ELL, Federal Stimulus, and Technology Updates at February Panel for Educational Policy

Monday's Panel for Educational Policy meeting covered three topics. Presentations are available here:

English Language Learners Update

The ELL Performance Report for 2007-2008 is still not available although some statistics are provided here.

Federal Stimulus Bill

The DOE has looked closely at what funds will be available and intends to compete aggresively for discretionary funds, including the $650 million in "Innovation Funds". Given the apparent education priorities of the Obama administration, the focus for grants will likely include technology, testing, teacher merit pay and charter schools.

Technology Update

Small schools success?

See articles from the NY Times and NY Post about the Gates-funded small schools boasting of much higher graduation rates than the larger schools that they replaced. A few points omitted or glossed over in these articles:

First of all, these comparisons assume that the students who attended both sets of schools were similar. Yet the independent evaluation done by Policy Studies Associates (in pdf) revealed that the students who were admitted to the small schools in all respects were much more likely to succeed. (This study was suppressed by New Visions until a copy was leaked by a critic to the NY Times in 2005.)

Not only were there far fewer English language learners and special education students among them, two groups with the worst graduation rates in the city, but on average, their students also had higher test scores, higher grades, better attendance, and were far less likely to have been held back than students at the large host schools. For example, only 10% of the students at the small schools scored below basic in their 8th grade ELA exams, compared with 35% at their host schools -- with a similar disparity in math. Moreover, 97% had been promoted in the prior year, compared with only 59% of the students at the host schools.

They had better attendance records in middle school (91% compared to 81%), and were less likely to have been suspended. Only 6% of Bronx NCHS students had IEPs, compared with 25% at the comparison schools; and none of the students at the small schools had the most serious disabilities. Indeed, teachers at the new small schools praised their principals for "recruiting more high-performing students."

The new small schools also had significantly more resources, more space, and much smaller classes than the large schools that they replaced. While class sizes at the larger high schools averaged 30 students or more, class sizes at most of the new small schools were between 13 and 20 students, as the first year PSA evaluation (in pdf) noted.

Students observed that their smaller classes were their most valuable aspect: “they liked the small class sizes, the willingness of teachers to provide extra help…” One student said, “I like the close thing with teachers and that you can discuss your problems with them.” According to another, “I like that it’s small, and we each get attention. There’s not one person who doesn’t get attention from our teachers. And they treat us all the same. In a normal high school, they don’t talk to you when you have a problem. They don’t care.”

I don’t think that it should be any surprise that if you take higher-performing students and give them smaller classes, they will be more likely to graduate on time than lower-achieving students with much larger classes.

Another important point to note that as the small schools take up more space, and exclude so many special ed, ELL, and low-performing students, large schools throughout the city have become even more overcrowded with "at risk" students, undermining their chance of success. Many affected high schools have since been put on the state failing list, including Murray Bergtraum, Washington Irving, Norman Thomas, Jane Adams, etc. etc.

The question is if this is equitable and sustainable, with so many of our large schools destabilized. Sadly, the administration has no strategy to improve these high schools, rather than close them down, exclude the neediest students, and cause more overcrowding and failure elsewhere.

As more than two thirds of our HS students continue to attend large schools, there needs to be some plan in place to increase the capacity of these schools so they can provide their students with some of the same sort of opportunities, including smaller classes.

Unfortunately, no such plan exists.

For more on these issues, see the recent Class Size Matters testimony to the City Council.

Also, Tilden HS teachers fight for their school’s survival. Though the school has one of the few bilingual programs for Haitian students, and a good record of graduating ELL students, the administration is determined to shut it down. Yet it is these very students who will be likely be excluded from the small schools taking Tilden’s place.

Even some of the older generation of small schools face the same fate --- being closed down prematurely so that the administration can establish yet another generation of small schools in its place: see the statement from teachers at the New School for Arts and Sciences, a small high school in the Bronx, that has improved results for its population of about 40% ELL and special ed students.

This just in: see Diane Ravitch's take on the media's unthinking acceptance of the administration's small school spin in Ed Week.

Mayor Bloomberg and UFT Reach Agreement on Schools Reorganization

Here are some highlights of the agreement announced at the press conference on Friday.

No Budget Cuts For Two Years

The Chancellor and DoE staffers responsible for the Fair Student Funding proposal have argued that many schools receive too much funding. Fair Student Funding would have cut some budgets while raising others. Despite record city surpluses, DoE was intent on taking these budget actions that many feared would destabilize successful schools -- as Deputy Chancellor Grimm told parents at a District 2 CEC public meeting, "there will be winners and losers". Under last week's agreement, the Mayor guaranteed that no school will have its budget cut in the next two years. For the many schools who would have seen large cuts, this retreat on the part of the administration is important.

Joint Planning for Class Size Reduction

New state law requires the Bloomberg administration to develop a five year plan to reduce class sizes in all grades. Under the agreement, the administration pledged to "work with the UFT, and other stakeholders, such as New Yorkers for Smaller Classes to develop a joint set of recommendations on how best to implement the law". Given the administration's past refusal to reduce class size or to engage anyone on this issue, their statement that they will proceed in cooperation with others represents a change in their public stance and may lead to progress. New Yorkers for Smaller Classes is a coalition chaired by Lillian Rodriguez-Lopez of the Hispanic Federation and includes the United Federation of Teachers (UFT), Class Size Matters, the NAACP, CPAC, ACORN, as well as many other parent and advocacy groups.

Increased Funding for English Language Learners (ELL)

The weighting for ELL students will increase compared to the original Fair Student Funding proposal, resulting in more funding for each student. A reserve fund will be established to ensure sufficient money is available should the new funding methodology leave gaps as it is implemented.

Parent Engagement

The agreement calls for a committee chaired by the DoE's Chief Family Engagement Officer and comprised of parent groups, to "design improved systems and processes for parent engagement, and specifically, to ensure that every school has a well functioning and well trained School Leadership Team".

Commitment to Engage on Issues

On several other issues -- middle school reform, teacher tenure and student success centers -- the administration pledged to work closely with various relevant advocacy and parent groups, as well as other stakeholders, including the City Council, going forward.


For parents, the agreement is a bit of a mixed bag. There are significant concessions and a welcome willingness on the part of the administration to take input from a wider group of stakeholders. These openings need to be pursued in good faith. At the same time, none of the elected parent organizations mandated by state and city regulations to represent parents were mentioned in the discussion of issues that are tremendously important to parents. The citywide elected parent organizations -- Chancellors Parent Advisory Committee (CPAC), Citywide Council on High Schools (CCHS) and Citywide Council on Special Education (CCSE) -- were clearly not parties to the agreement, nor were the Community Education Councils that represent parents in each of the 32 school districts. Many of these bodies have passed resolutions that address important issues not included in the agreement, for example excessive testing, the poor state of special ed services, the reckless pace of the incessant restructurings, etc. There is clearly much more that needs to be done.

The press release detailing the agreement can be found here.

For God's sake, Stop! Look! Listen! Por Dios, ¡Pare! ¡Mire! ¡Escuche! Mon Dieu, Arretez! Voyez! Ecoutez!

Luis O. Reyes, Coordinator of the Coalition for Educational Excellence for English Language Learners (CEEELL), attended a meeting with Chancellor Klein on March 14, 2007, set up by the New York Immigration Coalition's Education Task Force (of which Luis is a member). NYIC had sought the meeting to get the chancellor's response to NYIC's “Education Policy Brief: State Funding, Accountability and Successful Strategies for ELL Students”. The Policy Brief is a blueprint to accompany the promised City and State funding increases for English Language Learner (ELL) students.

According to Luis, “the blueprint calls for a 1.0 ELL weighting, but just as importantly, it advocates for tracking of any new ELL funding to ensure that ELL students, their teachers and their parents benefit fully through quality instruction and support services, with public accountability for inputs and outcomes”.

NYIC had sent the document to the Chancellor and his senior staff including Deputy Chancellor Andrés Alonso and Ms. Maria Santos, in charge of the Office of English Language Learners. But the meeting the Chancellor granted, was with Garth Harries, the Director of the Office of New Schools and Brian Ellner, Senior Counselor to the Chancellor. And as Luis relates in this perspective on the meeting, the Chancellor had an entirely different agenda:

Asked to share his response to NYIC's ELL Funding Accountability Plan and its Immigrant/ELL Success Agenda, Chancellor Klein chose to focus, instead, on two major issues: his proposed Weighted Funding Formula and his New Small High Schools Initiative. He indicated he was surprised that we were not more supportive of his weighted funding formula proposals, which would provide different levels of increased funding for ELLs at the three different levels in the public schools. And, he asserted that the small high schools were critical because they provided options to high needs students (immigrant, minorities); and touted the International HS's with their "high concentration of talent and skills" on behalf of ELLs.

Most of the time was spent on the Chancellor's two issues. On the first, we responded to the first by noting the great difference in scale between the Governor's ELL budget proposal (an additional .5 weighting that would generate an unprecedented $350 million per year in additional ELL-generated funding for New York City) and the City's proposal (a weighting that ranges between $180-$300 per ELL pupil at the elementary level to $360-600 at the HS level). On the second issue, the Chancellor indicated there was a dispute about whether ELLs were proportionally represented in the small high schools. He felt they were. We felt they were not.

The bottom line, in my opinion, came down to whether or not we, the ELL/immigrant advocates, were on board with the Chancellor's initiatives or part of the opposition (what he has categorized elsewhere as the "defenders of the status-quo"). There was no owning up by the Chancellor nor his senior aides to the unwritten 2-year ELL exemption policy that has allowed many new small HS's to not admit ELLs. Nor did he respond to the issue of dismantling bilingual HS programs and leaving Haitian, Asian and Latino ELLs without equivalent options in his new small schools.

While the Chancellor did say that he was "cognizant of all the different issues", neither he nor Harries and Ellner engaged the people at the meeting regarding our comprehensive agenda. Instead, we were pushed to be cheerleaders for the Chancellor's initiatives, aked, in effect, to choose sides. Nor did the Chancellor acknowledge that a two-year $45,000 grant for ELLs to 10 new small HS's was a pittance, if not insulting, in the face of the true need.

I have to say that this was one of the most unsatisfying meetings I have attended with Chancellor Klein or with any Chancellor (and I go back 25 years now!). The truth is, that not engaging ELL/immigrant advocates on our terms, and expecting us to be defenders of his initiatives and proposals, is shortsighted, even patronizing. While understandable, given all the negative reaction to his reorganization plan, he is wrong to set himself up as the one and only champion of change. I believe he believes he's on the side of the angels, fighting for equity and real change.

Nevertheless, his tin-ear response to our advocacy on behalf of ELL/immigrants, leads me to the brink of despair. We did not arrive here yesterday; not even 5 years ago, when he was selected Chancellor by the Mayor. Many of us have been battling the Latino and ELL dropout crisis for longer than we care to say. We have grown older and tired (I speak for myself!) from presenting Chancellors with educational reform agendas premised on the need to respect our languages and cultures while insisting on real reform, real resources, and real results.

If there is one thing I would like to get across to Chancellor Klein, it is that we are neither hired help, nor unpaid flaks, and, certainly, not died-in-the-wool defenders of the status-quo. Do not patronize us! Engage us as partners, not supplicants. If you do not, you too will fail. And, if you do, so shall we. The best chance we have to make a difference will have been squandered.

For God's sake, Stop! Look! Listen! Por Dios, ¡Pare! ¡Mire! ¡Escuche! Mon Dieu, Arretez! Voyez! Ecoutez!

Luis O. Reyes

Coordinator,

Coalition for Educational Excellence for English Language Learners (CEEELL)

March 16, 2007

Boss Tweed's revenge?

Another irony in the rich history of Boss Tweed is that he was eventually brought down by Samuel J. Tilden, a reform-minded chairman of the Democratic state committee, NY Governor and a Presidential candidate.

Samuel Tilden would have become President, having won the popular vote and more electoral votes as well, if not for a lot of political shenanigans.

And now, more than 100 years later, Tweed appears to be having his revenge, as top DoE officials are closing down the school named after him -- despite the protests of teachers, parents, students and elected leaders.

The determination of top officials at Tweed to eliminate Tilden HS flies in the face of a positive quality review of the school only a few months ago.

The review pointed out the how how the principal's "efforts and leadership have received enthusiastic support from students, teachers, parents and her administrative staff" and that English language learners achieved a passing rate on their Regents exams 25.3% above similar schools and 16.8% higher than schools across the City. Also notable is that the school is one of the few places that offers bilingual classes to Haitian students. An excerpt:

"From the principal, whose open-door policy welcomes students at all times, to teachers and security personnel, a culture that values knowing and respecting all students is immediately observable."

The small schools that will open up in its place are allowed to exclude all ELL and special education students for up to two years -- where will all these children go?

See also this NY Times column about the situation at Tilden HS, and the website of the school's defenders who are trying to save it from being eliminated.

An update from John Lawhead, Tilden HS teacher: On Tuesday (March 20) we had a free-lance writer who's on assignment from Voice. She attempted to interview the principal. Melody Meyers of the DOE communications office refused to give permission for the principal to talk.

Also check out John's testimony before the City Council here.

Public School Parents Go To Albany

Today is the annual CPAC Lobbying Day. CPAC is the Chancellor's Parent Advisory Council, whose members are elected by PTA presidents in each school district. Unlike the various Mayoral appointees who represent the Department of Education in dealings with parents, CPAC is elected by parents to represent our interests.

Buses full of CPAC members and parent volunteers left for Albany early this morning. They will see their State Senators and State Assemblymembers, the people who ultimately are responsible for NYC public schools, who control the budget and who will decide, in 2009, whether to renew the experiment in mayoral control of schools.

The CPAC agenda is available online. A page on each position is available from the files section of the CPAC group site. Parents should take a few minutes to review these positions, all of which are opposed by Mayor Bloomberg and Schools Chancellor Klein.

CPAC has prepared the following summary of their positions:

"On Parent Empowerment: We support the full restoration of Community School Districts, and District Superintendents with the authority to implement policy, address community needs, and respond to parental complaints. All schools, including those in the empowerment and contractor networks, should remain within the district structure. Community District Education Council’s (CDEC’s) need to be strengthened as conduits for public input into the capital plan, zoning, and education policy. We support training and oversight to guarantee functioning Parent Associations (PA’s) and School Leadership Teams (SLT’s) in all schools.

On Governance: We urge the Legislature to hold hearings on the negative effects of unchecked unilateral Mayoral control, and to pass legislation allowing the NYC City Council, with input from parents and other stakeholders, to provide the necessary checks and balances on Department of Education (DoE) policy.

On Class Size Reduction: We endorse the Nolan/Lancman bill that would require that a minimum of 25% of the additional state funds our schools receive be invested in reducing class size in all grades, to levels that currently exist in the rest of the state. In the CFE case, the Court of Appeals found that classes were too large in our schools to provide our children with their constitutional right to an adequate education, and that their excessive class sizes led directly to low achievement and high dropout rates. It is time to make smaller classes a reality for NYC children.

On CFE and Accountability: We support the proposal to provide $5.4 billion in additional aid to NYC schools, and urge the Legislature to adopt the Nolan/Lancman bill, requiring that a minimum of 25% of these funds be invested in reducing class size in all grades. Robust accountability measures and public input must also be required, including City Council approval of the city’s CFE spending plan, in consultation with CPAC and other parent groups, as well as regular audits of the spending of these funds by the State Comptroller’s office.

On High-Stakes Testing: We urge the State to develop an effective, valid and reliable assessment system to evaluate students’ progress, based on multiple measures, and to ban the use of any set of tests contrary to the recommendations of the American Educational Research and the National Board on Educational Testing. No standardized test or set of tests should be used as the sole or primary criterion to determine whether a student is promoted, retained, admitted to or allowed to graduate from school.

On English Language Learners (ELLs): We urge the State to monitor schools to ensure that ELL students receive the necessary instructional services and hold schools accountable for failing to meet the needs of these students. The amount and scope of Limited-English-Proficient (LEP) aid should be expanded, to provide key components of an Immigrant/ELL Success Agenda.

On Charter Schools: We oppose lifting the cap on charter schools in NYC, because this would divert critical resources, attention, and classroom space from our traditional public schools. Also, charter schools do not enroll their fair share of ELL and special education students. Allowing more charter schools to be formed would encourage the creation of two separate and unequal school systems. Finally, we vehemently oppose any legislation that would allow the Chancellor to authorize charter schools with no appeal or judicial review.

On Cell Phone Ban: We urge the State legislature to overturn the (DOE) cell phone ban, which violates parents' rights to ensure their children's safety."