 488, much closer to the national average than our city students.

Are graduation rates up? The city says they have climbed from 53% to 62% from 2003-2007. The state says they have climbed from 44% to 52% from 2004-2007. Either way, the city’s graduation rate is no better than the graduation rate for the state of Mississippi, which spends less than a third of what New York City spends per pupil.

We must wonder whether we can believe any numbers for the graduation rate, because the city has encouraged a dubious practice called “credit recovery,” which inflates the graduation rate. Under credit recovery, students who failed a course or never even showed up can still get credit for it by turning in an independent project or attending a few extra sessions. A principal told the New York Times that credit recovery is the “dirty little secret of high schools. There’s very little oversight and there are very few standards.” (NY Times, April 11, 2008). Furthermore, the city doesn’t count students who have been discharged; these are students who have been removed from the rolls but are not counted as dropouts. Their number has increased every year. Leaving out these students also inflates the graduation rate.

We have all heard that social promotion was eliminated, that students can’t be promoted from grade 3 or 5 or 7 or 8 unless they have mastered the work of the grade. Nonetheless, a majority of eighth-graders do not meet state standards in reading or math. And two-thirds of the city’s graduates who enter CUNY’s community colleges must take remedial courses in reading, writing, or mathematics. These figures suggest that social promotion continues and that many students are graduating who are not prepared for postsecondary education.

The present leadership of the Department of Education has made testing in reading and mathematics the keynote of their program. Many schools have narrowed their curriculum in hopes of raising their test scores. The Department’s own survey of arts education showed that only 4% of children in elementary schools and less than a third of those in middle schools were receiving the arts education required by the state. When the federal government tested science in 2006, two-thirds of New York City’s eighth grade students were “below basic,” the lowest possible rating. These figures suggest that our students are not getting a good education, no matter what the state test scores in reading and math may be.

The Department of Education, lacking any public accountability, has heedlessly closed scores of schools without making any sustained effort to improve them. Had they dramatically reduced class sizes, mandated a research-based curriculum, provided intensive professional development, supplied prompt technical assistance, and taken other constructive steps, they might have been able to turn around schools that were the anchor of their community. When Rudy Crew was Chancellor, he rescued many low-performing schools by using these techniques in what was then called the Chancellor’s District. Unfortunately this district—whose sole purpose was to improve low-performing schools--was abandoned in 2003. There may be times when a school must be closed, but it should be a last resort, triggered only after all other measures have been exhausted, and only after extensive community consultation.

The Legislature owes it to the people of New York City to make significant changes in the governance of the New York City public schools.

First, the governance system needs checks and balances. Having the chance to vote for the mayor once in four years is no check or balance, nor does it provide adequate accountability. The school system needs an independent board, whose members serve for a fixed-term, to review and approve the policies and budget of the school system. This board would hold public hearings before decisions are made. It would review the budget in public and give the public full opportunity to express its concerns.

Second, the performance of the school system should be regularly monitored by an independent, professional auditing agency. This agency should report to the public on student performance and graduation rates. Those in charge of the school system should not be allowed to monitor the system’s performance and to give principals and teachers bonuses for higher performance. Such an approach does not produce accountability; instead, it only encourages principals and teachers to find creative ways to boost their test scores and graduation rates.

Third, the leader of the school system should be appointed by the independent board, not by the mayor. The chancellor’s primary obligation is to protect the best interests of the students. If elected officials say that they must cut the schools’ budget, the chancellor should be the voice of the school system, fighting for the interests of the children and the schools. If the chancellor is appointed by the mayor, his first obligation is to the mayor, not the children.

There are many challenges facing the New York City school system. Many of the students that it serves are disadvantaged by poverty, are English language learners, or have special needs.

Changing the governance of the school system will not solve all the problems of educating more than one million students.

Nonetheless, the Legislature must learn from experience. It should correct the flaws in the law passed in 2002. That law went too far in centralizing all authority in the Mayor’s office and in excluding the public from any voice in decisions affecting their communities and their children. It is time to change the law.



http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4617433714635450968&hl=en

Related
ICE Minority Report on School Governance Rejected at UFT Exec. Bd.

UFT Takes a Seat on Mayoral Control, While ICE Offers Alternative

What Will Diane Ravitch Say...

... Today at the NY State Assembly hearings on mayoral control?

Rumors are she will smash them to smithereens.

Will Diane's position come down closer to the UFT's tweaks or ICE's gutting?

10 AM at 250 Broadway, 19th floor

How the NYCDOE Lies? Let Me Count the Ways

Not a day goes by that we are not flooded with information on the kinds of lies and misinformation coming out of the NYC Department of Education and Mayor Bloomberg's office. That objections to the outrages are coming from both teachers and parents is worth noting, though it is ignored by the media (see report on WNYC Beth Fertig report yesterday). I'll be posting some of this when there is time, but it is only scratching the surface. Check with the NYC Public School Parents Blog for consistent updates.

That the school community is totally ignored when school closings are announced or new schools are placed or forced into existing buildings, is not in question by anyone involved. But the BloomKlein spin machine spits out lies by the second. (Today there will be a demonstration from 3-4:30 by parents and teachers at PS/IS 72 in the East NY section of Brooklyn, 605 Shepherd Ave. UFT officials will be there to assure them the closing is a fait accompli.)

Leonie Haimson sent this post:

On Monday night, at the mayoral control forum in Queens, Dina Paul Parks, Senior Policy Advisor to Deputy Mayor Walcott, insisted that parents in general and district leadership teams in particular are consulted and their input is solicited before any decision is made on where to site new schools in the district. The video with her comments are here: Debate on Mayoral control; check it out!

Parent activist Lisa Donlon from District 1 on the lower east side responded. I don't know what most of the labels she is using mean, but you'll get the gist of what Lisa is talking about.
Note in particular the role being played by Tweed's CEO of Parent Involvement, Martine Guerrier, who a long, long, time ago in a galaxy far away, was actually someone who questioned the actions of Tweed when she was the Brooklyn rep on the Panel for Education Policy. That was before B'klyn Boro Pres. Marty Markowitz signed on as a total BloomKlein flunky and Martine started to drift. Then on the day of the big anti-BloomKlein rally in Feb. 2007, she was hired for the $150,000 job by Klein. (See Ed Notes, Say It Ain't So Martine and Leonie's report on the Feb. 28, 2007 Rally to Put the Public Back in Public Education.) From what I hear, Martine has become a virtual spin machine all by herself.


Lisa

I bet someone at DoE tells her (Dina Paul Parks) that is true.
It is not.

One example- tonight was the public hearing for the OPD planned move of Ross Global Academy into Eastside Community High School in District One.

The RGA board discussed the plan in mid October, according to their minutes.
I was informed by OPD in mid November of a plan that was calibrated down to the number of classrooms needed vs the number available, yet no one at Eastside, including the principal, had at that point been told.

The matter has not to date been brought to my DLT for input of any kind although I have informed the members of the plan.

Last spring Martine told CEC members that OFEA had worked with a number of DLT's to plan school closings and new school openings.

I'd be happy to share the correspondence by which I tried to ascertain the validity of the claims; I asked for meeting agendas and attendance lists, that were never provided to back up the claim (that buck stopped at Brian Ellner).

Some of the CEC members in the districts cited by Martine as having had these conversations told me that a sort of shadow DLT was convened by OFEA and OPD to have these discussions.

DLT core membership is defined by state law and Chancellor's Regs but
I had the impressions that these other groups would pass a sniff test.

Lisa Donlon follows up in another post with these questions:

Why does everyone buy into the demonizing mythology of the "bad old days" of school boards?
Why glorify the current system which has many more serious flaws?
Why is the legislature not threatened with a close down when corruption, scandal and cronyism are revealed?
Why are only poor, urban, non-white school systems subject to "control" by autocracy?

Parent Ellen Bilofsky of Brooklyn wrote this email to Beth Fertig of WNYC after her report on the Brian Lehrer show on mayoral control yesterday. (I was on hold to talk about the drive-by diplomas and reports of teachers being pressured to not give kids level one scores after I heard Fertig repeat the DOE bull-stat that Level ones had dropped significantly under BloomKlein without considering the real reason.)

As a public school parent for 17 years, I'm disappointed at your presentation of the issues around mayoral control (although I missed the first few minutes).

For one thing, you seemed to accept the DOE's line that test scores are a solid--and the only--indication of improvement, without questioning the increased focus on those scores. If low-performing schools raise their scores, but the students learn nothing except how to take standardized tests, how much better off are these children?

You also repeated that principles have been "empowered" to control their own schools, without realizing how hamstrung they really are by the DOE's requirements for constant testing and by requiring the schools to absorb some of the services the districts formally paid for but with slashed budgets.

Finally, you dismissed parental involvement under the previous governance system as "theater" and merely "feeling listened to." Yet parent leaders in many districts, and to an extent at the city level, had considerable influence on the policies of their superintendents and had substantial information about district policies and budgets.

I personally felt my years of involvement were denigrated by that comment.

The current DOE turns the notion of "accountability" on its head by being accountable to no one for its policies--not to parents, not to the City Council, not even to the State legislature. Being able to vote the mayor out of office once every four years is not sufficient to hold him accountable for his chancellor's educational policies, when we are voting on his performance in so many other areas. And schoolchildren can't wait four years to rectify the DOE's grave mistakes.

Only a system of checks and balances, with true accountability and oversight, can fix this.

There is much, much more that could be said about the problems of mayoral control and what needs to be done to improve our system without "throwing the baby" of what was done right under the old system "out with the bathwater."

I hope future segments will give a more balanced view (well, actually, more tilted toward the parents' point of view) and will give parents some time to respond.

I'll close with this comment from NYC Parent Steve Koss

So many of us on this listserv believe fervently that the Klein regime's relentless focus on "measurable results" -- graduation rates, standardized test scores, etc. -- has utterly perverted the education process and led to all sorts of machinations to fudge the numbers (credit recovery, scaled exam scoring, discouraging participation in exams, changing student answers, etc.). This is an inevitable outcome of basing people's compensation, performance reviews, bonuses, even their jobs on those "measurable" outcomes. More than 30 years ago, this was formally identified by what is now known as Campbell's Law: "The more any quantitative social indicator is used for social decisionmaking, the more subject it will be to corruption pressures and the more apt it will be to distort and corrupt the social processes it is intended to monitor."

My point is this. WE all know this is going on, WE all believe that the system has been turned upside, leading to these behaviors, but most of the public and most of the media (especially the major NYC newspapers) either don't know, don't believe it, or simply don't care to report it. Until we can get a respectably large group of teachers and school administrators to get up and, as they say, speak the truth to power, nothing is going to change and we'll remain on this same road to well-measured ruin (although, ironically and tragically, it will look to most like a magnif icent, quantifiable success).

Perhaps we can start collecting/cataloging these stories and get the individuals who report them to also stand behind them (even if anonymously). I suppose I'm being naive, but wouldn't it be great, for example, to have a press conference where people from the classrooms told these stories? What WE all believe and know to be happening will never become common knowledge and public perception until we can get those closest to this to speak out about what they see going on every day in their schools. How can people who care about children's education stand silently by and watch this happening?

Fiorillo!

Michael Fiorillo, in his wonderful speech at the Delegate Assembly yesterday, punched numerous holes in the UFT leadership's position on mayoral control. Unfortunately, the Unity boat still floats as the body overwhelmingly endorsed a continuation of mayoral control, albeit with some checks that will do little to balance the equation the dictatorship by one person, no matter who that person is or will be, over the schools.

Michael made the point of tying the concept of removing entire schools systems from public control as being part of the national assault on teacher unions with the concurrent push toward privatization.

The UFT leaders, who know full well Michael was on target, prefer to mislead the members into believing it is all local. All about Klein and Bloomberg and if we only get rid of him them – even though we will do nothing to try to interfere with Bloomberg's 3rd term – things will improve.

I'm going to try to get some of Michael's notes so I can give a more complete report of his speech, which received great applause from all sides of the aisle, though not many seemed convinced enough to vote against the UFT/UNITY Caucus leadership plan.

I'll be back later with more on this DA, which had so many interesting angles. In the meantime, check out James Eterno's excellent report on the ICE blog.

Mayoral Control: Bad for Teachers, Students, Parents and Communities

Here is the 2-sided ICE leaflet being handed out at the UFT special Delegate Assembly today to endorse the UFT task force report on mayoral control. ICE has another view.

Bloomberg screams hysterically about these mild limits placed on his power - like he can't control the reps the borough people choose - see one Martine Guerrier the former Brooklyn rep who was hired by Klein as parent CEO. It is all much ado about nothing.

In the UFT "reform" he still gets to appoint the chancellor and the UFT doesn't even endorse the CSA call for the chancellor to be an educator. The ICE plan calls for 5 years of teaching experience, among other reforms. Even the UFT says we don't want to go back to a central board of education, which by the way has never been elected like boards of education are all over the nation. Have you seem the results of a dictatorial mayor controlling things? Teachers and parents know the phony stats are total bullshit and most kids are more poorly educated today than they ever were under the old system.

Read the view of one parent/teacher below the leaflet.

Click on images to enlarge



From a parent and teacher critical of the UFT plan:

Read some of the articles of parents who went to Washington D.C. to testify AGAINST Mayoral Control - it SEEMED like a good idea at the time to "save" the failing public schools. Type in"Mayoral Control NYC DOE" in your browser to find articles relating to this.

Change for changes' sake is NOT always a good idea- we need solid ideas, and the political will to implement these ideas, if we really want to save public education and turn the public school system to what it should be- TRUE education for all that are capable. Schools should be turning out graduates that know how to read, write, think critically- this ISN't happening.

As a parent of a NYC student and a teacher, AND resident of the city, I'm appalled by how my daughter has been miseducated all of these years. How will she be able to realistically compete for any kind of meaningful job when she graduates? For years, she hasn't had textbooks, workbooks, NOTHING to work with, to read or study from. It's not the fault of the teachers, it's the decisions that have been made from the top and pushed down to the bottom rungs.

My story is repeated by the parents of other students, I'm sure. Who loses as a result of mayoral control? The students, the very people that schools are supposed to exist for....

Chicago Teachers Organize Against Privatization

With a severely weakened union, there's a new union caucus in town in Chicago. CORE (Caucus of Rank and File Educators) organized the protest, which is being reported by Labor Notes.

Here's on interesting note in the articlem which I posted on norms notes with links active:

As Chicago’s school district has become increasingly run by private contractors, the 31,000-strong Chicago Teachers Union, an AFT affiliate, has seen its rolls plunge by 6,000.

Chicago Teachers Organize Against Privatization

See the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1v-dSTOsbc

The Core web site.

UFT Takes a Seat on Mayoral Control, While ICE Offers Alternative

UPDATED

The NY Times has an article on the UFT position on mayoral control.

The Independent Community of Educators (ICE) had members on the task force who struggled to get the committee to take a strong stand against mayoral control. But to no avail. ICE came together a little over 5 years ago partially based on the UFT's support for mayoral control and has been putting out this position over that time. (Ed Notes took a stand against in 2001.)

We'll be getting into the details later. ICE sees any continuance of mayoral control no matter how many "checks and balances" will continue to be a negative for the NYC schools.

Click on the images to enlarge

At the bottom of the Times article:
Union officials said they expected that some members of their committee would also issue a dissenting report" it is ICE being referred to.

It is the ICE members that are being referred to.

The ICE Minority report is posted at Ed Notes and other sites.

There is a lot to talk about - yesterday's UFT Exec Bd meeting and the mayoral control panel moderated by Elizabeth Green with Leonie on the panel. I was at the latter (somehow the UFT's Carmen Alvarez had a clone and was at both.) Here's one report of the Ex Bd meeting:
Reports from the Belly of the Beast: What Happened at the UFT Exec Bd Meeting

On the UFT embargo of information floating out of the task force, we received this email from a delegate this morning.

Imagine my surprise! I open up the NY Times this morning and I see an article about this report and Randi is quoted in the article! I thought we were supposed to keep this “secret” until the entire, or at least the 25% of the delegate body that can fit at 50 Broadway, can discuss this. So when Randi does it, it is news/spin. If someone else does it, it is a leak and an assault on the union and the democratic principles it "stands" for.

A particularly striking note from the Times article:

The teachers’ union did not back a proposal made by the principals’ union, which would require that the chancellor to have a background in education and could not receive a waiver from the state’s education commissioner, as both Chancellor Joel I. Klein and his predecessor had.

So, the CSA is calling for an educator as chancellor and the UFT is not.

Enough said.

Stay tuned as more analysis is coming from the ICE people who participated. They will attempt to present the ICE report at the Delegate Assembly tomorrow after having their request to have the official UFT amended turned down at the Exec Bd.

Interesting note:
Leo Casey proposed that the ICE report be printed and distributed at the DA. One inch towards democracy? Or a clever tactic to defuse ICE's demand to include the minority report? Let's give Leo credit on this one, though I am always suspicious. Will UFT copy machines break down in protest upon coming across something that says "ICE?"

Reports from the Belly of the Beast: What Happened at the UFT Exec Bd Meeting

From a correspondent attending the UFT Exec Bd meeting on Feb. 2.

Michael Fiorello from ICE got up to speak under the 10 minute open mic period. Bob Astrowsky who was running the meeting (and from all body language, seemed to not care less) told Michael that he could speak when the item of governance was on the agenda. Michael began to walk away, but then quickly returned and and asked for confirmation - good, quick move Michael. Astrowsky added that he would need a 2/3 vote of the body to speak. Michael was not about to give up the mic, when UFT Governance Task Force co-chair Emil Pietromonaco said that any member of the committee would be able to speak.

The UFT governance report, though it does put in some checks and balances, does not gut mayoral control. When Michael spoke he talked about mayoral control against the national backdrop and pointed out that it was fraught with danger, particularly privatization and charterization of public education. He also talked about how the report may be politically expedient, but not necessarily good for members, kids and communities. He asked for our minority report to be attached.

At this point, people asked for copies, which we made available, although the issue was not what was in the report, but a member's right to attach one. Randi took the mic and began to question Michael.

She may have been trying to determine if our members shared their report with ICE, which we all know to our frustration, they did not. She asked if it was written up between the time that the UFT report was written and tonight. Michael responded to her questions.

For the record, the basis for that report was written in Loretta and Gene Prisco's living room 3 years ago by a diverse group of Staten Islanders - not yesterday or even last month. It has been edited, condensed and amended after discussion with ICE and a Staten Island Democratic Club. They even discussed how could to write a minority report when the specific details of the report were not known. ICE decided to submit the entire plan.

Leo Casey put up a resolution that the UFT print our minority report for the delegates on Wednesday, in addition to that of any other caucus, and have it available at the table at the DA. This passed.

There were some who attempted to tear at everyone's heartstrings by telling us how hard they worked, how many hours they worked to get this report done and questioned why this was brought up now. Then the usual arguments: There is strength in unity, a minority report would weaken the work of the committee and we have to go to Albany united.

In fact, an organization that has diversity and can withstand diversity is much stronger than one that has all marching lockstep.

The most brilliant comment came from an executive board member who said that this wasn't from a minority - it was only from three people. Is he teaching social studies?

New Action spoke. One spoke against the official report saying it just wasn't strong enough against Mayoral control. Another attempted to amend the report by adding that the Chancellor have a background in education. Unity's Sandi March said if that were so, we wouldn't have had a Harold Levy. Does March have an education background? If she does, it doesn't show. (Levy was a Regent, by the way.) If I hear one thing from teachers, it is their disgust that those who are making decisions aren't educators.

A few things struck me - in the years that I have been going - there is never discourse - they all agree, defend, pander. 81 people are all of one mind. Another point of view will not even be entertained. I don't think I belong to any organization like that. As a matter of fact, in the organizations that I belong to, if there are 20 people in the room, there are 28 different points of view.

The other, is that New Action [with 8 members who got elected with Unity's endorsement], is a loyal opposition. They serve the purpose of saying there is opposition - makes it look oh so democratic and a deliberative body. Even their voice votes were weak and feeble - and I am not sure that there were 6 of them heard in the roll call vote. If I were one of the opposing votes, I would have wanted my vote recorded so that I could stand on that record.

It also occurred to me, that if a majority of the people on the Exec. Bd. were in the schools working under this despotic system, threatened by becoming ATRs as schools closed, harassed by principals, faced the fear of being sent to the rubber room, losing academic freedom in the classroom, and doing hours and hours of detrimental test prep in large classes - they would be shouting to gut mayoral control and teachers and parents are doing,

We are definitely on the side of the angels on this one.

ICE Minority Report on School Governance Rejected at UFT Exec. Bd.

The UFT task force report is floating around and the members of ICE who served on the comittee attempted to get the UFT Exec Bd to support their minority report. Why a minority report? Because it supports the continuance of mayoral control. albeit with some tweaks. Below is the ICE minority report.

Independent Community of Educators

Minority Report: School Governance

The imminent deadline of June 2009 does not permit time to deliberate and articulate the details of a comprehensive governance structure. A Transition Team, appointed by the NYS Ed. Department for a period of no longer that one year should be established to maintain the system on an interim basis and plan for the structure. Public hearings should be held. They should be well-publicized and held at times and places that insure maximum turnout.

We suggest the following guidelines:

1. The system must be based on democratic participation of the community with decision making flowing from the school level to a central body.

• The creation of true school leadership committees with shared decision making, as defined by NYS Law, will create a Comprehensive Education Plan which will set goals and make recommendations about improving the quality of education in each school, with reference to but not dictated by citywide policy. The administration, faculty and parents will have an equal role on the committee. In their augmented role in the school committees will be reconstituted, with special attention to making them more inclusive and accessible to teachers and parents.

• The duly elected and well trained committees appoint their principals who will maintain a collaborative relationship with the committee and the entire staff.

• Management begins at the school level, with a central organization to standardize some components, manage overall system responsibilities (licensing, payroll, contract negotiation, etc.)

• District Superintendents are selected by school leadership committees in the District in which they serve. The major function of the District Superintendents will be to provide friendly criticism and support, monitor the implementation of the Comprehensive Education Plan and to advocate for the needs of their respective schools.


2. The DOE must be politically neutral and not tied to any one political office. A school system cannot change/adjust according to the whim, caprice, political aspirations, career, or ideology of a politician. It must be run as an independent office with responsibilities to the people of the City and operate within the regulations and laws of the NYS Ed. Department.

• A Central Board responsible for general and overall policy and oversight of all services that are centrally located will be made up of five elected members, one from each borough; one appointee from each of the borough presidents and three Mayoral appointees. A teacher representative will be selected by the UFT. All will be elected/appointed for set terms and removed by the Central Board by a 2/3 vote only for cause.

• The Central Board will appoint a Chancellor, who has demonstrated success as an educator.

• The Chancellor’s role will be to advocate for policy, law and funding; develop guidelines, benchmarks and tracking systems for school needs and achievement; report to all elected officials; monitor the District Superintendents; establish a human resource department; negotiate contracts, and insure that they are upheld.


3. Benchmarks are to be established and evaluations conducted by an independent agency.

• Evaluations of schools and students should be based on multiple measures and should be used for gathering information in order to provide support.

• Responsibility for the analysis and evaluation of the Dept. of Education's programs will be given to the Public Advocate. The Advocate's Office will have statutory authority to review all Dept. of Education documents and will receive all resources currently allocated to the Dept. of Education for the review and analysis of their programs.

• The Advocate's Office will be required to produce an annual report evaluating the progress of the Dept. of Education in advancing students' skills, reducing absenteeism, increasing the high school graduation rate and any other measure that would demonstrate success. The Advocate's Office would then produce reports based on an established schedule determined by when data is available.


4. Inherent in the system design must be respect and support for all constituents.

• School leadership committees, representative of their schools’ constituents, (staff, parents, students in the middle and high schools and their community) under the leadership of democratically oriented principals decide the programs and teaching strategies best suited to their students. Teachers are respected for their experience and expertise in teaching and learning.

• All schools provide a comprehensive education program including the core curricula areas, performing and visual arts, health and physical education, career and technical education, and technology.


5. Funding must be fair, equitable, transparent, with budget decisions made at the school level.

• A larger portion of the funding received by the federal, state and city will be managed by the schools. The school leadership committees will determine how funds are spent.

• Equitable funding developed by central staff and approved by the Central Board will determine how much money each school receives. Budgets and expenditures at all levels of the system will be made available for review by the public. The City Council is to be involved in this process.

• Funding and spending will be monitored by the Comptroller.

• All contracts will be put out to open bid and made public via the Internet.


6. School and District lines must be drawn in a way to preserve and strengthen the integrity of neighborhoods and communities.

• In the creation of district lines, consideration can be given to existing community planning boards/combining boards.

• All registered voters and parents are eligible to vote for district councils.

• Non-registered parents can vote on separate voting machines at each poll site dedicated solely for the purpose of electing the councils or with a mail in ballot. While this will necessitate an additional eligible voters list, the input of the public is necessary in a democratic society that must take responsibility for schools.

• District councils will serve as a public forum for parents and community and serve as a liaison between the District and the Central Organization.


7. A system of checks and balances will be put into place to give voice to all constituents.

• Parents and Students will have access to an Education Council within the Office of the Public Advocate to provide assistance and guarantee its rights. School staff will be represented by their unions.

• The City Council will have non-voting representation on the Central Board.


8. Professionals creating and implementing instructional policy should have classroom teaching experience so that they have a clear understanding of the implications of their decisions.

• The Chancellor, principals, assistant principals and other pedagogical supervisors must be experienced educators, with a minimum of five years of classroom experience; no waivers will be granted.

February, 2009

Tweed and Learn NY Scaredy Cats

The DOE and Learn NY (the Mayor's front group pushing mayoral control) are afraid to come to an open and honest debate. Thus won't be at the

Queens Civic Congress Forum on Education: Mayoral Control of NYC Schools: Extend it? End it? Change it?

At Queens County Farm Museum, 72-50 Little Neck Parkway, 1/4 mile north of Union Turnpike.
Featuring a panel, including Dina Paul Parks, Senior Policy Advisor to Deputy Mayor for Education and Community Development; Phyliss Bullion, Council of Supervisors & Administrators; Leonie Haimson, Executive Director, Class Size Matters; April Humphrey, Campaign for Better School; and Rob Caloras, President, District 26 Community Education Council. Moderated by Liz Green, Gotham Schools.

David and I will be there to tape.

The UFT Report on Mayoral Control...

... has been released to members of the Executive Board and the Delegate Assembly. Tonight the EB votes and the DA votes Weds.

ICE members have a lot to say about it and will be doing so.Will the UFT reject recommendations that are much better for kids, teachers and parents? I'll leave you in suspense as I will honor the UFT request to keep the report out of the hands of the press until after tonight's pre-determined vote. Look for commentary tonight.

Here is a section of a the Education Notes handed out at last week's Delegate Assembly:

One of the major planks in the corporate agenda for education is to put large urban school systems under dictatorial mayors who are free to shut out parent and teacher input while undermining the union at the school level.

From the day Randi Weingarten announced her support for mayoral control in May 2001, Ed Notes has stood against this policy, pointing to the Chicago model which began in 1995. Indeed, the Independent Community of Educators (ICE) came together in 2003 based on people opposed to the UFT’s going along, getting along policies.

So, now as we come to the possible sun set of the law, which would force us back to the what, today, looks like the good old days of local district boards.

If a referendum were held, I bet 75% or more of the people who work in the schools would vote to end mayoral control.

The UFT leadership is in a bind. How to continue to support mayoral control in practice while giving the members the opposite impression.

Thus, the creation of a governance committee, open to all, but packed with Unity people.

Meetings were held on all boroughs, but I have always felt the positions the UFT will take is predetermined and all this is about finding the right language that will play well. Now there are ICE people on the committee but they can’t tell us what is going on because there is some kind of gag rule and they will be water boarded if they talk. Or sent to GITMO.

Abandoning seniority rules, accepting school closings as a fait accompli, joining in on the influx of charter schools, accepting the CEO model, tacit acceptance of non-educators as chancellors, supporting the Gates and other private interest onslaught on public schools, signing on to the testing mania by supporting merit pay and individual teacher report cards based on these tests – I won’t give you any more of the laundry list – has led to the worst working conditions for teachers in decades and a deterioration in learning conditions for many children, no matter what the fudged numbers might show.

For a union whose members have been so ravaged under mayoral control to in any manner to support this policy even with supposed tweaks, is to abandon any hint of support for the kinds of progressive change our schools so desperately need.

January 30, 2009 One School's Account of Devastating UFT Failure

Jamaica HS Chapter Leader (and fellow ICE'er) James Eterno interrupted his report on the Delegate Assembly to chronicle the devastating impact of the failure of the UFT to protect its members. I extracted it and am re-publishing this powerful statement on the predicament strong union people like James face in the light of major budget cuts to come. You might also want to check out my friend Vera's sharp criticism of the UFT on where they were all these years when the city was flush with money, Responding to Randi.


Since Randi is a regular reader of the blogs, I have a question and I will send this directly to her and some of the Unity hierarchy. How am I going to convince my members to attend a UFT rally at City Hall on March 5 when they feel abandoned by the Central UFT?


Back in 2007, the secretaries at Jamaica filed a group grievance saying that school aides were doing their jobs. In 2008, their Chapter Leader, Jackie Ervolina, came to Jamaica and urged us to support the UFT's citywide grievance on this issue. We agreed. Last spring the UFT told us they won the citywide case. To date, nothing has improved at Jamaica.

Part of this situation at my school goes back as far as 2006 and before. A secretary who had been doing evening school for many years was replaced by a school aide for most of her hours in 2006. She has been waiting almost three years for arbitration. In addition, two secretaries filed workload disputes. The disputes died at the Superintendent's level. One was supposed to be reconvened in February 2008 and never was.

Our secretaries stood together as a group and were told by the UFT to stand tall and fight. They are a shining example of trade unionism. What has the UFT done in return? When we email their Chapter Leader, or talk to our District Representative, we are told to wait and wait and wait and wait and then wait some more. Do you think I am going to be able to get these courageous UFT members out to a rally? They feel they have been abandoned by the UFT as three have since been excessed. Two of these are ATR's and the other is out of Jamaica.

Furthermore, how do I convince a teacher who can't get an answer from the DOE on her Family and Medical Leave Act request that she applied for in December, to come to a rally? A few days ago this person was told by the UFT that we have to be patient because the DOE is slow. Federal law gives the employer five business days to respond to a FMLA request; the UFT tells us to wait, and wait and wait some more.

How am I going to persuade the many teachers who lost parking permits to come to the rally? Jamaica lost many of our legal parking spaces, not just permits, under the new procedure implemented in the fall. We complained in September and haven't heard from the UFT in months on this issue?

How do I tell the Absent Teacher Reserves in my school that they should come to a rally when some aren't put back on our school's budget even when they are teaching full programs (planning, teaching, and assessing)? We've been working with Michael Mendel on this all year and the Principal basically refuses to move unless the situation is obvious and even then it takes a long time for action.

Administration improperly excessed a UFT Delegate and it took us two months, a great deal of effort and a grievance to get her back. Both the delegate and I thanked Mendel personally for helping us in this arduous fight but the central UFT has allowed conditions to exist in the schools where Principals can try to illegally excess a union activist with impunity.

In addition, a teaching fellow was teaching a full time math program all fall but the school would not put him on our Table of Organization. The UFT was informed. Once again, patience was preached. This young teacher ended up finding a job at another school rather than risk getting fired on February 3. Subsequently, that full time math position was left vacant (filled with coverages) for the last two months of the semester. The UFT has told us nothing. Another math teacher who was excessed and is at another school, applied to return to Jamaica and grieved. How do I convince these people that the Union cares about them?

A colleague and I have emailed Randi several times on how the Principal habitually violated our Contract. There are plenty of other examples I could cite but let me just sum up by saying that if I had a dime for each time a UFT member came to me and said that they trust me but the UFT is full of you know what, I would have the salary of a UFT officer. OK that's a little exaggeration but you get the point.

If this is the situation at Jamaica High School where we are not afraid to stand up to the DOE as we rallied at a Panel for Educational Policy meeting last year and wrote to the state twice this school year demanding equity for our school, I can only imagine what is occurring at other Chapters.

To Randi and Unity readers: I'll be there on March 5 and I'll urge people to join me, but could you please give me some tips on what I can say to get my members to have some faith in a Union that is great for "lip service" but has let us down on so many occasions.

Today's Best Person of the Day

Haimson Eyed As Key Influence in Mayoral Control Fight


Living in Miami and never having laid eyes on Leonie Haimson, I was a bit surprised by the idea of her as a "little lady". In my minds eye she has always appeared as a giant. But I guess there is precedence for such confusion.

Rosa Parks was a diminutive woman and at the same time a giant in the people's eyes. So it has happened before but that does not change the feelings of gratitude and awe that I feel for Ms. Haimson. She is living proof that good people will persevere, and that at the end of a long and difficult struggle, we will win.

Thank you Ms. Haimson for all you have given to America's children and teachers in the public schools.

Paul A. Moore

Suzane Joseph – MS 313K

Today's Worst Principal of the Day

PS 150K Update

Our correspondent reporting on the situation at PS 150K, a school slated to close, sends this follow-up to a previous report.

There was a union person sent to 150K today to talk to the teachers about their rights and what to do as the year closes. Well, she was unaware that the school was getting a charter school. She then had little to say to the staff. The only thing they were told was that the current principal could only select folks to stay in the phase out school based on grade level seniority. Most of the teachers in the 7th and 8th grades, which are staying, are not fully licensed and would have to be let go.

A woman from the neighborhood said several folks had heard from others outside the school neighborhood that a charter was set to go in there even before the school staff were informed.

Next week someone from the DOE is scheduled to visit and speak with the staff.

The UFT and Mayoral Control

The UFT has been on the wrong side of just about every progressive education issue. By signing on to the “teacher quality is the most important Joel Klein/Michelle Rhee formula" they abandon the stronger case that lower class sizes are more important and in fact would raise the level of teacher quality across the board. Thus you see all kinds of class size reduction gimmicks like the 2 failed petition campaigns (haven’t heard much about those lately, have you) while ignoring the calls from this publication and ICE to make class size reduction a priority contract item. The numbers you see today that you can at least grieve on were implemented in 1970. Remember the argument used against us that we would see educations due to the CFE ruling? How's that working out?

Abandoning seniority rules, accepting school closings as a fait accompli, joining in on the influx of charter schools, accepting the CEO model, tacit acceptance of non-educators as chancellors, supporting the Gates and other private interest onslaught on public schools, signing on to the testing mania by supporting merit pay and individual teacher report cards based on these tests – I won’t give you any more of the laundry list – has led to the worst working conditions for teachers in decades and a deterioration in learning conditions for many children, no matter what the fudged numbers might show.

One of the major planks in the corporate agenda for education is to put large urban school systems under dictatorial mayors who are free to shut out parent and teacher input while undermining the union at the school level. Don’t get me wrong here. They are not anti-union - at the top level. They need a union with a collaborative leadership like the UFT, which can function as an intermediary to sell their programs to the teachers and control any signs of resistance.

From the day Randi Weingarten announced her support for mayoral control in May 2001, Ed Notes has stood against this policy, pointing to the Chicago model which began in 1995. Indeed, the Independent Community of Educators (ICE) came together in 2003 based on people opposed to the UFT’s going along, getting along policies.

So, now as we come to the possible sun set of the law, which would force us back to the what, today, looks like the good old days of local district boards.

If a referendum were held, I bet 75% or more of the people who work in the schools would vote to end mayoral control.

The UFT leadership is in a bind. How to continue to support mayoral control in practice while giving the members the opposite impression.

Thus, the creation of a governance committee, open to all, but packed with Unity people.

Meetings were held on all boroughs, but I have always felt the positions the UFT will take is predetermined and all this is about finding the right language that will play well. Now there are ICE people on the committee but they can’t tell us what is going on because there is some kind of gag rule and they will be water boarded if they talk. Or sent to GITMO.

In case you didn’t notice, there is another Delegate Assembly scheduled for next week (Feb. 4). It is all about the position the UFT will take on mayoral control. They must be having difficulty drafting a document that will play both sides of the issue against the middle. ICE has been adamantly against mayoral control and it will be interesting to see how this plays out. My guess is there is a lot of maneuvering on the part of the leadership. No mater what, I expect attacks on the ICE committee members. And for the UFT to say one thing while asking for tweaks.

The Video the UFT Doesn't Want You To See: The ATR Rally

A Tale of Two Rallies
or
A Tale of a Rally
and
A Wine and Cheese Party

[Make sure to see Part 2 also]

On November 24, 2008, teachers without positions, known as ATRs, held a rally at Tweed. They had forced the UFT to endorse the rally but in the interim the UFT signed an agreement with the DOE. The leadership called for an information meeting at UFT HQ, a mile away at the very same time the rally was due to start. Mass confusion. I taped the UFT HQ while David Bellel did the rally. The back story is how desperate UFT leaders were to suppress the tape I made. In fact, today at the Delegate Assembly they will pass a gag rule to try to prevent future embarrassment.

Part 1
Concurrent events at Tweed and the UFT
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Ac-Ul1m8-0



Part 2
UFT leaders with some ATRs who went to the info session march -er- meander up Broadway to Tweed where the 2 forces meet. Unity is outnumbered and Randi is heckled as she speaks. Note: She congratulates the people who called for the rally, saying there would not have been an agreement with the DOE if not for the rally. Less than an hour before she gave the people at the info meeting the reverse message: that in these bad economic times, things like rallies and militancy are not wise. No wonder they didn't want me to tape.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hG4xrbgiGqU

LA Teacher Union Urges Boycott of Practice Tests....

....but is warned the scores may go down.

Gee, ya think?

L.A. teachers' union calls for boycott of practice testing

These tests are all about practicing for THE BIG ONE. They take time away from doing real teaching. But they do serve the purpose of artificially inflating the scores. Sort of like lifting weights. I can actually make my puny biceps look like more than little lumps with a few sets of curls. Lasts a few hours before shrinking back to reality.

"The union Tuesday directed teachers to refuse to give them to students on the grounds that the tests are costly and counterproductive."

Here's a union that walks the walk. Not like the UFT which sets up a committee to study the testing issue for a year, comes out with a pretty good report (so they can say they have reservations about testing) but then endorses merit pay based on test scores and measuring individual teacher performance based on these tests.

[LATU Pres.] Duffy remains skeptical.

"The pig does not get fatter when you weigh it 10 times a day," Duffy said. "And if the test scores do go up, isn't it phony? Because what you are doing is teaching to the test, teaching a subject that has been narrowed down radically. We're not creating smarter kids. We're creating smarter test takers."

Duffy announced the boycott Tuesday at Emerson Middle School on the Westside, where teachers said the district tests were too burdensome on top of already mandated state and federal testing.

"We are supposed to be teaching, not testing," said Emerson English teacher Cecily Myart-Cruz. "We can come up with our own assessments in our classroom, and we do -- every day."

Teachers and schools actually seem to have some say, not like here in NYC, and Duffy may actually pull this off. The LATU showed off its biceps when most of the teachers in LA boycotted classes successfully for an hour at the beginning of the school day earlier this school year.

[Supt Ray] Cortines asserted that the assessments are part of teachers' assigned duties -- they are not optional. He also said he has and will amend aspects of the tests that need fixing. But he won't toss them out because, he said, they have contributed strongly to rising performance on the state's own annual tests.

I'm disappointed in Ray Cortines, who I always considered a good educator, for pushing these tests but all these guys are under enormous pressure to show results. But I think he is not arrogant like a Joel Klein and hopefully will try to make some changes. But even the best seem to be caving. How he will respond to a massive boycott will be interesting. If teachers ever started using their power enmasse.... ah, why even bring it up? In NYC the UFT is just one big obstruction with tiny biceps.


Related:
When Bronx teacher Doug Avella's 4 classes refused to take one of these practice tests, the DOE called out the hounds and he seems to have disappeared from the school system. Maybe they sent him to GITMO.

Articles on Ed Notes on the Avella story in chronological order beginning in May 2008.

Bronx Teacher Under Gun Due to Student Boycott of Test

Dear Joel Klein - Letters on Student Test Boycott

Where is Leo Casey and Edwize on Test Boycott?

PS 150: The Real Game Behind Closing Schools

Everyone knows if you close a school and replace the teachers, nothing much will change. Except that the school with a newer crop of inexperienced teachers will be much more unruly. In 2006, PS 225 in Rockaway was reorganized and all teachers had to reapply for their jobs, with a small handful being retained. Now that school is being closed and we have been looking for the signs that they will attempt to claim success by somehow changing the school population, not an easy thing. NY State Senate leader Malcolm Smith runs a charter school about 2 miles away that is based in quonset huts. Maybe they'll figure out a way to move that school into PS 225. Who knows?

Parents and teachers know the key to showing the kind of results that can be used politically is to change the kids.

This story about another closing school just came in over the transom from a source:

PS 150 in Brownsville is one of the schools slated to close (phased out). When the first parent meeting was held the DOE could not (and would not) answer their questions about the transition. All they said was we don't know. Parents were upset, but did not do anything immediately. Monday, the school - parents and teachers - were told that the "new school" was going to be a charter school with all that it implies. It was a small group of parents, but they found out their children will not automatically move from 150 to the new school. NOW they are angry and are planning some type of demonstration. But I fear it is too late. The DOE has spoken. This is not happening in all the schools that are closing. But, I wonder how many are getting this treatment.

Here is one thing we know. The UFT will send someone in to tell the teachers it is a fait accompli and nothing can be done. And good luck as an ATR.

Facts About GED–Plus

The PEP meeting tonight, there will be an update on GED similar to the one offered to the City Council by Cami Anderson, the Superintendent of Alternative Schools. Anderson is a Teach for America alum and fits the usual profile of people at Tweed. Many people view her tenure as a disaster. We're not surprised. She's part of the Joel Klein version of FEMA. You're doing a great job Brownie - er - Cami.

Here is some background on GED Plus from Marjorie Stamberg and Jeff Kaufman.

Marjorie:
GED -Plus is a multi-sited program, with more than 80 sites across the city and 6 "hubs". The teachers are extremely dedicated and hard-working, but we are laboring with very deep problems of financing, lack of resources, and loss of many students and teachers from the program. This in part stems from the disastrous "re-organization" of the city's GED programs in June 2007. There were city council hearings on that closing, and the UFT testified there at that time.

Here are some questions to ask at the PEP:
1) Consequences of the "reorganization" of the city's GED program, in June of 2007.

The program was "reorganized" in June 2007, and involved closing five GED facilities in the district*, and reopened as "GED Plus. All the teachers were excessed in masse at the time, and GED Plus then opened in September 2008 with only 1/2 of the teachers and the loss of hundreds of students whose sites and programs were closed over that summer. Teachers with PhDs in literacy were let go, as were bilingual English-Chinese teachers -- I know many of them personally, and we have been struggling to place these extremely talented and dedicated teachers and get them out of the city "ATR" pool every since.

Importantly, there is no record of what happened to the students who had been in the previous programs when their sites closed in June 2007. Literally hundreds of students simply "disappeared." One of the closed schools was the "Program for Pregnant and Parenting Teens." Meredith Kolodner in the Daily News recently published an article reporting that the DOE had very few records on what happened to these students.

2) Loss of arts and enrichment services. Previously, there were a number of arts programs, partnerships with the Metropolitan Museum, musical programs, and others. Now, to my knowledge all arts and enrichment programs at "GED Plus" are no longer available.

3) Many students at GED Plus are not ready to take the test, and are placed in literacy classes at the five GED Plus "hubs" across the city. There is a paucity of age-appropriate books, lack of computer services (out-dated and broken down computer labs, if any), "smart-boards" or any modern technology for these students.

4) Cami Anderson will state they have brought in an outside vendor of literacy specialists called "The Aussies" (at great expense). They have virtually NO experience dealing with the multi-lingual, multi-ethnic older teenage population we work with in New York City. Their idea of basic "literacy" instruction is far more advanced than that needed by students reading on a 3rd or 5th grade level. Many students simply cannot read the books in the classroom libraries.

5) What special services for Special Ed counselors, testing, and special materials, Wilson training, access to VESED occupational training is going on? To my knowledge, students are still able to participate in an excellent partnership at "Co-op Tech" but this again is limited.

6) What special counseling services, partnerships with CUNY, participation in literacy and ESL programs available at CUNY are being offered? Much of this was also lost in the reorganization.

*The five closed schools were Auxiliary Services for High Schools, Career Education Services, Vocational Education Services, Off-site Educational Services and the School for Pregnant and Parenting Teens.


Jeff Kaufman:
Since the D79 reorganization in 2007 Anderson has stated that her intention was to reduce GED referrals and to streamline the process so less students would “fall through the cracks.” While I don’t have statistics I do know that students who were formerly incarcerated continue to be dissuaded to return to their schools and still do not make it to alternative programs like the GED. In fact they are terrible in tracking students despite the fact this problem has existed for years.

Marjorie:
Ms. Anderson and the D79 superintendency are sure to talk about the "low" attendance rates in the GED programs. GED Plus is where students go who have dropped out, or been pushed out of their high schools and are now trying again for an education. So it's not rocket science that many have attendance issues. But outrageously, students often are counted in as being in GED -Plus and parallel programs when they are pushed out of other schools. In fact they may never have shown up, but it is a manuever used by the DOE to lower the drop out rate from the high -schools. I.e., if a student was "transferred" to another program, it doesn't count as a drop out.

Furthermore, if you look at success rates of the program, how can one possibly judge GED-Plus which is only in it's second year of running. It takes many of these students a number of years to get their literacy skills up enough to pass the GED.