Monday, October 26, 2015

Ding, Dong, Mulgrew Buddy Tisch is Leaving -

Hallelujah! --- Leonie Haimson


No noblesse oblige to kick around anymore. Too bad she seems to be leaving on her own terms--20 years too late. Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out. ... Fred Smith
ttp://m.timesunion.com/local/article/Regents-Chancellor-Merryl-Tisch-won-t-seek-6590479.php

Too bad we have to wait until March. I remember Mulgrew waxing poetic about how wonderful
Tisch was.

A few Ed Notes pieces on Tisch.

Ed Notes Online: Merryl Tisch: Might As Well Be a Crook

ednotesonline.blogspot.com/.../merryl-tisch-might-as-well-be-crook.html
Sep 22, 2013 - Merryl H. Tisch, announced a new program: 13 research fellows would be selected to advise the ... Unfortunately, our present leadership at the state level in NY is not that different. ..... 'Sorry, class, I'm late – again LOL.

Ed Notes Online: I'm Not a Crook

ednotesonline.blogspot.com/2009/04/im-not-crook.html
Apr 1, 2009 - I'm Not a Crook ... YES< HE IS A CROOK. ..... What Merryl Tisch Does Not Understand - I want to explain something in the most easy way I ...

Ed Notes Online: EEP, I'm Not a Crook Either

ednotesonline.blogspot.com/2009/04/eep-im-not-crook-either.html
Apr 2, 2009 - The money reportedly did not go directly to Sharpton but was channeled through ..... What Merryl Tisch Does Not Understand - I want to explain ...

And one from RBE:

When Will Merryl Tisch Be Investigated For Corruption?

perdidostreetschool.blogspot.com/.../when-will-merryl-tisch-be-investiga...
Nov 10, 2013 - The fact that his children do not go to public school when they live in one of ... I'm sure the newspapers and news outlets that are owned by Tisch family ... Silver's chief of staff married to the crook who Tisch appointed to run a ...



Alan Singer on Moskowitz's "Suspension" Academy's Code of Misconduct

John Merrow posted the Success Academy Network's disciplinary code which is distributed to all parents. Surprisingly I was unable to find it on any of the Network's numerous websites. 

I find the infractions petty and the penalties at Success Academy Charter Schools highly punitive, especially for younger children, but readers can judge for themselves. 

Success Academy rules are a manifesto for zero-tolerance policing policies brought into an elementary school. Research on the impact of zero-tolerance policies continually demonstrates that they are detrimental to both a student's emotional and academic growth, reinforce student behaviors they are supposed to eliminate leading to further suspensions, and increasingly exposed suspended to influences that virtually ensured further problems in schools and with the police. 

Some of the rules at Success Academy read like they could have been copied from a Department of Corrections guide for disciplining incarcerated prisoners. Others seem like a return to Maoist China "struggle sessions" during the Cultural Revolution of the 1960s when people accused of misconduct made public confessions of their misdeeds and mis-thoughts. Students can be suspended from school or expelled for behavior that occurred outside of school time and off of school grounds. 

Alan Singer, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-singer/moskowitzs-suspension-aca_b_8388616.html
Here is a link to the full Discipline code.

We know there are some teachers in public schools with major discipline problems who would love these policies -- but those schools either suffer from incompetent admins, many new and inexperienced teachers or an overload of kids with problems.

Charter schools do not have the latter but do have many inexperienced teachers who have not learned how to deal with kids with discipline issues. Thus the rigid code -- just dump the kid into suspension because the teachers can't handle them.

Video: Jia Lee Fuses Hard Core Bread and Butter with Social Justice as #MORE2016 UFT Presidential Candidate

Time to kick out the insanity and replace it with humanity... Jia Lee
There was joy in Mudville - in the real reform anti-ed deform community and throughout the opposition to Unity Caucus at the announcement from MORE that Jia Lee would oppose Michael Mulgrew for the office of UFT President in the upcoming UFT elections this winter.

Kit Wainer in his introduction to Jia called her a fusion of hard-core bread and butter and social justice and her links to many parent groups around the city who support her as a leader of the opt-out movement. For the first time in a UFT election we may see parents playing a role by going into their childrens' schools and encouraging teachers to vote MORE.

Jia is not only well-known in the city and the state (she ran for a NYSUT position) but also nationally through her work with other progressive caucuses and unions.

Accolades came in from around the city, state and nation. Our pals at Port Jefferson Station posted the announcement: with this photo of Jia. Our pals in the Chicago Teachers Union and CORE expressed their support on Facebook and twitter.

In her speech at the MORE conference Jia talked about the insanity of that crazed principal who threw out all the teacher desks. 

Jia knows all about crazed administrators, having worked in a school under a Leadership Academy slug and even took on the job of chapter leader despite seeing previous CLs chopped or sent to the rubber room (a founder of ICE was the previous CL who was rubber-roomed). Jia had to spend so much time trying to defend her colleagues from being assaulted there was a danger of having her teaching affected. She finally escaped to a progressive school where she could practice her profession. [NOTE: Look for the a follow-up video of Lauren Cohen, Jia's former colleague at the same school, who goes through chapter and verse of the impact of this principal on her health and her life.]

Jia also talks about her current student who appeared on the PBS Success Academy story and whose records were exposed by Eva [NYC Public School Parents: Cease and Desist letter sent today to Eva Moskowitz of Success Charters].

The student and his mom attended the MORE conference.

In this 17 minute video, Jia shows her humor, intelligence, commitment to the teaching profession and to her students and parents. While many of us assumed that Jia would be the MORE candidate for the past 6 months. MORE did not rush the timetable and went through a democratic nominating and ratifying process, which is how MORE would run the UFT if elected. After all, we don't want to be a Unity clone of personality cults driven from the top.




https://vimeo.com/143515713



Let's get rid of those bath salts that make people crazy.

Sunday, October 25, 2015

Exposing Brittney Packnett: Resisting Teach for America Attempts to Infiltrate #BlackLivesMatter

She's one of the black faces whose job it is to sell us just enough of the nonsense to get us all to the polls in 2016 for a pro-privatization Democrat instead of the pro-privatization Republican. This is why leading Democratic contenders bestow the traditional recognition upon the various flavors of BlackLivesMatter.
...... Bruce A. Dixon, managing editor at Black Agenda Report:

TFA/BlackLivesMatter/CampaignZero Activist Brittney Packnett (Almost) Tries to Defend the Indefensible

By BAR managing editor Bruce A. Dixon

Wed, 10/21/2015 - blackagendareport.com

Stung by growing public recognition of Teach For America's heinous role in destabilizing communites and destroying public education, CampaignZero/BlackLivesMatter activist & TFA's Brittney Packnett took to Huffington Post last week to defend herself and TFA's mission. But school privatization is so unpopular she had to resort to misdirection and mumbling about her St. Louis orgins and supposed conspiracy theories against her instead.

TFA/BlackLivesMatter/CampaignZero Activist Brittney Packnett (Almost) Tries to Defend the Indefensible

As the pivotal role of Teach For America in the elite bipartisan drive to privatize public education comes more sharply into public view, it's natural that TFA operatives and apologists will try to defend their missions and careers. That's what Brittney Packnett's sad and disingenuous “Let's Get Back To Work” piece in Huffington Post last week was about.
 
Packnett's problem however, and Teach For America's too is that their mission so clearly indefensible that they can't really talk about what Teach For America actually does, and why it does those things.
 
TFA, whose St. Louis director is Ms. Packnett, cannot just come out and say they spend hundreds of millions a year in corporate and government funds replacing experienced, qualified, mostly black public school teachers with undertrained and mostly white temps to facilitate the policy goal of their corporate funders, which is the privatization of public education.
 
Organized public school teachers used to be the backbone of civic life in black communities... they were well-educated and decently paid, had roots in the communities where they worked, and their short commutes gave them plenty of time to take part in local affairs. Now that's history, in good part thanks to the work of Brittney Packnett, Deray McKesson and their mentors and corporate funders. TFA's part in transforming the public school workforce has served three purposes....
  • it removed from many school workplaces an entire layer of experienced educators with institutional knowledge and local ties -- teachers and administrators accustomed to working together who know how to run their classrooms and their school without their new “run-the-school-like-a-business” bosses;
  • it lowered the quality of engagement and instruction with students in the schools where TFA recruits replaced experienced teachers, making the school less safe and attractive for those parents who could exercise the option to leave;
  • it facilitated school management by instability and fear, and with the closing and privatizing of thousands of schools nationwide already a fact, it contributed to a culture of rootless classroom short-timers on their way somewhere else;
These are all indisputable outcomes of Teach For America's practices in African American communities around the country, and Brittney Packnett touches none of them, because she quite simply can't. School privatization, the ultimate goal of TFA's funders, is so indefensible and wildly unpopular that even privatizing politicians dare not utter the word aloud.
 
Instead Packnett drops a meaningless stat about how many TFA grads stay in education, without telling us that a huge share of these end up not in the classroom but as the six figure a year administrators who do the actual firing of existing teachers, the Department of Education officials who award school funding based on how many teachers are fired and how many schools are privatized, or working for the think tanks the Obama administration allowed to write Race To The Top, its signature education program.
 
So the only defenses Packnett and those like her can mount are distractions and misdirections, and not even very good ones. Her Huffington Post piece talks about simple minded “conspiracy theories” against her. It reminds us that she lived only a short distance from Michael Brown was shot, and claims she's in it for the kids and the families and all the right reasons. Sure.
Packnett says “It is easy to portray me as the evil Trojan Horse.” She's right. It IS easy to hang that on her and Deray McKesson and the rest of the TFA herd because quite simply it's true. She's one of the black faces whose job it is to sell us just enough of the nonsense to get us all to the polls in 2016 for a pro-privatization Democrat instead of the pro-privatization Republican. This is why leading Democratic contenders bestow the traditional recognition upon the various flavors of BlackLivesMatter.
 
To be sure, Teach For America is only a part of the privatization juggernaut. Some other parts of the machine include the standardized testing industry, the private firms that certify school districts, and the diploma mills which certify “run-the-school-like-a-business” principals and administrators. Former Chicago Public Schools chief Barbara Byrd Bennett is pleading guilty to a kickback scheme involving one such “academy” and in the current session of Congress eight members of the Congressional Black Caucus “abstained” from voting on a bill that would have directed the Department of Education to investigate crooks and conflicts of interest in the charter school industry... Packnett's colleagues and sponsors among them.  Some of these black congressional reps were doubtless among the boosters of her “braintrust” gathering at the Congressional Black Caucus's annual meeting in DC this September.
 
And lest one imagine there's a great deal of difference between the two branches of BlackLivesMatter, CBC at the same time was also courting the "official" BlackLivesMatter "co-creators" as well.
 
The one piece of Packnett's Huffington Post piece that seems absolutely sincere was its “Let's Get Back To Work” title. Certainly Packnett and TFA would like a lot less attention paid to what they actually are, and what TFA actually does, so they can get back to work. But they ain't workin' for us.
Bruce A. Dixon is managing editor at Black Agenda Report, and a member of the state committee of the Ga Green Party.  He lives and works near Marietta GA and can be reached via email at bruce.dixon(at)blackagendareport.com.
 

WE Phiily Caucus on #BlackLivesMatter Leader (and Former TFA-er) DeRay Mckesson Tied to Racist Ed Privateers

WE members attended and spoke at the MORE October 24 conference. The 2 year old caucus is challenging the current union leadership in Philadelphia and might have a real chance to knock off yet another pro-Randi AFT local.




NOTE: DeRay Mckesson used to work for TFA before becoming one of the spokespersons for #BlackLivesMatter. Is this political naivete or a slick attempt to further legitimize ed privateers' policies of racist miseducation while reaping profits from public funds?-- SEA


Dear Mr. DeRay Mckesson,
As the social justice caucus within the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers, we were surprised to see that you are coming to Philadelphia to speak alongside leaders of Teach for America (TFA). The Caucus of Working Educators (WE) is committed to racial justice in our schools and society, and we stand in solidarity with the #BlackLivesMatter movement.
We see Teach for America as working in opposition to the goals of publicly funded education for all students in Philadelphia and to the goal of increasing the number of teachers of color and teachers who are committed to building relationships with communities over the long term, which we see as an integral component of culturally responsive teaching. We view the hiring of cadres of racial, cultural, and geographical outsiders with very little teaching preparation as part of a larger neoliberal effort to privatize education and replace unionized teachers (many of whom are teachers of color) with young, inexperienced teachers (most of whom are white and do not intend to stay in the teaching profession and commit to the long-term improvement of their teaching practice).
This practice of displacing African American teachers, in particular, is already underway. While Philadelphia’s teaching force increased by 13 percent from 2001-2011, the percentage of Black teachers dropped by 19 percent. This has contributed to Philadelphia having the greatest disparity between the race and ethnicity of the student body and those who teach them. Only 31 percent of Philadelphia teachers are of color compared to 86 percent of the student body they are teaching. This is unacceptable.
TFA has ties and parallels with the charter school movement, which we see as undercutting public education. The mass charterization of public neighborhood schools has led to the outsourcing of public school management to private operators. Just weeks ago Philadelphia Public Schools announced yet another wave of school closures and conversions of public schools into charter schools affecting upwards of 5000 students. This is in addition to the 23 public schools that were closed in Philadelphia in 2013.
The decision to turn a district school into a charter is often made by the highest levels of administration without consulting with the school community, including parents, teachers, students, and leaders. Your support of Teach for America represents a support of these same kinds of outsourced and contracted paradigms for educating our children. Rather than hiring experienced professionals that will stay in the profession for a long period of time, Teach for America hires individuals with little or no experience in classroom settings via external channels such as private universities and corporately sponsored recruitment. Teach for America and charter schools both represent a failure of public leadership to lead and create change in our public schools, and prioritize outsourcing teaching and school governance over public responsibility to realize every student’s right to a fully funded, culturally relevant, education in their neighborhood.
Instead, TFA contributes to the dangerous and misleading discourse that claims poverty and structural inequality have little to no impact on educational outcomes. This irresponsible explanation provides Democrats and Republicans alike with a pretext to continue vicious budget cuts to public services and institutions under the guise that “personal responsibility” and “grit” are the main factors in determining a child’s success or failure.
We live and work in state that has the largest funding disparity between wealthy and poor districts and in a city whose externally appointed school governance commission is proposing to continue to close down schools that primarily serve low-income African American families. In Philadelphia where 79 percent of the city’s students are Black and Latino, $9,299 is spent per pupil compared to the $17, 261 spent just across the city line in Lower Merion where 91 percent of the students are white. This is the civil rights crisis of our generation.
In this context, we believe that it is essential that those who are committed to racial justice take a critical stance against organizations that aim to further privatize education and/or replace fully prepared unionized teachers with underprepared novices who are likely to leave the teaching profession in two to three years.
The Black Lives Matter movement has served as an inspiration and instruction on how to confront racism and inequality throughout our country. Part of that inspiration is the way that the movement has looked at the connections between police violence and racism and other inequalities faced by African Americans. We consider the attacks on public education to be a part of the “state-sanctioned violence” that the movement has done so much to highlight over the last year. We do not believe that the white billionaires that bankroll Teach for America and the corporate education “reform” movement are any more interested in the education of poor and working class Black and Latino children than we believe they are interested in ending police violence in Black and Brown communities. If they were, these crises would no longer exist.
We are glad that you are visiting Philadelphia, and we hope that you will use your platform to engage in a critical dialogue about whether TFA supports – or as we believe undercuts – the goals of a fully funded education for every student in Philadelphia with teachers who know their community and are committed to staying for the long haul.
Sincerely,

Members of the Caucus of Working Educators Racial Justice Committee
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
workingeducators.org
https://twitter.com/CaucusofWE
facebook.com/WorkingEducators
http://www.workingeducators.org/open_letter_to_deray_mckesson


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Jia Lee voted in as Movement of Rank and File Educators Presidential Challenger to Michael Mulgrew

So proud to announce Jia Lee as the MORE/New Action presidential candidate. I am processing her 17 minute speech at the MORE conference yesterday and will post it later.


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: October 24, 2015
Contacts:
Megan Moskop (252) 367-0908
John Antush (917) 734-3907

Jia Lee voted in as Movement of Rank-and-File Educators Presidential Challenger to Michael Mulgrew and his Passive Unity Caucus
As NYC School Crisis Continues, Jia Lee Leads Teachers and Community to Challenge Unaccountable Union Leadership and Defend Public Education

NEW YORK: Educators, parents, and community members cheered the announcement of Jia Lee as their choice for UFT presidential nominee at the State of Our Union, State of Our Schools Conference on Saturday. Fed up with overcrowding, underfunding, and overtesting, educators are coming together with the community to take back their union, and bring change to their schools through the 2016 UFT elections.

“Our schools are in crisis, in large part part because our current union leadership is complicit in bad policy and continues to tell us that this is the best they can do. It’s not the time for us to re-negotiate what has already proven to be disastrous. It’s time for teachers to come together with the community and chart a new course for our union. We are going to take back our union and lead a fight for the schools our children deserve,” said Ms. Lee.

Saturday’s conference, organized by the Movement of Rank and File Educators (MORE) in coalition with a host of community organizations, was the first step in defining a platform for the upcoming UFT election and 2018 contract negotiations to defend and enhance New York City’s public schools. The conference  featured discussions ranging from “Bringing Democracy to the UFT” to “Making Black Lives Matter in Education.”

In the upcoming UFT election, Lee will head a joint slate of teachers representing a united front of MORE and the New Action caucus. As a parent and a teacher since 2001, Jia Lee is at the forefront of the growing movement to opt-out of high stakes testing. She has served as a UFT Chapter Leader for the past 8 years, and is a conscientious objector who has steadfastly refused to administer tests that reduce her students to test score. Last year, she brought this testimony to the U.S. senate hearing on ESEA.
Educators have lost patience with Michael Mulgrew and the Unity caucus’ leadership of the United Federation of Teachers and are joining the community to continue building a movement for change– in their union and in our schools. Mulgrew has been president of the UFT since 2009 but has been unable and unwilling to effectively challenge the corporate onslaught against public education. He has agreed to high stakes-test based teacher evaluations and a contract that delayed earned pay raises for teachers.

In the last union election, in which 75% of working educators did not vote and the majority of ballots came from retirees, the MORE caucus earned 40% of the vote in the high school division and 23% of the active teacher vote overall. This year, in partnership with the New Action caucus, MORE seeks to increase voter turnout as active teachers reclaim their union.

ABOUT MORE: The Movement of Rank-and-File Educators (MORE), is the social justice caucus of the UFT and largest force for change within the teachers union. In the upcoming elections, MORE has formed a united front with New Action Caucus  to challenge Unity Caucus, the bureaucratic political machine that has dominated New York’s teachers’ union for the past 50 years. Over the past decade, Unity has led the UFT into crisis, signing off on harmful policies such as overuse of standardized testing and pay increases that fail to keep pace with inflation, while using union funds to pay UFT President Michael Mulgrew over $260,000 per year and dole out salaries of over $100,000 per year to over 100 Unity Caucus political operatives on UFT staff.

###
The Movement of Rank and File Educators is the Social Justice Caucus of the United Federation of Teachers.  To learn MORE, visit www.morecaucusnyc.org

###
The Movement of Rank and File Educators is the Social Justice Caucus of the United Federation of Teachers.  To learn MORE, visit www.morecaucusnyc.org

panelSOUSOS
Jia Lee, MORE-UFT’s candidate for UFT president, addresses the crowd of parents, teachers, and students at the State of Our Union, State of Our Schools Conference Saturday. The opening panel also included Joe Burns, author of Reviving the Strike, Charmaine Dixon, parent, and Kit Wainer, chapter leader at Leon M. Goldstein High School.    photo credit: Julia Neusner

JiaSOSSOU.JPG
Lee speaks with Earth School student Jamir Geidi and his mother Fatima Geidi about their positive experiences at her school in contrast to the treatment they received at Success Academy. photo credit: Julia Neusner

jiaonpanel.jpg
Lee: “It’s time to reclaim and re-energize our union in true defense of our public schools.” From the opening plenary panel with parent and Change the Stakes member Charmaine Dixon.

Saturday, October 24, 2015

Think Different - UFT Elections and Today's MORE conference

Paraphrasing the so-called Einstein definition of insanity: Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different outcomes.

Today's MORE conference, in part a kickoff of the 2016 UFT Election campaign (MORE may announce a presidential candidate), is part of the process of not doing the same thing over and over. MORE may still get the same results, but at least it is trying to do things different - like sending a mailing to every chapter leader in the city announcing the conference. Even if people don't come, it is an announcement to every chapter leader that a group like MORE exists and is actively working for change.
  • PS 58 The Carroll School 

  • 330 Smith St, Brooklyn – F/G to Carroll St. – Everyone Welcome – Suggested Donation $10

Kudos to the MORE conference committee - I don't know all the names but do know that Peter Lamphere and Megan Moskop took the lead on this Always reliable, now-retired, Gloria Brandman has also been deeply involved.

I'm doing some afternoon shifts at the registration desk - so if you come on down look for me.

If you look at the program published on the MORE blog (This Saturday- State of Our Union, State of Our Schools Conference!) you see a nice mix of what has been termed "teacher-centric" and social justice issues, with many fuzzy lines between them. I know some people still bristle when they see SJ issues - my problems with MORE were not over SJ but over balance - and my sense of this conference is one of the kind of balance MORE needs.

I find too many conflicts for workshops I'd like to attend. Naturally I'm attending the morning workshop on UFT democracy I am doing with Fiorillo and Arthur Goldstein - and have to miss the Patrick Walsh/Mike Schitzer workshop - boy, what a duo they are. I can't miss Leonie's class size workshop in early afternoon and then may be on duty so might have to miss the late afternoon workshop - I am taping the opening and closing sessions.

I don't expect an enormous turnout but do expect many people associated with the old and new opposition to be there - the long day can reinforce and forge important personal and political bonds between people. Old pals from ICE and new pals from MORE will be there and with this event going from 10AM to 7PM it is a long day but should be fun - unless my jetlag-catches up to me and I fall asleep somewhere.

Trying to avoid the same-old same-old
We have been through so many UFT election cycles where the opposition fell into the Einsteinian rabbit hole, often with the same outcomes in terms of votes and organizing capacity. I seen very little variation in terms of campaigns and election organizing - even pretty much the same timetable as dictated by the Unity Caucus.

I don't absolve myself from responsibility. Since the 2004 election I have always gotten sucked into the morass. That was one of the reasons I advocated for something different - don't run - leave Unity standing pretty much alone out there and use the election to organize.

It was clear after my debate with Mike Schirtzer at an ICE meeting in May 2015 (The Great Scott-Schirtzer Debate: Boycott UFT Elections...) that people in ICE and MORE wanted to run in the elections: Mike Schirtzer: Why MORE Will Run In The 2016 UFT ...

So off to Plan B - what can MORE do to change the same old election dynamic, given its still limited resources - not just money, but personnel? Let's not underestimate the importance of live working bodies (as opposed to groups like ICE which were top-heavy with retirees or near retirees) in the schools who are committed to building an opposition caucus. The numbers of hard-core people are how I measure the prospects of any opposition. They are not easy to find - people who will devote evenings and weekends to doing the work of a group like MORE.

Ch-ch-ch-changes
A couple of things have happened over the past 3-5 years that offer some glimmer of hope.

GEM - Grassroots Education Movement - founded in January 2009 as a committee of ICE - focused not on being a caucus but on fighting for publice education and for the first time since my experiences in the early 70s as a fairly new teacher, began to attract a similar group of younger people in the early stages of their careers. As GEM morphed into Change the Stakes and MORE starting around 2011-12, both wings began to attact more people - parents of young children and teachers (and parents of young children) with logn careers. Not enough, mind you - but really quality, hard-working people - and great teachers. Let me not underestimate this factor -- many of them are considered top of the line in their schools and that gives them some cover from abuse. Teachers under abusive principals and young enough not to have their salaries be a factor, have often managed to transfer to safer institutions - but of  course that can change on the whim of the DOE - so they better beware, especially as they reach higher salaries.

And I believe that this influx of 30-something teachers had an impact on the New Action decision to leave the Unity fold and work with MORE - they too see the future of an opposition depends on them. 

MORE is also trying out different methods of organizing an election campaign, including adopting some ideas I have pushed for. But that will take dozens of active people, not a few at the top running a campaign. MORE about some of these ideas and how Ed Notes readers can plug in - including running with MORE for AFT/NYSUT delegate, in upcoming posts.


Friday, October 23, 2015

MORE Conference TODAY - Leonie Haimson on class size

What a lineup. Looking forward to Leonie Haimson's presentation which will include some history of the UFT/Unity approach on class size.

Here is her perspective on the recent UFT press conference on class size:

http://nycpublicschoolparents.blogspot.com/2015/10/are-5485-classes-this-fall-that-violate.html


News Advisory: This Saturday- State of Our Union, State of Our Schools Conference!

Full Schedule for State of Our Union / State of Our Schools


Featured Speakers:

Liza Campbell, Seattle teacher with an participant’s report on recent strike
Jia Lee, Chapter Leader of the Earth School, high stakes testing conscientious objector
Lauren Cohen, Chapter Leader at PS321K
Leonie Haimson, Class Size Matters
Ismael Jimenez, WE Caucus, Philadelphia Teachers Union
Joe Burns, Author of Strike Back: Using the Militant Tactics of Labor’s Past to Reignite Public Sector Unionism Today
Alan Singer, Hofstra University, Social Studies Educator
Charmaine Dixon, Parent, Change the Stakes
Benita Rivera, The Many
Akinlabi McCall, Coalition for Public Education

Endorsing Organizations:

NYCORE, Change the Stakes, NYCOPTOUT, The Teacher Diversity Committee of New York, NYS Stronger Together Caucus, Bad Ass Teachers Association, Coalition for Public Education.

 

 

At PBS Newshour: Jesse Hagopian - At a school with a history of social protest, this teacher is leading an opposition to ‘excessive testing’

What's going on out there with PBS? Telling our side of the story? First the mash-up of Eva, now Jesse Hagopian, who barely lost the election in the Seattle Teacher Union election and a leader of a sister caucus to MORE.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/school-history-social-protest-teacher-leading-opposition-excessive-testing/

Watch their post-Jesse story where they talk about the whining complaints from Eva.

 

Back From Japan

We got back from a 16-day tour of Japan with Overseas Adventure Tours (OAT) on Wed. night - thank to Joel Hamberger for airport pickup services of 2 very jet-lagged people who had been traveling for 24 hours. We left Kyoto to head for the airport at 12 noon on Wednesday and arrive back home at 10:30 Wednesday evening when it was almost noon Thursday in Japan - the kind of stuff that makes my hair hurt. And trying to follow the Mets I had to turn off airplane mode and use data every morning to check the scores - and we had 2 couples from Kansas City on the trip who had their own rooting interests - and will probably be facing them in the Series.

I hope I don't fall asleep while doing the UFT democracy workshop at the MORE conference tomorrow - but no worries as Michael Fiorillo and Arthur Goldstein (NYC Educator) will be there to give me a shove.

We loved Japan for so many reasons - which I will go into at some other time. All I will say is that I now understand it when people say that coming back from Japan where everything seems to work so well to the US is like going to a 3rd world country. Nothing like traveling on subways where you can eat off the floor or a bullet train going 200 mph to give you that feeling.

Here is today's column for The Wave I wrote Tuesday morning - when it was Monday night here. Oy!
School Scope: A (Very) Brief Message From Kyoto
By Norm Scott

I’m writing this from Japan on the morning of Tuesday October 19 which is the evening of Monday October 18 back in Rockaway. I’m still jet-lagged and confused after 2 weeks. I have to get the score of the Mets game while they are playing at 10 AM in the morning. And as I get ready to head out for our final day of touring the Giants are just getting started with their Monday night football game. Let me know how it comes out. Anyway, we expect to be back in New York on Wednesday night, October 21, which will really by Thursday morning October 22 here in Japan. And last night was the first night I slept a full 8 hours. I’m too confused to tell you more about our trip. All I know is that I have missed tons of rehearsals for the RTC production of One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest and Producer Susan Jasper has been sending me emails that they own me once I get back – my first rehearsal will be Thursday night October 22 which will be Friday morning October 23 over here. I need a big jug of sake.

Thursday, October 22, 2015

ICE 2010 Platform on UFT Democracy - a starting point for discussing democracy at the MORE conference

I'm working with Michael Fiorillo and Arthur Goldstein on the 11 AM workshop on UFT democracy.

Here are the 2 handouts for discussion at the workshop on UFT democracy as a starting point for developing a platform for our demands for structural change. First we review the current structure and then brainstorm changes.

The people attending can add, eliminate or modify these points or take things in an entirely different direction. Check these out if you aren't attending the conference or will be going to other workshops and send any suggestions you might have.

Or How would you structure the UFT if you were starting from scratch?

The rub, of course, is that as long as Unity controls every structure in the union there is no way to change those structures without a massive membership revolt from below. We will also brainstorm strategies for forcing change.

ICE platform, Part VI 


VI. For a militant, progressive, democratic UFT: a democratic UFT is a key to a strong union


One of the major goals of a movement seeking change in the union is to take on the task of democratization — setting up structures and procedures that will give the rank and file the opportunity to have direct and constant ability to formulate union policy.

On paper the UFT is more democratic than many unions, but in practice what we see is a well-oiled political machine:
— The least number of people make the decisions.

— The rank and file are deliberately kept unaware of what is going on in regards to most issues.

— There is a conscious attempt by the president and other officers to limit rank and file participation in meetings, discussions and the decision-making process, with union structures set up to enforce this policy.

— There is a consistent effort by union officers on all levels to stifle dissent and opposition. They go so far as to modify or violate previously existing democratic practices and procedures in order to do this.

— Measures are taken at the Delegate Assembly and in citywide voting to ensure the desired results.
As soon as their monopoly of power is challenged, the union’s officers change the rules of the game. Some years ago, when members elected an opposition candidate for high school vice-president and came very close in the junior high division, the officials changed the voting procedures for divisional leaders, turning them into at-large positions. They eliminated elections for district representatives who leave mid-term and fill these positions with appointments by the presidents. District reps play key roles for the union bosses by rewarding friendly chapter chairpersons and punishing dissident chapters through the delivery or withholding of services. They intervene in chapter elections by stealthily supporting candidates against known dissident chapter chairpersons and sometimes even delegates.

If you’re looking for democracy within Unity Caucus, however, you won’t find it there either. Caucus discipline is maintained through a system of rewards and patronage: a career ladder within the union, out-of-classroom jobs in schools (in the past at district offices and the Central Board), assistance in getting good administrative jobs, and transfers to desirable schools. It’s the Success for Unity Caucus Faithful Program. Simply put, dissension within Unity Caucus is not tolerated. There has rarely been a delegate elected on the Unity Caucus slate who has voted against the Unity Caucus position at a NYSUT or AFT convention. Unity Caucus utilizes its well-disciplined base within the UFT to control the state and national unions so that it can implement its political agenda.

Our union officers know that an informed, involved membership with a greater voice would challenge their policies and would also vote them out of office. That’s why they work so hard to keep us from knowing what’s really going on and having regular access to viewpoints that differ from theirs.


Key structural changes are needed to bring greater democracy to our union so that the membership can decide what their union should stand for.


1. Divisional elections for divisional vice-presidents (i.e., high school members alone should vote for high school VP, vocational high school members for vocational high school VP, and so on).

In 1994 Unity Caucus ended the practice of people within a division voting exclusively within their division for their own vice-president because they wanted to make sure no VP would ever again be elected from an opposition group, as had happened a few years earlier. Unity changed the procedure to make the balloting for vice-presidents at large. That means that all the members of the UFT vote for divisional vice-presidents, even if they don’t work in that division. In addition, retirees, who in the last election cast 35% of all votes cast, also vote for the high school, junior high school, and elementary divisional vice-presidents, which means that non-working members have a tremendous influence over who will represent working teachers.


2. Retirees should not vote for UFT officers, who are responsible for negotiating the contract for active members.

The NYS Public Employees Relations Board has ruled that retired members of the UFT are not members of our bargaining unit. Therefore, retirees should not vote for those who represent active members in collective bargaining. There should be a special retiree VP who handles retiree issues and is elected exclusively by retired UFT members.


3. Retirees should vote for three teacher members of the Teachers’ Retirement System Board.

State law restricts TRS membership to in-service members and does not allow retirees to serve as teacher reps. Only active UFT members may vote for these positions, even though retirees have a stake in TRS issues. The UFT should be working actively to change this anomaly.


4. District representatives (a full-time UFT position to support the chapter leaders and members in a district) should be elected by all the members of a district.

In 2002, the UFT suspended District Representative elections and appointed people to these positions. The DRs must bring their members’ voices to the union officers rather than act as mouthpieces for the people at the top.


5. At-large UFT Executive Board seats should be configured proportionally; that is, the number of seats given to a caucus on the Executive Board should relate to the percentage of votes that caucus received in the election.

Divisional and functional seats should still be voted on by each division to ensure representation from each division, so that no caucus within the UFT is excluded from the Executive Board. A caucus getting 30% of the vote in an at-large election deserves 30% of the at-large Executive Board seats to present their positions and shape the policies of the union.


6. UFT Delegates to the AFT and NYSUT Conventions should be apportioned along similar lines.

Without proportional representation Unity Caucus has been able to use the UFT’s winner-take-all method to control the NYSUT statewide union and the AFT national union, thus controlling all our policies from the local to the national level.


7. All full- and part-time non-elected union jobs intended for UFT members who work for the DoE should be posted in the schools. The senior qualified candidate should be hired.

Virtually all jobs are instead doled out as patronage positions. DoE employees who work for the UFT serve at the discretion of Unity Caucus and owe their loyalty to them, rather than to the members. Union employees who do not work for the DoE (e.g., lawyers, cleaning crews) are of course excluded from this recommendation.


8. Every issue of the NY Teacher should be opened to opposing viewpoints.

A full debate in print on union issues twice a month will allow members’ opinions to be fully disseminated. A resolution was put forward at the Delegate Assembly last year proposing that every issue of the NY Teacher be opened up to articles by people who oppose the UFT policies on a particular issue. Unity voted it down saying that allowing opposition viewpoints to be published in the union’s newspaper once every three years was sufficient.


9. Meet the President meetings held during UFT Election years should be Meet the Candidates’ Forums.

Candidates of all declared slates should be able to have equal time at these forums. Otherwise, Meet the President meetings become thinly disguised campaign rallies for the incumbent president and the other officers. Free and fair elections are essential in a democratic union. Unity Caucus has a tremendous advantage by controlling the union newspaper and through the distribution of all its literature that only reflects their positions. This outreach is prohibitive for opposing caucus members, who have neither the mechanisms nor the resources to match what Unity Caucus has at its disposal from our union dues.


10. All caucuses who have met requirements to run in an election should be able to mail at least one piece of literature to all the members at union expense during election time.

An advertisement in the NY Teacher is not sufficient to be able to get a political message across to the members, given the advantages Unity Caucus already has.


11. There should be an open microphone at all Union meetings.

Presently the chair has discretion to call on whomever he/she wants, and in this way he/she manipulates the discussion. At each Delegate Assembly, for example, we see the same people constantly recognized while others rarely or never get the floor. Anyone who wants to speak should have the right to do so.


12. UFT committees (special education, high school, middle school, etc…) should vote on proposals presented at their meetings, with the understanding that such proposals shall be forwarded to both the Executive Board and the DA.

Top-down UFT meetings where officers merely disseminate information prohibit other positions from being discussed, voted upon and officially recommended by the bodies.


13. When elected positions such as officers, District Reps, and functional chapter leaders become available in the middle of a term, there should be a special election.

Typically Unity Caucus replaces its officials by having them retire or move to a different position in the middle of a term. This gives the Unity dominated Executive Board the opportunity to choose the replacement long before there is an actual election. For example, Sandra Feldman resigned as UFT president to become AFT president in 1998, and the Executive Board picked Weingarten to replace her as UFT president; Weingarten didn’t have to face the voters until 1999. The NY Teacher then printed a series of publicity pieces about Weingarten, giving her a lot of name recognition and good press. When she ran as an incumbent in the election, she was at a huge advantage over potential opponents. The same sequence is now occurring with Michael Mulgrew, who the Executive Board has installed as interim president until the March 2010 elections.


14. Make the Delegate Assembly a legislative body where officers and Executive Board members have limits on how long they can speak. Often the regular business of the agenda is not taken up until way past 5:00 p.m., which leaves very little time for delegates to discuss the motions. The president’s and other reports must be limited so that the Delegate Assembly can truly be a legislative body.


15. There should be a majority rather than a 2/3 vote required to put motions on the current and next month’s Delegate Assembly agenda.


16. Limit the total percentage of retiree delegates at the Delegate Assembly. There are now 300 retired DA delegates, who comprise 11% of the total and who have a disproportionate say on working conditions.

Wednesday, October 21, 2015

PBS Stands By Merrow Report on Eva Moskowitz Tactics to Drive Unwanted Kids Out of Her Schools

I think Merrow did not go nearly far enough. Forget attrition rates. Just count how many kids start kindergarten and last until the testing grades. And as Leonie has pointed out (Leo Challenges Eva at AFT/Shanker Institute), the UFT/AFT calls for them to backfill negates the question of where the backfill will come from.

Sure public schools have attrition rates due to kids moving etc - not easy to push kids out of public schools because parents have someplace higher to go. Success parents have nowhere to go.

And with another closing of Success Schools for a bogus teacher rally today, there should be some more exposure of these characters. Will the press take a quiet poll of these teachers and ask them if they would like to be in a union?

PBS issued a "clarification."

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/pressrelease/pbs-newshour-clarification/

PBS NewsHour Clarification

October 20, 2015 at 5:56 PM EDT
On October 12, 2015, the PBS NewsHour aired a report from veteran education reporter John Merrow, based on nearly a year of reporting, about suspension policies of young children and one successful charter school network in New York City. The NewsHour stands by the report. However, the CEO of Success Academy, Eva Moskowitz, has since raised objections to two specific issues in Mr. Merrow’s report. She protests that she was not given the opportunity to respond to one family’s comments in the story and she asserts that Mr. Merrow’s reporting about attrition rates is incorrect.
Mr. Merrow’s report was not about any particular child but about suspension policy. The reporting included conversations with nearly a dozen families about their young children’s suspensions from Success Academy, as well as other sources, including one within Success Academy. Most of these sources were unwilling to go on camera. In their interview Mr. Merrow asked Ms. Moskowitz for her response to the information he had gathered from these sources, and she was given ample time to respond.
Only one family was willing to talk on camera, but the mother was not willing to allow Success Academy to release her son’s school records. Ms. Moskowitz should have been given a chance to respond to this family’s comments. The NewsHour regrets that decision.
Ms. Moskowitz also disputes Mr. Merrow’s reporting on Success Academy’s attrition rate. This is a complicated area because charter schools, including Success Academy Charter Schools, calculate attrition differently. Mr. Merrow addressed these disparities by comparing similar time frames and methods for calculating attrition. He used both public numbers and internal documents to calculate a comparison of attrition rates. One of the charter schools in the report calculates attrition by the names of individual children over a 365-day calendar year, from the beginning of one school year to the beginning of the next school year. Success Academy’s data is based on the number of children over the school year, not the calendar year. Mr. Merrow reconciled those numbers fairly and thoroughly.
The fundamental point of Mr. Merrow’s report is about the policy of suspensions of young children. It accurately documents that Success Academy suspends students as young as five- and six-year olds at a greater rate than many other schools, which Ms. Moskowitz does not dispute. Mr. Merrow’s report also explains that Success Academy Charter Schools are achieving superior academic results and are popular among New York area families. While the NewsHour regrets the decision to include that particular mother and child without providing Ms. Moskowitz with an opportunity to respond, the NewsHour stands by the report.

Tuesday, October 20, 2015

Leo Challenges Eva at AFT/Shanker Institute

It is a good thing when Leo and the AFT take on the Evil Madness so openly in the Shanker Institute report: Student Discipline, Race And Eva Moskowitz’s Success Academy Charter Schools. I'm on the move, heading back to New York, so don't have time to read it all - I'm including it below. I noted this criticism from Leonie:

The continued insistence on the issue of backfilling I think is wrong-headed. Instead we should have data on attrition, which the state refuses to provide. Even if they backfill, does that negate the injustice of kicking out low-achievers? Moreover, if they do start backfilling, that will further disguise how many kids they kick out only to replace them with others. ... Leonie Haimson on Leo Casey's Shanker Institute report on Success Charter Discipline
Leo is Leonie's favorite person in the world as he so often attacks her when she dares to criticize the union's darling partners in crime in the de Blasio admin. When Leonie talks I listen but will take a closer look when I get home later.

Here's an excerpt:
At a recent press conference, Success Academy Charter Schools CEO Eva Moskowitz addressed the issue of student discipline. “It is horrifying,” she told reporters, that critics of her charter schools’ high suspension rates don’t realize “that five-year-olds do some pretty violent things.” Moskowitz then pivoted to her displeasure with student discipline in New York City (NYC) public schools, asserting that disorder and disrespect have become rampant."
Sure - suspending a 5 year old who does terrible things ought to work - work getting the parents to pull their kid and out them in a public school.


http://www.shankerinstitute.org/blog/student-discipline-race-and-eva-moskowitz%E2%80%99s-success-academy-charter-schools


Student Discipline, Race And Eva Moskowitz’s Success Academy Charter Schools



At a recent press conference, Success Academy Charter Schools CEO Eva Moskowitz addressed the issue of student discipline. “It is horrifying,” she told reporters, that critics of her charter schools’ high suspension rates don’t realize “that five-year-olds do some pretty violent things.” Moskowitz then pivoted to her displeasure with student discipline in New York City (NYC) public schools, asserting that disorder and disrespect have become rampant.
This is not the first time Moskowitz has taken aim at the city’s student discipline policies. Last spring, she used the editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal to criticize the efforts of Mayor Bill De Blasio and the NYC Department of Education to reform the student code of conduct and schools’ disciplinary procedures. Indeed, caustic commentary on student behavior and public school policy has become something of a trademark for Moskowitz.

The National Move to Reform Student Discipline Practices
To understand why, it is important to provide some context. The New York City public school policies that Moskowitz derides are part of a national reform effort, inspired by a body of research showing that overly punitive disciplinary policies are ineffective and discriminatory. Based on this research evidence, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Psychological Association and School Discipline Consensus Project of the Council of State Governments have all gone on record on the harmful effects of employing such policies. The U.S. Education Department, the U.S. Justice Department, civil rights and civil liberties organizations, consortia of researchers, national foundations, and the Dignity in Schools advocacy coalition have all examined the state of student discipline in America’s schools in light of this research.1

Their findings? Suspensions and expulsions, the most severe forms of school discipline, are being used excessively in American schools, often for such minor infractions such as “talking back” or being out of uniform. Further, these severe punishments are being applied disproportionality to students of color, especially African-American and Latino boys, students with disabilities and LGBT youth.

As a result of these data, the U.S. Education Department and U.S. Justice Department issued guidance to schools, based on their finding that discriminatory uses of suspensions and expulsions were in violation of Title IV and Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Since this guidance came from the federal agencies that are charged with the enforcement of the Civil Rights Act, it added the force of the law to the powerful moral arguments for addressing the problem of discriminatory discipline. School districts and schools, public and charter, took notice. The more progressive minded, such as the new de Blasio administration of the New York City Department of Education, began to reform their disciplinary practices in accord with these regulations. As a consequence, the suspensions and expulsions from New York City’s public schools have been dramatically reduced.
Moskowitz makes no explicit mention of these developments in her attacks on the de Blasio administration, although a careful reading shows that they are a calculated response to them. Instead, with unverifiable anecdotes, cherry-picked statistics, and out-of-context quotations, Moskowitz dismisses New York City’s student discipline reforms as “edu-babble” and “nonsense.”2
In a revealing video interview that accompanied the Wall Street Journal op-ed, editorial board member Mary Kissel launches the conversation by declaring that the “Obama administration wants laxer discipline standards for minorities in public schools.” Moskowitz does not disagree. Under the cover of attacks on the policies and practices of New York City public schools, Moskowitz has delivered a shot across the bow of President Obama, retiring Secretary of Education Arne Duncan and incoming Acting Secretary John King. The message is, if you choose to enforce civil rights law when it comes to discipline in Success Academy charter schools, expect an all-out political war.

The Data on Success Academy Schools
Why would Moskowitz feel the need to lay down a gauntlet in opposition to a president and two secretaries of education who have all been vigorous charter school supporters? For that matter, why take on the entire civil rights community? To answer these questions, I decided to take a look at the data on suspensions from New York City schools, both public and charter. There are three repositories of these data: the Civil Rights Data Collection of the U.S. Education Department; the School Report Cards of the New York State Education Department; and the school discipline data reports of the NYC Department of Education to the City Council, as required by New York City’s Student Safety Act. (The UCLA Civil Rights Project provides a user friendly portal for viewing the federal data and, while the Student Safety Act data is not available on the internet, the New York Civil Liberties Union publishes useful annual Suspension Data Fact Sheets.) With three different repositories of data, one would think that it should be a simple matter to locate accurate information. But the reality is rather different.

Take the data published by the U.S. Education Department: The most recent available dataset is for the school year 2011-12, when the New York City Department of Education was under the administration of Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Bloomberg’s NYC DoE reported suspension rates of 1.7 percent for secondary school students and 0.3 percent for elementary school students, figures which were far below the seven percent suspension rate it had provided under the Student Safety Act.3
But this inconsistency pales next to the data for Moskowitz’s Success Academy Charter Schools: Across all Success Academy schools, just two suspensions were reported to the U.S. Department of Education for 2011-12. During the same year, hundreds of suspensions were reported to the New York State Education Department, for an overall suspension rate of 17 percent.4
The numbers that Success Academy chose to report to the federal government were not only so radically at variance with those reported to the New York State Department of Education, but also so obviously wrong, as to appear contemptuous of the charter networks’ obligations under federal civil rights law.5
To provide the most complete picture possible of what is happening in both the Success Academy schools and regular New York City public schools, it was necessary to gather data from a number of different sources. Let us start with most recent dataset, for the year 2013-14, which was published late last spring as part of the New York State School Report Cards. According to the state data, in 2013-14, Success Academy Charter Schools had a total of 728 suspensions for a suspension rate of 11 percent, while the New York City public schools had a total of 9617 suspensions for a suspension rate of one percent.
We know that the NYC public school data is understated, however, because (just as in the case of its report to the U.S. Education Department cited above) only the most serious suspensions are ever reported to the New York State Education Department. Upon request, the New York City Department of Education supplied the Shanker Institute with the total number of all suspensions for the 2013-14 school year. These data showed 53,504 suspensions; yielding an annual suspension rate of five percent.6
From the standpoint of Success Academy, therefore, the most charitable reading of these numbers is that the charter school network suspended its students at more than double the rate of the New York City public schools, eleven percent to five percent.7
But these numbers are only the beginning of the story. New York charter school management has defended student suspension rates in their schools that are much higher than those of New York City district schools on the grounds that they educate more students with challenges – students living in poverty, students with special needs, and English Language Learners. The New York State Education Department data includes a fairly robust set of student demographics that make it possible to test this claim by comparing the student demographics of Success Academy charter schools and New York City public schools for the 2013-14 school year.8
In fact, on the most important measures, the student demographics of Success Academy schools indicate a lower need student population than are served by New York City public schools as a whole: while 81 percent of New York City public school students are “economically disadvantaged,” 74 percent of Success Academy students fall into that category; while 18 percent of New York City public school students have “learning disabilities,” 14 percent of Success Academy students fall into that category; and while 15 percent of New York City public school students are English language learners, only 5 percent of Success Academy students fall into that category.9
Thus, insofar as one credits the argument that a student population with greater needs will necessarily have more problems with behavior and more student suspensions, Success Academy schools should be suspending fewer – not more – students than the New York City public schools.
Why Age Matters
There is one more key issue of comparability that is often lost in these discussions: the age of students. As students enter into adolescence, misbehaviors generally increase and disciplinary consequences for those misbehaviors (such as suspensions) tend to climb in number. For a true “apples-to-apples” comparison, we should look at data for students in the same age groups. As it happens, during the years discussed here, Success Academy Charter Schools served no high school students and had very few students in middle school – in fact, over 90 percent of their students were in the elementary school grades of K through 5.
To adequately compare suspension rates in Success Academy Charter Schools with rates in the New York City public schools, we requested that the New York City Department of Education provide the Shanker Institute with a breakdown of student suspensions by grade level: In 2013-14, the elementary school grades had 6,634 suspensions, the middle school grades had 18,873 suspensions and the high school grades had 27,997 suspensions. That is, the elementary school grades accounted for nearly half of all New York City public school students (47 percent), but only 12 percent of all suspensions; the middle school grades accounted for 22 percent of all students, but 35 percent of all suspensions; and the high school grades accounted for 31 percent of all students, but 52 percent of all suspensions. In other words, in 2013-14, there was 1 suspension for every 67 students in the elementary school grades of New York City public schools and one suspension for every 11 students in the middle and high school grades. By contrast, in Success Academy Charter Schools, there was one suspension for every nine students in 2013-14, and these students were overwhelmingly concentrated in the elementary school grades – a higher suspension rate than for New York City public middle and high school students. Shockingly, when students of the same ages were compared, Success Academy Charter Schools was suspending students at a rate roughly seven times greater than in the New York City public schools.10
The Matter of Race
What were the race and ethnicity characteristics of Success Academy’s suspended students? Only the Civil Rights Data Collection of the U.S. Department of Education requires that districts and schools report the race and ethnicity of suspended students; but, as previously noted, since Success Academy reported only two of its hundreds of suspensions to the federal government, we have no direct source of information on this matter. We do know, however, that in the 2013-14 school year, seven of the eighteen Success Academy charter schools (Harlem Success I through V, Bed-Stuy Success I and Bronx Success I) accounted for nearly 90 percent of all suspensions, with suspension rates above the average for all Success Academy schools. In each of those schools, the combined share of African-American and Latino students was in the high 90 percent range.
While Success Academy is on the extreme end of the spectrum, the problem of excessive suspensions for African-American and Latino students runs deep across the charter school sector in New York City, as the Advocates for Children’s report, “Civil Rights Suspended,” has documented.
The challenge posed to Success Academy and similar charter schools by the U.S. Department of Justice and U.S. Department of Education’s guidance on student discipline is serious. To be in conformance with civil rights law, these schools will need to make radical reforms to their “no excuses” school culture and practices. Now that Moskowitz has laid down the gauntlet on this issue, many eyes will be on the Obama administration for its response. Changing policies, practices and cultures to make schools into safe and welcoming places that do not resort to the excessive and discriminatory use of suspensions and expulsions is hard, challenging work.
Educators across the country will be watching closely to see if all schools are required to take it on. If the greatest transgressors of federal civil rights law are given a bye for political reasons, it is hard to see how the law can be successfully enforced anywhere. Public scrutiny of the issue is bound to grow in the wake of John Merrow’s powerful PBS News Hour piece on Success Academy’s suspension policy. The Obama administration’s initiative to end excessive and discriminatory suspensions and expulsions will ultimately stand or fall on its willingness to take on those, such as Moskowitz’s Success Academy Charter Schools, who openly refuse to abide by federal civil rights law.
Perhaps the specter of having to make these student discipline reforms was, by itself, sufficient cause for Moskowitz to take on the Obama administration, Duncan, King and the entire civil rights community. But it is not the only issue; Success Academy’s student discipline policies are also intimately tied to its practice of refusing to “backfill” empty student seats. I will take up the issue of “backfilling” in a follow-up post on Success Academy Public Schools.
*****
ENDNOTES
1 See the work of the U.S. Department of Education, the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, the Advancement Project, the American Civil Liberties Union, the UCLA Civil Rights Project, Discipline Disparities: A Research to Practice Collaborative, the Atlantic Philanthropies, and the advocacy coalition Dignity in Schools.
2 By way of illustrations, consider the following two examples: First, there is the claim in Moskowitz’s op-ed, repeated in the video interview, that “4 percent of New York City high-school students carry a weapon to school; 2 percent carry a gun.” These statistics do not reflect the actual numbers of students who were found in possession of a weapon in their school – despite the fact that in New York City, the penalty for possession of a weapon in school is a suspension, and thus appears in the suspension data. But it appears that the real numbers were too low to suit Moskowitz’s purposes, since she claims to have obtained her alternative numbers from the NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene epidemiological report, “Firearm Deaths and Injuries in New York City,” a report that incorporates data from the NYC Youth Risk Behavior Survey. A fuller examination of this survey provides a different picture of school safety than Moskowitz portrays. Since 1997, the numbers of New York City high school youth who reported carrying a weapon of any sort have fallen by more than half, and the numbers who reported carrying a gun have been halved. Indeed, the rate of weapon and gun carrying among high school age youth in New York City is well below the national average. Moreover, the numbers of youth carrying weapons are not uniformly spread across the city, but concentrated in neighborhoods of high poverty – the South Bronx, Harlem and Central and Northern Brooklyn: the rates of firearm violence (death and injury) among high school and college age youth in these areas were at least twice the City’s average. Now that Success Academy has begun to open its own high schools, one could employ Moskowitz’s logic in this op-ed to Success Academy charter high schools located in its areas of concentration in the South Bronx, Harlem and Central and Northern Brooklyn, and conclude that 8-10 percent of their students would be carrying a weapon in school. It is a safe bet that when it comes to assessing the safety in her own schools, the CEO of Success Academy will be returning to the statistics of students actually found in possession of a weapon in school that she was so quick to disregard in discussing public high schools.
Second, Moskowitz mocks the use of “restorative practices” in New York City public schools by ridiculing a quote from a website, which has no connection either to New York City schools or to any of the significant forces in the movement to reform student discipline. The NYC Department of Education discipline code includes a description of the restorative practices that should be employed in city schools, explaining how practices such as peer mediation can be used to resolve student conflicts and disputes before they escalate into violence. But Moskowitz ignores this authoritative information.
3 New York City public schools distinguish between “Principal” suspensions, used for less serious misconduct and limited to no more than five days of suspension, and “Superintendent” suspensions, used for more serious misconduct and extending for as long as a year. As the name suggests, it is in the authority of the Principal to issue a Principal suspension, but a Superintendent suspension requires the approval of the Superintendent and a more formal and quasi-legal due process hearing conducted by the NYC Department of Education. Under Bloomberg, the NYC Department of Education appears to have been reporting only Superintendent suspensions, which accounted for only 19 percent of all suspensions. Since the U.S. Education Department category is “out of school suspensions,” which would cover any loss of school days, there would not appear to be a plausible reason for reporting only Superintendent suspensions.
4 There were seven Success Academy charter schools which had been in existence long enough to report data to the U.S Education Department for its 2011-12 report: five Harlem Success Academies and two Bronx Success Academies. There is an anomaly in the corresponding New York State Report Card for Bronx Success Academy 2, which is missing data for attendance and suspensions. I therefore calculated the overall figures for Success Academy using the six schools with data. In the next year of the New York State Report Card, which includes data for all seven of the original Success Academy schools and an additional two new schools, the overall suspension rate rose to 19 percent.
5 In the years of the Bloomberg administration, Moskowitz had a close ally on student discipline and other issues leading the NYC Department of Education. Over the course of the decade ending in 2011-12, suspensions in the Bloomberg-run NYC public schools more than doubled. So long as the disciplinary policies of the New York City public schools were increasingly punitive, Success Academy had cover for its own policies. But, with changes in student discipline policies arising under the de Blasio administration and the new leadership at the NYC Department of Education, the Success Academy’s record has become increasingly vulnerable.
6 For the 2013-14 student registers in New York City public schools, I have used the numbers from the Department of Education’s public portal.
7 In her Wall Street Journal op-ed, Eva Moskowitz states that there is an 11 percent suspension rate in Success Academy charter schools, as opposed to a four percent suspension rate in New York City public schools, but does not provide a source for these numbers.
8 There are two missing data points that, if they had been provided, would make the comparison more complete. While the NYSED demographics do include students with disabilities, it does not distinguish between those students with minimal disabilities and those students who have more serious disabilities. And while the NYSED demographics do include a measure of economic disadvantage which is more sophisticated than the crude free and reduced lunch status measure that is often used as a proxy for poverty, it does not break out homelessness, which is the most severe form of economic disadvantage. 
9 What is particularly striking about the lower levels of need in the Success Academy student population is that their charter schools have been sited in the historically highest need communities of New York City – Harlem, the South Bronx, and Northern and Central Brooklyn – which should have led to higher, not lower, levels of need. These results would give credence to the claims that Success Academy charter schools have been “creaming” these communities, enrolling a disproportionate number of students that have low levels of need.
10 A more precise estimate would be possible if city, state and federal education authorities required all schools and districts to report their suspensions by grade level. This is a needed policy adjustment.