Tuesday, March 11, 2014

ADVISORY: TODAY, 11am CM Dromm, Large Majority of City Council to Blast #CuomoCuts-- City Hall Steps


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: March 11th, 2014
 
Contact:
Julian Vinocur, julian@aqeny.org212.328.9268

Large Majority of NYC Council to Demand Public School Funding Increase, Following Gov's Promise to Give More to Charter Schools Instead

Led by Councilmember Daniel Dromm, Large Majority of Councilmembers to Release Sign-on Letter Calling on State to Comply with CFE & Increase School Aid

PRESS CONFERENCE
*TODAY, Tuesday, March 11th, at 11AM. 
Steps of City Hall*
WHO: Chair of the Education Committee Councilmember (CM) Daniel Dromm; CM Fernando Cabrera; CM Chaim Deutsch; CM Rafael Espinal; CM Mathieu Eugene; CM Ben Kallos; CM Brad Lander; CM Antonio Reynoso; CM Helen Rosenthal - *COUNCIL LIST STILL IN FORMATION* - David Sciarra, from Campaign for Fiscal Equity ProjectPublic school parents and advocates from the Alliance for Quality Education. 

WHAT: A day before the NYS legislature approves their one-house budgets in Albany, a large majority of the New York City Council, led by Councilmember Daniel Dromm will release a sign-on letter calling on state to go above and beyond what the Governor has proposed on school aid for public schools. The letter follows the Governor's controversial comments, promising to increase funding for the 3% of students across the state that go to privately-run charter schools, while proposing an inadequate budget that will yield more classrooms cuts for the 97% of students that attend traditional public schools.

*Participants will be tweeting using #CuomoCuts*

WHEN: Today, March 11th, at 11AM.

WHERE: City Hall Steps, Lower Manhattan.
 

Monday, March 10, 2014

Dora Taylor: What is a Charter School

Dora reminds us of her 2010 piece on charters at the Seattle Education blog.

What is a Charter School?

The basic difference between a traditional public school and a privately run charter school is that with a charter school there is complete control of the school by a private enterprise within a public school district. Although taxpayer-funded, charters operate without the same degree of public and district oversight of a standard public school. Most charter schools do not hire union teachers which means that they can demand the teacher work longer hours including weekends at the school site and pay less than union wages. Charter schools take the school district’s allotment of money provided for each student within the public schools system and use it to develop their programs. In many systems, they receive that allotment without having to pay for other costs such as transportation for students to and from the school. Some states, such as Minnesota, actually allocate more than what is granted to public school students.

The money that is allocated for each student by the school district, stays with the charter school whether the student remains in that school for the entire school year or returns to a public school.

A charter school can expel any student that it doesn’t believe fits within its standards or meets its level of expectation in terms of test scores. Because it is a charter school, parents and students do not benefit from the regulations and oversight that would protect them in a public school.

The reason for the emphasis on test scores is because when a state agrees to provide a charter, there are requirements for that charter school to meet or exceed a certain level of performance in terms of test scores. Therefore, charter schools establish unspoken policies in terms of the admission of ELL or IEP students as well as students who the charter school doesn’t believe will meet the state standard.

Also, according to a recent study by Stanford University’s Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO), charter schools do not necessarily perform any better than public schools. In fact, 37 percent performed worse. Forty-six percent demonstrated “no significant difference” from public schools. Only 17 percent of charter schools performed better than public schools.

Charter School Myths
To follow are charter school myths that reverberate throughout the media and among the proponents of charter schools but have no basis in fact.

Myth #1: Charter schools have this incredible and truly unbelievable success rate at graduating students on time.
It’s easy when a school can cherry pick their students or counsel them out for a school to have a high success rate in graduating their students. The reality is that there are few English Language Learners (ELL’s) in charter schools and most charter schools will not accept or will counsel out IEP students (Individualized Education Program) who have special requirements. Students in this category include children with learning disabilities, ADHD, emotional or cognitive disorders, autism, speech or language impairment or developmental delay. These are students that public schools not only accept but provide individualized programs for under the law and with as much of a budget that a school or district can muster.
Charter schools don’t want these students because states mandate that for a charter school to keep their charter, the school is required to show a certain level of performance and this is reflected in test scores. It a student is going to test poorly, the charter school does not want that student. It is also expensive to provide additional support for IEP and ELL students and most charter schools are looking at their bottom line in terms of profitability.

This leads me to the second myth about charter schools:
Myth #2: Charter Schools do not take funding away from public schools.
They do.
What has happened in cities like Chicago and Philadelphia is that as students leave the public schools, the money has followed the student to the charter school.
The way that public schools manage to maintain a budget for special instruction of ELL and IEP students is to pool the financial resources that come with each student. Every district has a certain amount of money per student that is to be used for their education. It varies from district to district depending upon the district’s budget. The majority of students in a typical school population require less in terms of actual costs than their IEP and ELL counterparts so the money is distributed to where the funding is needed.
When students who require less in terms of actual costs leave the school population and a greater percentage of students who remain require more funding, overall there is less money to go around for the students who require additional support.
Also, if a student attends a charter school in the fall and is then “counseled out”, the money stays with the charter school for that school year. This is another racket that some charter schools are involved in, expelling students after getting the cash from the district for that student.
When I met with Arne Duncan two years ago, a teacher from Chicago asked Arne what he was going to do with all of the special ed students who had been left behind in the public schools. She said that the school and the teachers were overwhelmed with the growing percentage of IEP and ELL students who needed additional time and resources that the school no longer had. Arne gave his goofy smile that is supposed to be disarming and said nothing that addressed her concerns.

Myth #3: Charter schools are public schools
So far we’ve seen that charter schools use public funds to stay afloat and even to make a profit but that’s where the term “public” begins and ends.
The intention of public schools was to ensure that all children received an education that would be the foundation for a productive future. The funding for education would be provided using tax payer dollars and schools would be run in a democratic and transparent manner.
None of the above applies to charter schools.
Typically there is no oversight of charter schools by publicly elected school boards and little to no protection of students from charter school violations. Typically charter schools have well-paid CEO’s who run the schools and a selected board to oversee how the school is run. Most charter schools do not support parent or teacher involvement.
There is also the fact that charter schools have created highly segregated school populations. See UCLA Report Says Charters Are Causing Resegregation Of American Schools and an interview with UCLA’s Civil Rights Project co-director Gary Orfield:

Myth #4: Non-profit charter schools are OK, for-profit charter schools are not.
Just because an organization is a “non-profit”, doesn’t mean that a profit cannot be had. Look at Teach for America, Inc for instance. TFA, Inc. is an organization that started out as a good idea but is now pushing its way into one school district after another demanding yearly fees for their uncredentialed and poorly trained recruits to populate minority public schools. Kopp is making a fortune off of what was once an admirable idea between receiving millions from her donors and $50M grants from the government on top of the average $5,000 per recruit per year fees that she garnishes from school districts. The atrocity is that these recruits go broke having to pay for their expenses.
There is nothing inherently altruistic about a non-profit. Many times it’s simply a wolf in sheep’s clothing. An example would be Michelle Rhee, another proponent of the privatization of our schools. She’s raking in millions between her donors and speaking engagements and exactly where is that money going?
Another fact to keep in mind is that most charter schools are managed by CMO’s, Charter Management Organizations such as White Hat Management, or EMO’s, Education Management Organizations, which add another layer of cost to school districts.
Which brings me to another myth that is related to charter schools, you don’t need to be credentialed, experienced or educated in education to be a good teacher.
This myth is related to charter schools in two ways. First, charter schools rarely hire union teachers or teachers with much experience. This is a way to keep the cost down so the myth is perpetrated that students don’t require teachers who are experienced, credentialed or have received a degree, particularly a Master’s degree, in education.
The second reason is that it supports the action by charter schools in hiring TFA, Inc. recruits to staff their schools with cheap labor.
What’s interesting about this myth is that you hear it repeated by people who have their children in private schools where they would consider the best teachers to have all of the attributes listed above including Bill Gates.

Myth #5: Charter schools are better than public school in terms of student performance.
Not only are their several peer-reviewed studies that show otherwise, but we see in states like Florida and New York that the proliferation of charter schools has not raised test scores or closed the much touted “achievement gap”.
Studies regarding charter schools include:
The Stanford Credo Report: Charter School Performance in Pennsylvania
New Charter Study by Mathematica With More Bad News for Corporate Ed Reform
NEW STANFORD (CREDO) REPORT FINDS SERIOUS QUALITY CHALLENGE IN NATIONAL CHARTER SCHOOL SECTOR
REVIEW OF THE LOUISIANA RECOVERY SCHOOL DISTRICT: LESSONS FOR THE BUCKEYE STATE
Schools Without Diversity: Education Management Organizations, Charter Schools, and the Demographic Stratification
Vanderbilt Study: Instructional Conditions in Charter Schools and Students’ Mathematics Achievement Gains

What we need is for all of those folks who are putting millions into backing the privatization of our schools to pay their fair share of taxes including Bill Gates.

Then, the population needs to realize that for our children to have a good education, we have to pay for it. Funding in education has been woefully lacking over the years and it is finally made itself painfully apparent in terms of the condition of our schools, the lack of resources that teachers have including up to date text books, a shorter school day and school year, and a loss of classes in music, drama, art, physical education as well as other classes that help spark an interest in learning.

And finally, our values need to change. The Secretary of Education Arne Duncan started his campaign for the privatization of our schools with a $5B plan that he termed Race to the Top. That money seemed like so much money to people and unfortunately schools districts and states fell for it and tried to comply with the demands of the Department of Education for what turned out to be a small pittance and did not cover all that each state was to do to receive RTTT money. What makes this so terrible in comparison is that last year we spent $5B every two weeks in Afghanistan. $5B for 50 states as a one shot deal to educate our children and $5B to Afghanistan every two weeks. As I said, our values as a nation need to change and we need to start demanding that federal funds be diverted away from spending on the corporate/military complex and the propping up of financial institutions and instead be used to educate our children. That’s where our future is.
Other articles and video’s of interest:
The Inconvenient Truth Behind Waiting for Superman
Access Denied: New Orleans Students and Parents Identify Barriers to Public Education
Parents say special-ed kids falling victim in charter battle for space inside city schools
Teach For America: A False Promise
Teach for America: The Hidden Curriculum of Liberal Do-Gooders
Does Teacher Preparation Matter? Evidence about Teacher Certification, Teach for America, and Teacher Effectiveness
Charter law forced school’s closure
Charter discipline policy under fire
Dirty job: charter teachers janitors
See also on this blog:
The Shock Doctrine
The Inconvenient Truth Behind Waiting for Superman
A teacher’s perspective: Firing day at a charter school
Are charter schools public or private? Neither or both?
Charter Management Organizations (CMO’s) and Education Management Organizations (EMO)

Dora Taylor

AFT Won’t Accept Gates Money, Except When It Does

...that only accounts for half the money AFT has received from Gates. According to Politico, “AFT’s executive council hasn’t formally voted to reject Gates funding for other projects, but Weingarten said she would be very cautious about taking such grants.” Somehow a headline that reads “AFT Shuns Gates Funding” gives a different impression than one that reads “AFT Will Be Very Cautious the Next Time It Accepts Gates Funding.”.... Weingarten said the union will push for a dues increase to offset some of the lost funding. It should give teachers a sense of empowerment to know their money is being used to compensate for the Gates shortfall. Mike Antonucci at EIA.
Mike nails what's really going on despite the salivating at the Ravitch blog over the news that Randi will not take Gates money for the Innovation project but will keep taking it. Here's some news for UFT members -- you don't have the right to vote to approve this dues increase since that decision will be made through the automatic dues increase rule.

UPDATE: Here is the video of the walkout on Gates at the 2010 AFT convention with Randi and Unity taunting them:
)

Our pal in Buffalo chimes in.
In the current desperate state of public education we really can't afford sacred cows. Diane Ravitch for all of her upside needs to take a long hard look at the dismal dearth of leadership Randi Weingarten has provided to her members. Ravitch may well be her friend, in fact if I have read that once I have read it a hundred times. That's nice....B-LoEdScene - No Country for Sacred Cows - No Comment From Ravitch by way of Politico : EXCLUSIVE: AFT SHUNS GATES FUNDING:
Yes, Diane left that part out in her post today celebrating Randi's "conversion."


Link to Intercepts


Posted: 10 Mar 2014 10:23 AM PDT
Over the last four years, the American Federation of Teachers has taken more than $10 million from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Now Randi Weingarten announced AFT will no longer accept Gates money… for the union’s Innovation Fund. But that only accounts for half the money AFT has received from Gates. According to Politico, “AFT’s executive council hasn’t formally voted to reject Gates funding for other projects, but Weingarten said she would be very cautious about taking such grants.”
Somehow a headline that reads “AFT Shuns Gates Funding” gives a different impression than one that reads “AFT Will Be Very Cautious the Next Time It Accepts Gates Funding.”

This is a victory for those who complained that AFT was being compromised by the Gates contributions to the Innovation Fund, but it’s a victory with a price tag. Weingarten said the union will push for a dues increase to offset some of the lost funding. It should give teachers a sense of empowerment to know their money is being used to compensate for the Gates shortfall.

Leonie on Ed Show Tonight on Charter Co-Loco Battle

At least MSNBC has been giving some voice to our side -- hope you saw Julie Cavanagh on the SAT issue on Chris Hayes Friday night. Now Leonie on The Ed Show at 5:30.

Dear folks:

I will be on the Ed Show at 5:30 PM EST tonight on MSNBC, talking about the furious co-location battle going on in NYC.

Lost in the furious rhetoric from the charter lobby and the biased coverage by the mainstream media is the fact that 36 co-locations are going forward, 14 of them for charter schools, and 22 for non-charter schools.  In all of these cases, these co-locations will lead to more overcrowding and prevent students from being provided with smaller classes, which the state’s highest court said was necessary if NYC children were to receive their constitutional right to an adequate education.

Over the weekend, the Public Advocate Letitia James held a terrific town hall meeting with the affected parents at these schools and the Community Education Councils who represent them.  The vote was unanimous to continue our lawsuit against allowing these 36 co-locations to go forward.  The entire public process that led to these co-locations was illegitimate, including the lack of real parent consultation and engagement, inaccurate utilization figures, false and some cases manipulated enrollment numbers, all engineered by the former head of Portfolio, Marc Sternberg, who shortly thereafter went to work for the Walton Foundation, whose explicit purpose it is to privatize public education.

More on this meeting and why we are continuing the lawsuit is on our blog here; as well as a link to a spreadsheet showing that 14 of the proposals would push the school building to 100% utilization or more.  In all cases, the utilization would be above 100% if the formula was aligned to smaller classes, a full complement of art, music and science rooms, and dedicated spaces for special needs students to receive their mandated services.

In fact, the Chancellor has admitted that the utilization formula in the “Blue Book” is inaccurate and has appointed a taskforce to improve it; two of the members of this taskforce attended the meeting on Saturday and voted that the lawsuit should continue.

If you support the lawsuit and oppose these co-locations, please sign onto the letter below, by emailing us your name, school/district, and position if any to info@classsizematters.org asap.

Thanks as always for your support,

Leonie Haimson
Executive Director
Class Size Matters
124 Waverly Pl.
New York, NY 10011
212-674-7320

  follow on Twitter | friend on Facebook 

forward to a friend | subscribe to this newsletter

 
AN OPEN LETTER TO
PUBLIC ADVOCATE TISH JAMES
AND
CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER
MELISSA MARK-VIVERITO
_______________________________________

WE NEED YOUR CONTINUED SUPPORT!

Dear Public Advocate James and Council Speaker Mark-Viverito:

Let us begin by thanking you for your longstanding support of all public school students and all public school parents.  You have been outspoken supporters of parents and teachers having key input into shaping the schools our children attend.  You have been outspoken supporters of reducing class size, alleviating school overcrowding, and working to implement our children’s right to a sound basic education.  Unfortunately, despite the change in administration, we continue to need your assistance in achieving these goals.

Under the administration of Mayor Bloomberg, the Department of Education pursued a reckless program of closing schools and starting new small schools and charters, and inserting them into existing  buildings were schools were already located, oblivious to their impact on students and the existing schools and programs.

The DOE under Bloomberg ignored the nearly unanimous complaints of parents and the objections of administrators and teachers, and approved hundreds of co-locations that caused more overcrowding, the loss of critical classroom space, as well as art, music and science rooms, caused children with disabilities and learning issues to be pushed out of the rooms required for their mandated services.  The creation of hundreds of new schools also caused a sharp increase in administrative spending and bureaucracy, concurrent with a sharp decline in the number of classroom and a sharp increase in class size.

In October and November 2013, the administration pushed through 45 co-locations in two meetings of the PEP, ignoring the input of communities and the harmful impact of these proposals on students and school communities.

We were thrilled when you, along with others, sued to void this massive round of co-locations, and waited patiently, as you did, with the hope that Mayor de Blasio would reverse most if not all of these plans.

He has not done that, and instead chose to go ahead with 36 of these proposals, which will have devastating effects on existing schools.   At least 12 of these proposals would push the building at or above 100% utilization, according to the DOE’s own figures.  If the Blue Book formula was accurate and pegged to reasonable class sizes, as well as sufficient space for special education services, art rooms, music and science, as well as adequate access to lunchrooms, libraries, and gyms, every one of these co-locations would be seen as pushing the existing schools into unacceptably overcrowded conditions.

This is why all of these co-locations must be reversed.
 
  1. In every case, they will either result in an increase in class size, or make it impossible to reduce class size in the future, despite the fact that class sizes in many grades are now the largest in 15 years and the mayor has pledged to reduce them significantly by the end of his term. Moreover, the state’s highest court has concluded that the class sizes of NYC students must be lowered for them to receive their constitutional right to an adequate education.
  2. They will hinder the ability of schools to address the needs of students requiring special education services by providing adequate space, as well as the ability of schools to address the learning needs of English language learners. 
  3. They will also restrict the amount of space available to expand preK, an important program and one of this administration’s top priorities.
  4. Because the DOE has in recent years redefined a full-size classroom as only 500 square feet, down from 750 square feet, and the building code requires 35 sq. ft per Kindergarten student and 20 sq. ft. per student in other grades, many of the classrooms in these schools will trigger violations in the building code, risking children’s safety.
  5. In all cases, the addition of new schools requires the creation of new, unnecessary bureaucracy with excessive numbers of administrative positions when resources could be better used on instruction.
  6. None of these damaging impacts on safety, learning conditions and/or spending are reflected in the Educational Impact Statements.
  7. In cases involving co-location of charter schools, the allowance of rent-free space results in their receiving more funds per capita than non-charter schools, creating inequities within school buildings, with two classes of students, one with smaller classes, more resources and programs, and the other with larger classes, and fewer resources and programs.
  8. In all cases, the DOE has ignored the input of parents, community members, and Community Education Councils, who have opposed these co-locations for the reasons cited above and more.
To be sure, these proposals were approved only because the public hearing process was a sham, the public input process was a sham, and because the Panel for Educational Policy rubber-stamped them without serious review.  In all cases, the voices of parents were not heard, and this was unlawful.

We urge you to proceed with your lawsuit and to see that the process going forward adheres to the law.  We pledge to join you in that effort.

Sincerely,


Leonie Haimson, Executive Director, Class Size Matters
John Englert, Co-chair, Citywide Council on Special Education
Shino Tanikawa, President, Community Education Council District 2* and member of the DOE “Blue Book” Taskforce
David Goldsmith. President, Community Education Council District 13*
Tesa Wilson, President, Community Education Council District 14; member of DOE “Blue Book” Taskforce
Felicia P. Alexander, President, Community Education Council District 16
Heather Ann Fiorica, President, Community Education Council District 21
Deborah Perkins, President, Community Education Council District 22
Naila Caicedo-Rosario, President of Community Education Council District 15
Tamara Rowe, member, Community Education Council 2*
Ben Greene, District 13 CPAC representative; 1st VP, Community Education Council District 13
Evelyn Feliciano, Parent Leader D10,    Member Bronx Community Board  5
Monse Santana, Title I chair, PTA Tompkins Square Middle School*, and District Leadership Team, District 1
Olaiya Deen, member, Community Education Council District 3
Christine Kroening, PTA President IS 78 Roy H. Mann School
Irene Abraham, IS 78/P312 parent
Linda Dalton, member, Community Education Council District 21
Gloria Smith, President of District 75 President Council and 1st VP, Citywide Council of D75
Randi Garay, member, Community Education Council District 21
Carlos M. Lopez Garcia, SLT Chair, Safety Chair & UFT Chapter Leader PS 30X

(* for identification purposes only; list in formation)

CamiGate: Get Rid of Black Teachers and Replace them with white TFA in Newark in the Name of Civil Rights

  • There is a historical context of racial discrimination against black teachers in the United States, and “choice” systems of education have previously been found to disproportionately affect the employment of these teachers. One Newark appears to continue this tradition.
  • There are significant differences in race, gender, and experience in the characteristics of NPS staff and the staff of Newark’s charter schools.
  • NPS’s black teachers are far more likely to teach black students; consequently, these black teachers are more likely to face an employment consequence as black students are more likely to attend schools sanctioned under One Newark.
  • Black and Hispanic teachers are more likely to teach at schools targeted by NJDOE for interventions – the “tougher” school assignments... Weber.Baker.Oluwole.Staffing.Report_3_10_2014_FINAL
Ahhh, the essence of ed deform. The 3 C's (Christie, Cerf, Cami) plan to destroy public ed in Newark. Thanks to the Ed Notes Newark correspondent bull dog - who I met for the first time at the MORE happy hour- for sending this.

Teachers at Newark Public Schools (NPS) largely reflect the racially and ethnically segregated student populations of their respective schools. Mark Weber also known as Jersey Jazzman, Bruce Baker and Joseph Oluwote have released a new report entitled "One Newark's" Racially Disparate Impact on Teachers. The previous report focused on how Cami Anderson's One Newark Plan disproportionately affected black and low income students in the district. In the new report, the authors contend, "NPS's black teachers are far more likely to teach black students; consequently, these black teachers are far more likely to face an employment consequence as black students are more likely to attend schools sanctioned under One Newark." In layman's terms, black teachers are more likely to teach in schools that are closing or being renewed. To make matters worse, charter school demographics differ from NPS by employing teachers more likely to be white and less experienced. We find ourselves in a fine kettle of fish here in Newark!

A Newark Teacher

Disparate Impact on Teachers


PDF of Policy Brief: Weber.Baker.Oluwole.Staffing.Report_3_10_2014_FINAL
As with our previous One Newark policy brief, this one is too long and complex to post in full as a blog. Below are the executive summary and conclusions and policy recommendations. We encourage you to read the full report at the link above.

Executive Summary

In December of 2013, State Superintendent Cami Anderson introduced a district-wide restructuring plan for the Newark Public Schools (NPS). In our last brief on “One Newark,” we analyzed the consequences for students; we found that, when controlling for student population characteristics, academic performance was not a significant predictor of the classifications assigned to schools by NPS. This results in consequences for schools and their students that are arbitrary and capricious; in addition, we found those consequences disproportionately affected black and low-income students. We also found little evidence that the interventions planned under One Newark – including takeovers of schools by charter management organizations – would lead to better student outcomes.
In this brief, we continue our examination of One Newark by analyzing its impact on NPS’s teaching staff. We find the following:
  • There is a historical context of racial discrimination against black teachers in the United States, and “choice” systems of education have previously been found to disproportionately affect the employment of these teachers. One Newark appears to continue this tradition.
  • There are significant differences in race, gender, and experience in the characteristics of NPS staff and the staff of Newark’s charter schools.
  • NPS’s black teachers are far more likely to teach black students; consequently, these black teachers are more likely to face an employment consequence as black students are more likely to attend schools sanctioned under One Newark.
  • Black and Hispanic teachers are more likely to teach at schools targeted by NJDOE for interventions – the “tougher” school assignments.
  • The schools NPS’s black and Hispanic teachers are assigned to lag behind white teachers’ schools in proficiency measures on average; however, these schools show more comparable results in “growth,” the state’s preferred measure for school and teacher accountability.
  • Because the demographics of teachers in Newark’s charter sector differ from NPS teacher demographics, turning over schools to charter management operators may result in an overall Newark teacher corps that is more white and less experienced.
These findings are a cause for concern: to the extent that the One Newark plan disproportionately affects teachers of one race versus another, the plan may be vulnerable to legal challenge under civil rights laws.

Conclusions and Policy Implications

In our previous brief, we found that the One Newark plan imposed consequences on schools and their students that were arbitrary and capricious. We found little evidence to support the claim of NPS that One Newark would improve student outcomes, and we found that the students who would see their schools closed, turned over to CMOs, or “renewed” were more likely to be black and/or suffering from economic disadvantage.
In this brief, we turn our attention to the effects of One Newark on NPS staff. We find patterns of racial bias in the consequences to staff similar to those we found in the consequences to students, largely because the racial profiles of students and staff within the NPS schools are correlated. In other words: Newark’s black teachers tend to teach the district’s black students; therefore, because One Newark disproportionately affects those black students, black teachers are more likely to face an employment consequence.

NPS’s black teachers are also more likely to have positions in the schools that are designated by the state as needing interventions – the more challenging school assignments. The schools of NPS black teachers consequently lag in proficiency rates, but not in student growth. We do not know the dynamics that lead to more black teachers being assigned to these schools; qualitative research on this question is likely needed to understand this phenomenon.
One Newark will turn management of more NPS schools over to charter management organizations. In our previous brief, we questioned the logic of this strategy, as these CMOs currently run schools that do not teach students with similar characteristics to NPS’s neighborhood schools. Evidence suggests these charters would not achieve any better outcomes with this different student population.
This brief adds a new consideration to the shift from traditional public schools to charters: if the CMOs maintain their current teaching corps’ profile in an expansion, Newark’s teachers are likely to become more white and less experienced overall. Given the importance of teacher experience, particular in the first few years of work, Newark’s students would likely face a decline in teacher quality as more students enroll in charters.
The potential change in the racial composition of the Newark teaching corps under One Newark – to a staff that has a smaller proportion of teachers of color – would occur within a historical context of established patterns of discrimination against black teachers. “Choice” plans in education have previously been found to disproportionately impact the employment of black teachers; One Newark continues in this tradition. NPS may be vulnerable to a disparate impact legal challenge on the grounds that black teachers will disproportionately face employment consequences under a plan that arbitrarily targets their schools.

Randi Gives Up Some Gates Dough -- And She's Being Praised?

Oh, Jesus, when will it end? Diane Ravitch posts the "good news" that Randi will no longer accept Gates money and there are some cheers - but also critiques.

Breaking News: Randi Says AFT Will No Longer Accept Funding from Gates Foundation for Innovation Fund


There are a bunch of comments you should read. I left one but it is awaiting moderation. In case it doesn't pass muster, here it is:

  1. Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Rowdy delegates to a national teachers convention Saturday gave several standing ovations to Bill Gates, whose billions in foundation grants for experimental-education-overhaul efforts over more than a decade have sparked widespread controversy and debate. There were scattered boos and hisses among the 3,400 attendees at the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) convention in Seattle, and a small group of dissident teachers walked out on Gates’ speech, but many at the Washington State Convention Center seemed to welcome the Microsoft co-founder’s message that teachers must be partners in any efforts to improve student achievement… Seattle local report
    At what point do our leaders take responsibility for their actions and be accountable for their errors? Remember how Randi and her horde mocked the people who walked out on Gates at the AFT convention? I shot the video of the sing-song “good riddance” shouts.
    Here is a link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6Ezri0pVOg
    We have seen well over a decade of AFT/UFT collaboration and only the weight of resistance has forced — and I say forced– Randi to take actions like this — but does is it good news and a real change in the way the leadership which persists in promoting the common core and other ed deforms until forced to change direction? and often for PR reasons? Why does Randi always have to be forced?
    Here are links:
    laugh yourselves silly — remember the Unity caucus hooting and booing those who walked out on the Gates speech at the AFT convention.
    Only when the AFT and UFT which is the tail that controls the AFT become democratic institutions of change will we see a true change in policy that will allow the unions to lead rather than tail the fight for public education.
    I only have to point to the big battle over charters in NYC over rent and co-location and how the very body that should be organizing against the Eva Moskowitz monster – the UFT – is toothless because of Randi’s folly – a co-located charters pushing out public schools — one middle school in the same building was closed by Bloomberg and the parents and teachers blamed the UFT charter.
    Will we get cheers when Randi one day gives that folly up? Really, when will this end?
    If you need a refresher google links to stories about that walkout in July 2010
    Here is one:
    Gates’s controversial speech to the AFT – Substance News
    http://www.substancenews.net/articles.php?page=1529‎
    Jul 11, 2010 – A video of the protests against the Gates speech has been posted … [A separate report in Substance will cover the walkout and protests from some of the delegates]. ….
I also asked:
Did Randi also disavow any Gates money to support the Common Core?
Just sayin' - oh, and who is giving the UFT money for its charter? Just askin'.

Some more comments:

  1. I appreciate that Randi Weingarten is doing this, but please read Mercedes Schneider analysis. http://deutsch29.wordpress.com/2014/03/07/a-schneider-debriefing-on-weingarten/:
    Weingarten implied that “so little” Gates money does not matter. However, it apparently does since not accepting “the next round” for the AFT Innovation Fund means a dues increase. The current Gates grant for the Innovation Fund and CCSS ($4.4 million) expires in May 2015.
    Note: There was no mention of returning any Gates money. There was also no agreement to not accept Gates money in the future– just not for the Innovation Fund.
    The Gates money matters to those who take it. However, the connection to Gates and the power that such connection brings matters to those benefiting from his circle of power more than does his money.
    A five-cent annual annual dues increase for all 1.5 million AFT members yields $75,000 in additional revenue.
    A two-dollar annual dues increase for all 1.5 million AFT members would yield an additional $3 million in AFT revenue.
    I would like to challenge Weingarten to offer AFT members the total amount that AFT dues must rise in order for her to say no to all corporate-reform-associated philanthropic money given to AFT.
  2. Janna
    Thanks to Mercedes, Diane and all of the people who have been speaking loudly about this. Unions are our best hope to fight corporate reform and if our unions are misbehaving then we need to speak up and put pressure on them. I think the recent conference, and Mercedes recent posts and many private and public conversations demonstrated to Randi where her mistakes had been. And she has never been a fool. She knows where the wind blows. Great news!

De Blasio Allies Counterattack on Moskowitz - the Real Civil Rights Issue of the Time

As a candidate for mayor, Bill de Blasio electrified crowds of parents and education activists with a pledge to charge rent to charter schools, one of the starkest policy departures from his predecessor, Michael R. Bloomberg... NY Times, March 10, 2014
Well, finally, a word or two that gets to the heart of the issue. The Mayor ran on an anti-charter platform and beat the guy who ran on a pro-charter platform. But then the article in the Times drifts into the admitted failure of deB to articulate a firm policy.

These groups don't have the money or resources but the de Blasio election with 75% of the vote over the pro-charter Lhota does mean something.

I'm betting the UFT is putting some resources into this but far behind the scenes and in fact is crippled by the fact that they have a co-located charter school and don't pay rent. So on the biggest ed issue of the day, the UFT must play in the shadows. (I will post some video of the rally the UFT did help organize at Seth Low -- but that is the great district UFT rep doing the heavy lifting.)

And notice how much more press the Moskwitz law suit is getting over the Tish James law suit to stop even the co-locos deB gave Eva. How delicious would that be?

Parents and Allies of Mayor de Blasio Debunk Charter Lobbyists’ Misinformation Campaign

*They Will Respond to Success Academy's Lawsuit over Co-locations and Defend de Blasio's Policy*

At Harlem Event, PS 149/PS 811 Parents, Rev. Michael Walrond, and Allies of Mayor de Blasio Will Rally for Reversal of Co-locations and Set the Record Straight

On the Heels of a New Video Campaign, Harlem Parents Will Discuss Why the Expansion of Success Academy in Their Schools' Building Would Have Been Harmful

WHO: Parents and Teachers from PS 149 and PS 811; Harlem Congressional Candidate Rev. Michael Walrond; Top Supporters of Mayor de Blasio.

WHAT: PS 149/PS 811 parents and their allies speak out in support of Mayor de Blasio’s decision to reverse the co-location in their school building. This event will come on the heels of a new video ad campaign these parents will launch Monday to debunk the misinformation and distortions that charter school lobbyists have been pedaling to the press.

WHERE: PS 149/PS 811, corner of 117th St and Lenox Ave., Harlem

WHEN: Monday, March 10, 4 p.m.

WHY: PS 149 and PS 811 lost several classrooms and a lot of space when Harlem Success Academy 4 was first co-located in their building in 2008. PS 811, a District 75 school for students with special needs, would have lost five additional rooms, including its only therapy room and a state-mandated room for conflict resolution, if Success Academy had been allowed to expand. Parents will speak about how Mayor de Blasio’s new process for evaluating co-locations strikes the right balance and takes into consideration the impact on existing district public schools.

###

--
Dan Morris
 
     
   

Stand With The Parents of P.S. 149 and P.S. 811!.

Dear Norm,
The hedge-fund cronies behind Eva Moskowitz and Success Academy are spending millions on TV ads to tell people that Mayor de Blasio is hurting children by refusing to allow her corporate-backed schools from moving into any public school they please.

What her ads don't tell you is the truth.


Were it not for de Blasio's decision to prevent the co-locations of P.S. 149 and P.S. 811 in Harlem, the building would be at 132% capacity. It would force students at the existing schools, many of them special-needs students, to hold classes and occupational therapy in the hallway.

Check out this video made by students and parents from the two schools.


Fortunately these parents don't have to worry about finding another school for their children, and they're thanking Mayor de Blasio for standing up against the corporate education movement and standing with public school parents and students. We are too.  Click here to thank Mayor de Blasio for protecting the students of PS 149 and PS 811!

During the last 12 years of the Bloomberg administration, thousands of public school parents and students in our communities have been under constant threat of being forced out of their local schools, or forced to compete for resources and space with co-located schools. That administration is gone; it's time to rebuild and reinvest in our public school system, and to defend students like those in PS 149 and PS 811.

Join the parents of PS 149 and PS 811 in thanking Mayor de Blasio for taking a stand for special-needs students, parents, and NYC public schools.

Best,
Olivia Leirer

Communications and Social Media Director

New York Communities for Change

Bertha Lewis Condemns Success Academy Lawsuit
New York, NY— Bertha Lewis, President of The Black Institute and a nationally-recognized civil rights leader and progressive advocate, released the following statement tonight condemning the federal lawsuit filed by Success Academy against Mayor de Blasio’s recent reversal of three co-locations:
“This lawsuit is not about civil rights, it's about the privatization of public education. Mayor de Blasio has stood up to the Wall Street bullies and said they cannot seize classrooms from students with disabilities to advance their political agenda. The civil rights community stands with him,” said Lewis.

Charterbeat Distorts Charter Coverage

That private dollars help the charters is fine, but they remain publicly funded institutions, and it is irresponsibly shortsighted to spend that money without also benefiting the host districts.... Your article notes that students at the Success Academy charter schools outscored public school students in standardized math and reading tests. While this may be encouraging for the charter school movement, it is not unequivocal proof of the charters’ superiority.... NY Times letters to editor
Today's Chalkbeat - which we refer to as Charterbeat - Rise and Shine headline: De Blasio's charter schools beating a political loss.

A loss? While his response has been inept -- they should have me as a consultant as I know Eva's game plan as well as anyone -- today's letters section of the NY Times, always a good indication on where the public that reads the paper is coming from, shows a different story - every single letter basically criticized Moskowitz and Success and charters in general and in fact were supportive of de Blasio. (Read them below).

The Times always splits the baby in the letters section reflecting the rough % of responses they get on a controversial issue. That today pretty much 100% are opposed to the charter lobby in some way is an indication. Just watch those expensive and massive commercials begin to backfire on them.

By the way -- Carmen Farina doesn't get it. Eva doesn't want seats - she wants the buildings -- it is all about real estate. Allow her schools to grow into shared locations while undermining the public  school until she gets sole control of the building -- and then offers to take them off the hands of the DOE for a buck -- and then convert them to condos.

Charterbeat in transitioning from Gotham Schools made sure to eliminate its nightly summarizing of the blogs where the truth is often read. They must be matching Cuomo in its contributions from the charter lobby.

Here are their links today:

Rise & Shine

Charter school space wars

Mayor Bill de Blasio has an uphill road to climb if he wants to carry out his plan to charge rent to charter schools.

Public Advocate Letitia James will ask a judge to delay charter school admissions while her lawsuit against co-locations proceeds.

De Blasio predicted that the lawsuit would ultimately prevail in court.

Ginia Bellefante: De Blasio’s heat over the co-locations he canceled instead of the ones he preserved shows that he has lost his ability to control the narrative.

Former Gov. George Pataki, who spearheaded the state’s charter school law, criticized de Blasio’s approach to charter schools.

Gideon Stein: The state should give charter schools extra funds that co-located ones should turn over to their fellow schools.

An advocate says Cuomo’s choices show that he prefers big-bucks charter schools to regular public schools.

Richard Whitmire: Lost in the debate is the fact that some charter schools do better than others in educating students.

Chancellor Carmen Fariña said she would try to find space for a Success Academy school threatened by her co-location decision.

Still, Success Academy parents plan to sue over their canceled co-location plans.


And here are the more realistic public opinion letters on the Times.


To the Editor:
Re “Mayor and Operator of Charter Schools Do Battle in Albany” (news article, March 5):
The conflict in New York over public charter schools and their host districts brings into sharp and painful relief the core flaw in the charter law. It was unwise to create a parallel system designed to compete for dollars and success.

Mayor Bill de Blasio and Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo have the opportunity to work together to foster collaboration between the two publicly funded school systems. Successful charters should share their successful practices not only through modeling that success but also through teacher training partnerships and other collaborative ventures.
That private dollars help the charters is fine, but they remain publicly funded institutions, and it is irresponsibly shortsighted to spend that money without also benefiting the host districts.
MAURICE G. ELDRIDGE
Swarthmore, Pa., March 5, 2014

To the Editor:
The heated back and forth between Mayor Bill de Blasio and charter school advocates like Eva Moskowitz exposes the contrast between the public interest and self-interest in their positions.
The charter schools movement began with the intention of creating places where educators and their communities could try out new ways to educate students who struggled in traditional public schools. They were meant to benefit those who remained in public schools — not undermine or displace them.
Unfortunately, the opening created by the originators of the charter school movement has been exploited by management companies and individuals within the charter school industry who see our schools as a source of personal profit — including Ms. Moskowitz, who earns a lavish salary. As charter operators continue to put their interests ahead of the children’s, it’s about time that public officials like Mr. de Blasio step in to advocate for each and every child, not just a chosen few.
SABRINA JOY STEVENS
Executive Director
Integrity in Education
Washington, March 5, 2014

To the Editor:
Your article notes that students at the Success Academy charter schools outscored public school students in standardized math and reading tests. While this may be encouraging for the charter school movement, it is not unequivocal proof of the charters’ superiority.
Parents who choose charter schools may be more dedicated to their children’s education than other parents. Hence the better performance of charter school children may owe as much, or more, to greater parental involvement than to any programs of the schools themselves.
Randomly assigning children to attend either public or charter schools and then testing their progress is the only scientific way of making a comparison. Similarly, studies purporting to show the advantages of pre-K will not be definitive if the programs involved parental choice.
DAVID S. HODES
Dobbs Ferry, N.Y., March 5, 2014
The writer is a retired pediatrician and professor of pediatrics.

To the Editor:
Public schools, especially those in inner-city New York, do not always serve children well. Classes can be large, teachers overwhelmed or inadequately trained, facilities in disrepair, essential equipment like copiers in short supply, art, music, science, physical education absent. Mayor Bill de Blasio proposes that charter schools pay rent to their host schools. Money may indeed help the situation.
Some charter schools have spruced-up facilities, renovated bathrooms, brightly lit hallways, the latest technology, smaller classes and longer days. In a building in which a Success Academy charter and a public school share a building, the contrasts are painfully clear.
These contrasts, demonstrating, not so subtly, to the public school students how little they are valued, can be remedied. Success charters and some others have access to impressive funding from philanthropists. Instead of paying rent, what if a charter school were required to improve an entire building to the same high standards it enjoys?
That would be a start, and who knows, smaller classes, science, art, music and physical education for all, healthy meals and better teacher training might follow.
ANNETTE MARCUS
New York, March 5, 2014
The writer is a retired science teacher and worked as a science curriculum consultant to Success Academy.

Sunday, March 9, 2014

Monday March 10, 4PM: Rally at Harlem School for Victims of Moskowitz Attempt to Push Out Special Ed Kids

Which kids are really getting hurt in the charter wars?

Rally To Support de Blasio and Public  Schools in Harlem Tomorrow
Where:  Outside PS/ MS 149
When : 4: 00- 5:00  March 10
41 W.  117th St between Lennox Ave and Fifth
Subway:  2 or 3 to 116th
 
Even as Mayor Bill de Blasio’s  handling of the issue of charter school co-locations has disappointed many, it has signaled the end of the era when the likes of entrepreneur Eva Moskowitz is granted whatever entrepreneur Eva Moskowitz  wants, regardless of how many public school children are displaced, short changed and treated  as if they are second rate citizens.    

Over the past week and more, Moskowitz has received absurdly favorable press in New York City papers, even as she once again removed children from schools during school hours, this time to bus  them to Albany as if they were adult lobbyists.  After years of incredibly favorable treatment by the Bloomberg administration, de Blasio has had the political courage to stand up to Moskowitz and her billionaire backers.   

As a result, Moskowitz  and her  friends in the media are doing all they can to paint her and Success Academies  as victims and create the false appearance of overwhelming public support for Moskowitz and the  horrific and destructive policies of Mike Bloomberg.  

They have flooded the air-waves with slick, heart-tugging commercials, engaging in a multi-million dollar public relations campaign designed to do nothing less than trick the public into forgetting that de Blasio won by a margin of 75% over Joe Lhota, in large part because of de Blasio’s rejection of Bloomberg’s education policies, of which Moskowitz  is such a perfect example.   

Today we have an opportunity to once again reaffirm the public will, let Moskowitiz’s billionaires know that they do not own our schools and our city, and let de Blasio know he is not alone.
Please, if you can, come and let your voices be heard loud and clear.  Come and remind Moskowitz’s billionaire backers that we live in a democracy. Above all, come and help insure that all of our children are shown the dignity that all children deserve.

Patrick Walsh

Chapter Leader

PS/ MS 149

Harlem

You Mean, That Jessica Tisch? Bratton Chooses Tisch

NYPD Commissioner Bill Bratton names Jessica Tisch as deputy commissioner of information and technology

Oh, you mean that Jessica Tisch?

Apr 15, 2008
Today's Post includes an op-ed calling for voters to decide on term limits so Bloomberg can run again. The piece claims Bloomberg has outperformed, citing his record in improving the schools. It's written by a Jessica Tisch, ...

Apr 07, 2009
I wrote about the ridiculous NY Post editorial her "brilliant" daughter Jessica sent supporting Bloomberg's 3rd term: "Average Citizen" Jessica Tisch Calls For Bloomberg 3rd Term. Posted by Norm @ ed notes online at

May 15, 2011
... in decisions concerning our children. Leonie Haimson: Merryl Tisch's daughter Jessica , wrote that oped in favor of overturning term limits and a third term for Bloomberg, based upon his terrific record at running our schools.


Putin Crimea Annexation Modeled on Eva Moskowitz Invasion of NYC Schools


Kremlin insiders have revealed that Vladimir Putin modeled his invasion of Crimea on the successful takeover of numerous public schools by Eva Moskowitz and her Success Charter chain. Sending shock troops into a building in advance? Check. Rolling local political forces in a media blitz? Check. "Eva Moskowitz has more power than Kim Jong-un," said a Putin spokesman.

Two who lust for Moskowitz-like power