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.

Update on Parent Opposition to Bloomberg's Schools Restructuring

Earlier, we posted resolutions against the latest Department of Education restructuring issued by Community Education Council in District 1 and the Citywide Council of High Schools. These bodies, elected by parents and mandated under NY state law and Department of Education regulations to represent parents, felt strongly enough to issue formal statements itemizing their objections to the restructuring and how the critical needs of their schools are being ignored by Mayor Bloomberg and Chancellor Klein.

Recently, more CECs (community school boards) and Presidents Councils (comprised of PTA presidents) have passed resolutions of opposition. Below is an updated list with links to resolutions where available:

District 1 Community Education Council (Manhattan) click here
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

Many 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.

If parents know of other PTAs, CECs or parent groups that have passed resolutions or are considering them, please leave a comment below or send us an email.

How one organization felt, after being asked to sign onto the letter of support

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 Museum of Modern Art – most of which are financially dependent on the good graces of the city. The DOE email which follows calls the signers "the Department's partners and friends."

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 Tweed spy on people’s emails.

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)…

What cost and/or benefit to your school (and our network of schools) do you foresee if we do or do NOT sign this letter?

We are also reaching out to other intermediaries to gauge their response.

Thanks.

[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.

Thanks,Debbie

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,

Until Mayor Bloomberg took charge of the city's schools, student performance had been all but stagnant for decades. Now, because of the first phase of the Children First school reforms the Mayor and the Chancellor have enacted, New York City's students are making real progress. Thousands more students are graduating and the New York City graduation rate is higher than it's been in more than 20 years.

Students' progress in reading and math is now outpacing gains in the rest of New York State.
But our schools are still not serving all New York City children as they must.

For the sake of our children, we need to act. And we need to act now. If we don't take the smart next steps the Bloomberg administration has outlined, we risk failing the children of New York City. That's a price that we are not willing to pay.

The reforms make sense. Schools need the authority and the resources to build the right educational program for every child, and to ensure that they're getting the job done, they must be held accountable for their students' academic success in all subject areas from math and reading to the arts and science. Schools also must be funded fairly.

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.

Sincerely,

You Ask, We Get the Answers: More Info on “Children First” Game

March 15, 2007 (GBN News): Since we broke the story, GBN News has been inundated with inquiries about the prospective new Parker Brothers game, “Children First: A Game of Irony”, based on the NY City school system. (See previous GBN News article, “A New Game in Town”, March 10). The game has been shrouded in more secrecy than a DOE planning meeting, but one of our intrepid reporters has somehow been able to get hold of cards and a board from a prototype of the game. The game apparently comes with a warning informing users that the entire game is subject to reorganization and may become obsolete shortly after you buy it. However, owners of the computer version can download updates for what is termed a “nominal cost overrun”.

Following are a few examples of cards and board spaces from the game (players must amass “test points” to win):

• The school you are principal of scores in the bottom 10% of your district. Lose 100 test points and your job

• The school you are principal of scores in the top 10% of the district. Gain 100 test points but lose your job on the next turn for failure to meet higher expectations

• You must choose a “Learning Support Organization”. Whichever one you choose, lose 250 test points

• Go To Rubber Room. Go directly to Rubber Room. If you pass Go collect $200 but lose an indefinite number of turns

• Your 5 year old is given a Metro Card instead of a school bus. Lose one turn while Child Protective Service investigates you for endangering your child

• Your school bus route is cancelled: You cannot get to school, lose 100 test points

• You score “below standards” on your standardized tests. Lose 100 test points and a turn while you repeat the grade. Teacher and principal lose 200 points each for “leaving you behind”

• Cell phone confiscated. You cannot contact your parents when your train breaks down. Lose two turns while you wander the streets trying to find your way home

• Your class has 40 students. Teacher confuses you with the student in the next seat. Lose 50 test points

• ARIS computer is down. Each player loses a turn

• “Get Out of Jail Free”: If you are a Tweed administrator you also receive 500 bonus points and a job offer at a high priced consulting firm with a lucrative DOE no-bid contract

• “Take a ride on the Reading First Railroad”. Lose a turn, the train already left

• Free Parking: Pay $250 fine for failure to dig your car out of the ice by the school. You didn’t think parking would really be free, did you?

• “Just Visiting”: The Mayor skips this space. He doesn’t do visits; he’s in Florida

• Advance token to the nearest “failing school”. If unowned, you can buy it from the DOE and turn it into a charter school.

A version of the game will also be available based on the St. Louis school district. The St. Louis version is similar to the New York game but if you land on the space labeled “Alvarez and Marsal”, you go bankrupt and have to start all over again.

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.