Schools choose their partners!

The DOE sent out a press release , with a tally of how many schools chose which School Support Organizations (SSO’s). (For an earlier posting explaining this byzantine system, see here.)

35% of schools decided to enter the Empowerment Zone, Judith Chin’s LSO (Learning Support Organization) came in second at 27%. Of the PSOs, (private Partnership Support Organizations) the losers were AIR, Success for All, and WestEd, none of which received enough votes to “remain eligible providers of support,” according to Tweed.

The belle of the ball with the fullest dance card among the PSO's was New Visions, chosen by 5% of schools. No doubt the fact that they will continue to be able to hand out hefty Gates grants made them even more alluring than they otherwise might have been.

Updated: Here's the full list (in Excel) of schools by borough, and their SSO's.

City Council Opposition to the Bloomberg Schools Reorganization

The Jackson-Liu resolution outlines the City Council's objections to Mayor Bloomberg's latest restructuring. The resolution, drafted by Education Committee Chair Robert Jackson and Queens Councilman John Liu, has been joined by a broad swath of the council.

We also have links to well-researched and thoughtful letters of concern from two councilmembers, Dan Garodnick and Gale Brewer of Manhattan. Click here and here to read them. Both letters make the obvious point that the unnecessary rush to implement these changes and the lack of input from stakeholders makes little sense.

More Information on the New School Support Organizations

On Monday, Chancellor Klein revealed more details of the options for school support organizations (SSOs) available to schools under the latest reorganization. See the DoE press release here.

In this chart just now provided to us by DoE staffers, each SSO option is defined along with pricing to be charged each school for the services provided.

There are three types of SSO:

1) Empowerment Support Organization (ESO): schools choosing this option will join other schools in a network and choose how to receive support
2) Learning Support Organization (LSO): four organizations to be led by former regional superintendents
3) Partnership Support Organization (PSO): non-profit groups under contract to provide services

We also have a list of entities that applied to become a PSO. Those that were accepted are noted. Princeton Review, St. John's University and a unit of New York University were not accepted, nor were any for-profit entities who applied. We note that the NYU entity is headed by Pedro Noguera, one of the more outspoken critics of the Bloomberg education policy in the academic community.

Principals will learn more at an April 23rd briefing and have until May 15th to decide which SSO to choose. Parents will be invited to "borough fairs" to learn more. The press release does not specify dates for these events.

UPDATE: Principals' Guide to School Support Organizations has been released by the DoE. Click here.

DOE Reorganizes Yet Again

March 26, 2007 (GBN News): The NY City Department of Education announced today yet another in a series of reorganizations, a new plan called, “Every School For Itself”. The move came as a bit of a surprise to most parents and educators, given that the previous initiative, “Children First”, has not yet been completely implemented. In response to a question as to why the abrupt change, Schools Chancellor Joel Klein told GBN News that this shows just how much the schools have improved under his leadership and that of Mayor Bloomberg. “To be able to change before changing”, the Chancellor said, “is the ultimate measure of success.”

Details of the new plan have not yet been fully developed, but will involve fierce competition among city schools for scarce resources. The plan will take effect April 1 according to the DOE statement. By that date, principals were to have made certain choices for their schools, which will determine their success or failure. What their options will be has also not yet been decided.

In a related story, Parker Brothers stock fell 10 points today amid concern over the fate of its new games, “Children First: A Game of Irony”, and “NCLB: The Game”, given that they were based on the last reorganization. Company spokesperson Brad Milton vowed that the game maker would keep up with the rapid changes. A new game is already being developed, Mr. Milton stated, which will be called, ”Survivor: New York City Schools”. However, it was feared that cost overruns due to the frequent need for redevelopment would render the game unaffordable to all but the very wealthy.


(With thanks to Dorothy Giglio)

Parent Opposition to Restructuring

Tuesday's Daily News editorial contains more of the same anti-teacher and anti-parent ranting we’ve come to expect from the News editors. As an alternative viewpoint, we thought parents should hear from an elected parent leader. Below we offer some insights from David Bloomfield, President of the Citywide Council on High Schools. From David’s testimony on the restructuring before the City Council:

Many, many questions exist regarding the recently-announced restructuring of our public schools. All we have are speeches and press releases from which to divine the new direction. And surely there is much to look forward to in a system that promises accountability, principal discretion, central support rather than micro-management, assurances of greater teacher quality promoted through rigorous tenure review, and funding equity that encourages enrollment of students who might otherwise be marginalized. I and many others might get behind these changes if they were more thoroughly explained, if weaknesses were discussed in good faith, and if we thought this restructuring was more than the reform-of-the-day. The caprice with which these changes seem to have been formulated and peremptorily announced leaves many stakeholders on the sidelines when our hearts and minds are needed to move the system forward.

More recently, David testified on the Empowerment Schools aspect of the restructuring:

In their zeal to wring quick rewards from worthwhile reforms, the Mayor and Chancellor do themselves, their initiatives, and students great harm. To prevent organized opposition, they shut out parents and the larger community. They deride cautionary advice from educators as incrementalism. They do everything in their power to evade checks and balances, whether it is sole source contracting or telling this very body that it has no power to legislate on education.

Parent leaders like David are deliberately ignored by the editorialists at the News and Post, whose agenda is merely to blame the teachers union for everything wrong with our schools. For David's full testimony see these links on restructuring and empowerment schools. The CCHS passed this resolution in opposition to the restructuring on March 14^th.

High School Parents Reject DoE Restructuring Plan

The Citywide Council on High Schools (CCHS), the elected representatives of parents and the entity mandated to advise the Schools Chancellor, passed this resolution March 14th in opposition to the proposed restructuring:

WHEREAS, having considered and reviewed the Department of Education’s Children First restructuring and Fair Student Funding Plan;

In view of the fact that the proposal focuses on overall structure rather than proven initiatives that directly impact the classroom, such as smaller class size;

Given that many details of the plan are still being determined;

Bearing in mind that the pilot Empowerment Zone is less than a year old and there has been no evaluation of the impact of creating Empowerment Schools on students’ academic achievement or on the funds available in these schools for teachers and academic programs;

With concern that restructuring of the entire school system following so soon upon the restructuring of 2003 will create destabilization and hardship for parents and students trying to obtain services similar to the chaos experienced at that time;

Noting that weighted student funding, as constituted in this plan, will create competition for scarce resources in the schools such that schools will have an incentive to hire lower-paid, inexperienced teachers and that other implications of the plan for schools’ budgets are not clearly spelled out;

Noting with regret that there was no input from parents or teachers in the planning of this proposal;

Therefore, be it RESOLVED that the Citywide Council on High Schools rejects the DOE Children First Proposal and calls upon the Mayor and the Chancellor to postpone implementation of this plan and immediately call public hearings on the priorities for education spending and restructuring of the New York City Public Schools.

Council Hearing on Empowerment Schools

The City Council Education Committee held a hearing yesterday on empowerment schools with testimony from Eric Nadelstern, CEO of Empowerment Schools. Under questioning, Nadelstern, a veteran NYC administrator, resorted to the familiar DoE tactic of laying down a smokescreen of obfuscation. Today's NY1 and NY Times coverage give some sense of the Council's frustration but leave out important points made at the hearings.

Councilmember John Liu was the sharpest in his criticism. Nadelstern, despite assertions that empowerment schools have much better results in terms of graduation rates, dropout rates and college placement than other schools, couldn't say whether those schools were better before they joined the empowerment zone. Liu's response: "How can say you don't know these numbers when you testify they are improving?" and again "We never get straight answers." Councilman Dan Garodnick, one of the more lucid of the city's politicans, asked a simple question about what distinct services would empowerment schools provide compared to the two other support models being offered to schools, Learning Support Organizations and Partnership Support Organizations. In response, Nadelstern droned on and on, never answering the question. After two more attempts at asking the same question, Garodnick gave up.

Most ominously, David Bloomfield, President of the Citywide Council on High Schools, and himself a parent at an empowerment school, testified on the weaknesses of the DoE plan. Ten years ago, working with the NYC Partnership and the School Governance Task Force, he helped draft a plan that is conceptually very similar to the empowerment initiative. The key difference is that the task force report called for "real authority" to be vested in school leadership teams. Yesterday, David testified on how that essential ingredient is completely missing from the Empowerment Schools we have today: "Parent after parent after parent after parent has complained that Empowerment Schools lack functional School Leadership Teams."

Update: Councilman Garodnick's office shared his excellent letter to the Chancellor.