It's obviously easier than we thought:
![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhvXI5uknOc6j19baz06up558uzul6kvcEnM-YOcEhfiwCahULgq1lqoSFWEn3u-8W6jG2goXXJFwk75cHqaiXHmHidhRhLJIiR5aCa1ljv9H8PJDf8o2L0rFohP4TcaJU5dZfcVkH_AmU/s400/dummies-1.jpg)
Independent voices of New York City public school parents
From Lisa Donlan, CEC member from District 1 in Manhattan:
One of the immediate, if relatively minor, consequences of the re-organization has been the suspension of several key parent engagement activities as the DoE tardily contemplates the effect on parents of kicking over the anthill to see what crawls out, once again.
Missing in action are the A-660 (Chancellor’s Regs that govern/define PTAs and Presidents’ Councils) the A-655 (regulations on School and District Leadership Teams), the CEP (Comprehensive Education Plan that is to align school goals with budgets, structures and actions) for each school, and the DCEP (CEP for community districts) to name a few of the casualties.
Each of these documents is in the midst of a major rewrite to accommodate the restructuring, and thus are not accessible for parents to use.
This year the individual school budgets, the first ones under the (watered down) revolutionary new funding scheme will be released in “early May.” CEC’s are to hold public hearings, reporting back parent input by May 31, as the Panel on Educational Policy is to rubber stamp the budget in the June meeting.
The Citywide Education Councils for High Schools and Special Education are based on the current region structure that will disappear on June 30, affecting the formation of the councils as the elections go forward.
In any case, the DoE has refused for three years to follow through on suggestions from parent leaders and elected officials to improve the council election process, legislation that governs the councils, or the training and operations of the councils.
It is clear that while the Mayor and Chancellor are willing to commit enormous energy into making bold new changes to our public education system, their implementation is often sloppy and poorly thought out. Instead of leaving parents limited opportunities for input in the wake of their reforms, the DoE would be wise to include us as partners in the planning and design of changes that affect us, our children and their schools.
I am sure we could contribute much to counter the negative effects of the culture of group think and yes-men that the consultants and lawyers have brought to the policymaking table.
Rob Caloras, the council president in District 26 in northeast Queens, a district known for its excellent schools and high levels of activism by parents, said that only five people were running for the parent council.
“It’s kind of sad,” Mr. Caloras said. “We’ve lost people who were on the council. They went back to the PTA because they feel it’s much more important to be active in their children’s schools than waste their time here.”
In District 27 (Queens) Andrew Baumann was the only candidate to show up at a forum where candidates were to address parents.
“The mayor and the chancellor really don’t want us involved,” said Mr. Baumann, who calls himself a reluctant candidate for a third term. “When you’re running a big corporation, you don’t ask the guys on the loading dock what their opinions are. The way I see it, we’re just pushing a box from one side to the other in a warehouse.”What the article fails to mention is that Chancellor Klein hired accounting firm KPMG to manage the election process. But their poor management was a major factor in the low turnout at the candidate forums. PTA officers eligible to vote and even candidates themselves were not told of the forums until a few days, sometimes hours, before they happened.
While the mayor and city teachers union celebrated several hard-won compromises on school budgeting last week, Queens parents were bemoaning what, for them, has become a bitterly familiar situation by now: not having a seat at the bargaining table...Parent leaders David Quintana (CPAC for District 27) and Marge Kolb (District 24 CEC) are quoted.
He's only here to help the kids at the charter school; he's not helping my child," Edith Jackson, 37, an unemployed mother of an 11-year-old boy who attends school in the same building that houses the charter school, but doesn't have access to the same amenities. "Get them computers; get them a music teacher, and art," she said.
She said she was also upset that almost none of the parents from her son's school had been invited to hear the president, but that many from the charter school were allowed in.
On Sunday, the NPR radio show, Infinite Minds, replayed one of Kurt Vonnegut’s last interviews. Vonnegut, who died a few weeks ago at the age of 80, spoke at length on several topics close to my heart, including global warming, turn of the century
“If you were to build or envision a country that you could consider yourself to be a proud citizen of, what would be three of its basic attributes?
Kurt Vonnegut: “Just one: great public schools with classes of 12 or smaller."
Question: “That’s it?”
Kurt Vonnegut: “Yeah….Just do this.”
To hear for yourself, click here.
Two articles about Ric Klass’s book about teaching in a large Bronx HS, “Man Overboard: Confessions of a Novice Math Teacher in the
“He does hold out some hope for schools that spend their money on smaller class sizes. “Given the discipline issues, the teacher will only get their attention when there are about 15 students in the class. Small schools, such as those being promoted by the Gates Foundation, are not the answer; it's smaller class sizes.”
And today’s Education supplement of the NY Times features a review of several teacher memoirs , including Ric’s and another by Dan Brown, a former filmmaker who was assigned to an elementary school in the Bronx, “The Great Expectations School: A Rookie Year in the New Blackboard Jungle” to be published in August.
In both, the authors describe their unwieldy class sizes as their most insurmountable challenge. Both fled the public school system and are now teaching in elite NYC private schools where no classes are larger than 15 students.
Ric’s story, in particular, puts the lie to Klein’s claim that we cannot reduce class size because of the shortage of qualified math and science teachers. If we could provide them with smaller classes, more people like Ric – who had all the right credentials, including degrees from MIT and Harvard Business School -- would hang around longer and we’d have a more qualified teaching force. It’s the attrition rate – not the lack of applicants –that doom so many of our students to less effective and experienced teachers.
Here is an excerpt from the review:
Apparently, even those who acknowledge that reducing class size is the key to improving our schools believe it to be a remedy that is “nearly impossible” to achieve, as in the case of the reviewer. This shows that the biggest challenge we face may be changing people’s minds about what is and what is not possible.
District 1 Community Education Council (Manhattan) click hereMany PTAs have also passed resolutions, including those at PS 3, PS 41 here, PS 116, PS 150, PS 290, Clinton Middle School, School of the Future (D2), PS 166 (D3), Middle School 210 (D27), and the following high schools: Manhattan Center for Science and Math, Stuyvesant, James Madison and Port Richmond.
District 1 Presidents Council (Manhattan)
District 2 Community Education Council (Manhattan) click here
District 2 Presidents Council (Manhattan)
District 3 Presidents Council (Manhattan)
District 4 Presidents Council (Manhattan)
District 6 Community Education Council (Manhattan)
District 24 Community Education Council (Queens) click here
District 26 Community Education Council (Queens) click here
District 27 Presidents Council (Queens)
District 30 Community Education Council (Queens) click here
District 30 Presidents Council (Queens) - the first to act
Region 6 HS Presidents Council (Brooklyn)
These bodies represent parents across the city:
Citywide Council on Special Education click here
Citywide Council on High Schools click here
Chancellor's Parent Advisory Council click here
The local community board has opposed the construction plans.Schlesinger and Cervino noted the ventilation system would have a monitor to ensure it was working. They asked if another monitor could be installed to detect levels of specific chemicals being released from the site.
“Even if the controls are working, we still want a monitor in that school,” Cervino said. “We asked, ‘If it’s not about the money, why wouldn’t you do it?’ They said, ‘Because we’re doing everything within the law.’
Enough is enough! Listen to parents. These are our demands:
• Provide smaller classes and a better capital plan to eliminate overcrowding.
• Restore arts funding and reduce testing.
• Include real input from parents and other stakeholders at the school level and system-wide before important decisions are made.
• Invest more resources in our children and the classroom, and waste less on expensive bureaucrats, consultants and no-bid contracts at Tweed.
• Stop the privatization and outsourcing of critical education services.
• Finally, no budget cuts to any school. Every one of our public schools is under-funded. With more than $1 billion in additional education spending and record city surpluses, there is no reason for any school to have its funding cut next year.
Below is an email from an intermediary organization that receives funding from DOE, sent to principals and teaching mentors, after being asked to sign onto the letter of support that Mayor Bloomberg released on Monday.
The letter was signed by 100 individuals, representing groups ranging from small afterschool programs to the
It is interesting that this particular organization, whose name is removed, asked for input from principals as to whether they believed that their schools and/or network might be punished if they did not sign on – and specifically requested feedback by phone or from a non-DOE email account, as though worried that Tweed might actually monitor their communications.
It would be interesting to know if officials at
Take note that the actual pros and cons of the proposals were never mentioned – no less whether these changes might really be in the interests of “the people who matter most: Our children” as the DOE letter claims.
Here is more evidence of the way in which the bullying tactics of the administration are viewed by educators on the ground. So much for the supposedly independent groundswell of support.
Also, interestingly, a reference is made to the fact that an earlier version of this letter criticized the elected officials and the UFT who opposed these radical proposals – which was apparently removed after negative reaction.
Dear principals and mentors,
We received this letter on Tuesday asking for [our group] to sign on. So far, we were told by one intermediary (who is NOT signing) that there was an earlier version which explicitly criticized politicians and the teachers union and that after pushback, it was revised to this version.
We are asking for your input….(phone or non-doe email is best)…We are also reaching out to other intermediaries to gauge their response.
[name removed]
From: Marcus Debbie [mailto:DMarcus6@schools.nyc.gov]
Hi xxxxxx-
Below is a public letter than many of the Department's partners and friends are signing. We have a long list of signatories already. Would you consider signing on to this public letter of support on behalf of xxxxxx [your group]? It would be great to have you.
Debbie Marcus
Associate Director of External Relations
Office of New Schools
http://schools.nyc.gov/newschools
(212) 374-6929
dmarcus6@schools.nyc.gov
Dear New Yorkers,
Our students and their families, indeed all New Yorkers, deserve the kind of schools and the kind of school system that our Mayor and our Chancellor are creating. We can't put special interests ahead of the interests of children. This Mayor has it right-we need to put our students' interests first. We urge all New Yorkers to join together to support these reform efforts. These reforms have real promise and will make schools better for the people who matter most: Our children.
On Monday, Mayor Bloomberg held a press conference where he castigated critics of his risky restructuring and funding proposals, calling them "a small chorus of people who are calling for a return to the good old days", who represent "special interests," like the National Rifle Association.
"You always do have the problem of a very small group of people who are single-issue focused having a disproportionate percentage of power," he said. "That's exactly the NRA."
Others might think, on the other hand, that it is he and the Chancellor -- a very small group with almost dictatorial powers over our schools -- who are the real problem.
Given the fact that among the many critics of their proposals are parents legitimately concerned about what these funding cuts might mean for their children, in terms of the loss of experienced teachers, class size, or essential services, I don't know how he can call us "special interests."
For an excellent critique of these funding proposals, and how they treat public education differently from all other municipal services, see this discussion from the Educational Priorities Panel.
Can you imagine if the city funded firehouses or police stations based not on the actual salaries of the employees, but on average salaries citywide – essentially forcing police captains to try get rid of their most experienced officers?
The attitude reflected here – seeing teachers as disposable resources -- goes against everything that the administration pretends to say about respecting them and honoring their profession.
"We want smaller classes, we want more arts funding, we want less testing, we want more input from real stakeholders on the ground....We have been asking for real changes for six years and they have kept their ears shut to us."
In fact, many of us have been calling for real change in our schools long before Bloomberg even thought of running for Mayor, and Joel Klein was still a prosecutor living in DC.
On the other hand, the Mayor surrounded himself yesterday with people who had signed onto a letter of support - with none representing either parent or mainstream education groups. Most of the organizations represented had financial interests with DOE or had received funding from the city or Bloomberg's own charitable donations.
Several had applied to be a partnership support organizations. Many of the news articles, including the NY Sun and the NY Post, pointed out how many of these organizations were dependent on
What was not pointed out, though, is how many had been the recipients of large no-bid contracts from DOE.
Last spring, CityYear (which contributed not one, but two signers to the letter) received a five year, no-bid contract for $11 million through 2012, “to help children learn to read, encourage children to stay in school and to care about their communities.” (The sixth year, and more millions of dollars, are to be contingent on follow-up questions “to be asked of CityYear.”)
Or what about the New Teacher Project, whose director also signed onto the letter of support? Last April, Tweed officials submitted a two year, $2.2 million no-bid contract for the Project, based at the
So the contract was re-submitted for even more money in May, and this time was approved, for $2.8 million! There's accountability for you.
And parents are the special interests, according to the Mayor!
In any case, the fact that the administration asked its contractors to sign onto such a letter shows how isolated and desperate they have become, to resort to an ethical and PR blunder almost as bad as New Visions asking their grantees for kickbacks.