Showing posts with label special needs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label special needs. Show all posts

Sunday, March 1, 2020

Testimonies of three mothers, speaking about how their children have been affected by the unacceptably large classes in city schools

The testimonies of parents, educators and advocates at the class size hearings at City Hall on Friday were so powerful that I am going to post many of them on this blog.  Here is video of the proceedings -- nearly six hours.  The hearings would have lasted even longer if many of the parents who wanted to testify hadn't been shut out because the room was too crowded. Here's an article about the hearings from Chalkbeat.

Below are the heartbreaking statements of three mothers, Alexa Aviles, Emily Hellstrom, and Naila Rosario. None of these their children were served adequately because of the unacceptably large classes in the city's public schools.

The plight of English language learners is also mentioned in Alexa Aviles' testimony, who asked, can you imagine such a child in a class of 32? It would be like trying to learn in Times Square on New Year's Eve.








Wednesday, August 22, 2018

Success Academy eliminating one fourth of their 12-1-1 classes for special needs students this year

In June, I was contacted by two parents whose fifth-grade special needs children were in a self-contained 12-1-1 class at Success Academy Bed Stuy middle school. They told me how the principal, Rishabh Agarwal, had brought them individually into his office and told them that the school was getting rid of their 12-1-1 self-contained program, because the school didn’t know how to educate kids with special needs and it was too difficult to find a certified special education teacher. 
He said their only two choices were to agree to have their kids held back in a regular 5th grade class or transfer them to a different school outside the Success charter network of 46 schools.
I contacted two attorneys with experience in special education, who told me that if their IEPs mandated a 12-1-1 class the school could not legally get rid of the program, but neither parent wanted to sue.  Neither did they want their children to be held back, since they’d been held back already at least once already by Success and felt that their children’s records did not merit being retained once again.  I asked the two parents to email the principal to confirm their story, and to copy Eva Moskowitz.   
A few weeks later, I checked back with the parents, and they told me their emails had not been responded to by anyone at the network.  They put me in touch with a third parent who confirmed their story -- that the entire class of fifth graders had essentially been driven out of the school, and the parents had received no help from Success in finding a new school.
I then contacted Ellen McHugh of the Citywide Council of Special Education for advice.  She contacted the special education office at the NYC Department of Education to ask them if they knew about this; and they did not.  (The DOE’s Committee on Special Education is officially in charge of overseeing all special education students, including those enrolled at NYC charter schools, to ensure that they are receiving their mandated services.)
The DOE must have then contacted Success to ask them what was going on, because the next day, the parents received calls from different administrators at the school.  One parent was now offered a seat for her son in a 12-1-1 class at a Success Academy Middle school in Ditmas Park, many miles away from her home– though he would still be held back, even though he was reading at grade level and had received 71.1% on his report card for the year.   
According to Success’s account in an article in today’s Politico Pro, five out of the ten children in the class were going to be held back.  Of the five students that Success had decided could move forward, they were offered a seat in a 12-1-1 class at a school even further away – Success Academy Midtown West in Manhattan. Here is the explanation offered by Success officials to the Politico reporter, Madina Touré:  
Success told POLITICO that five of the 10 students in the 12:1:1 class were held back, which would have resulted in five students in a fifth-grade 12:1:1 class and five students in a 12:1:1 sixth-grade class. The network, Success said, does not have the space, teachers or funds to offer classes with five students each.
Success said that the school did not have a 12:1:1 class in the fourth grade last year because its schools go from kindergarten to fourth grade and then fifth grade to eighth grade.
Success also said that students are supposed to be educated in the "least restrictive environment," noting that an 8:1 or 6:1 class "is considered more restrictive than a 12:1:1."
The network offered the sixth-graders the option of a seat at Success Academy Midtown West in Manhattan in a 12:1:1 classroom or to stay at Bed-Stuy 1 in an Integrated Co-Teaching classroom — classes led by two teachers that combine special education students with general education students who need extra help.
The fifth-graders were offered a seat in a 12:1:1 classroom at Success Academy Ditmas Park Middle School in Brooklyn or an ICT classroom at Bed-Stuy 1. Eight of the 10 students are enrolled at Unity Prep, Success said.
First, these kids were not offered a seat in any 12-1-1 class until DOE interceded with Success and blew the whistle.  Second, most 12-1-1 classes feature mixed grades, so this makes little sense as an explanation. 
More likely, Success officials decided to get rid of this class because it was too hard to find a qualified teacher, as the principal had told the parents, and these students had likely brought the school’s test scores down in any case. 
The principal, Rishabh Agarwal, refused to comment to Politico and is no longer working at Success.  According to his LinkedIn profile, he is now attending Harvard Business School, which suits his resume since before being hired as an “analyst” and administrator at Success, his only previous work experience was as stock analyst at a brokerage house in Chicago.
On May 30, 2018, just a few days before the parents at Bed Stuy Middle school were told to find a new school for their children, Charles Sahm of the Manhattan Institute wrote the sort of glowing account of Success Academy for The 74 that is usual for that news site, funded by a typical array of pro-privatization foundations, including Gates, Walton and Bloomberg, as well as Jon Sackler, whose family made their fortune off Oxycontin. 
This piece, later reprinted on the Manhattan Institute website, focused on the network’s results with kids with disabilities, and more specifically with students in their 12-1-1 programs.  Sahm reported that “This year, Success has 24 self-contained classes serving 288 students…. when students need that level of support, the network seeks space in one of its 17 schools offering 12:1:1.”
Hmm.  Success told Madina Touré, the Politico reporter, that next year they will have “18 12:1:1 classes at 13 different Success schools” so it appears that they are eliminating one fourth of all their 12:1:1 classes in one year, at four of their schools – even though the total number of Success charter schools and students is still expanding fast.
It can’t be for lack of space; as we know from DOE that there are more than 3,000 empty seats in Success charter schools in Brooklyn alone.  I wonder where all the other students who were attending 12-1-1 classes will attend school next year. (If you are a parent of one of these children, feel free to contact me at info@classsizematters.org)
Sahm went on to explain how well these Success students in 12-1-1 classes do on the state exams:
Of Success students with special needs, 82 percent scored proficient in math and 60 percent in English. Success reports that even among its students with moderate to severe learning disabilities — those assigned to self-contained classrooms with other students who have learning disabilities — 54 percent scored proficient in math and 32 percent in English. Astonishingly, Success students in self-contained classrooms outperformed both district and charter school math proficiency averages.
Now that one knows how they achieved these high test scores by carefully winnowing out high-needs students, these results do not seem so miraculous after all.
Sahm then quoted Julie Freese, who oversees Success’s special education efforts: “Success staffs its 12:1:1 and ICT classrooms with lead teachers experienced in special education. ‘We put our best teachers with our most vulnerable students,’ she notes.”
One of the parents told me that a woman named Karen Wade was the lead teacher of her child’s 12-1-1 class last year at Success Bed Stuy middle school.  I looked Wade up on the state website for certified teachers – and she isn’t listed, meaning she had no kind of teaching certification, no less one in special education.   Then I found her profile at Linked in.  
According to her profile, Karen Wade graduated from Brooklyn College with a BS in psychology in 2015, was a sales assistant at H & M and Saks department stores for several years, then an administrative assistant for three months at Nazareth Regional high school, a parochial school in Brooklyn. 
She had no teaching experience of any kind when she was hired as the lead teacher in March 2017 for the 12-1-1 class at Success Academy.  So if her class of students wasn’t progressing to the extent that Eva Moskowitz wanted, perhaps it wasn’t the fault of the students but a result of the inadequate teaching and training at her school.
Unfortunately most of the article is behind a paywall, but below is the excerpt featured in Politico Morning newsletter.  Also be sure to check out yesterday’s Chalkbeat account of the abusive treatment of students at the sole Success Academy high school, where “28 out of about 300 students were sent back to an earlier grade, some moving back to eighth grade after starting high school” and only 18 of the 67 faculty and staff are expected to return this year.   That piece ends with Eva Moskowitz proclaiming to the students, "I could have said, look, I’m going to throw in the towel...I didn’t abandon you. I’m here.”  In the case of these special needs students, they weren't so fortunate.  And check out the latest news about a lawsuit by parents of special needs children kicked out of Success Academy Fort Greene elementary school, which a federal judge recently ruled could go forward.
------
SUCCESS NIXED SPECIAL ED CLASS, PARENTS SCRAMBLE — POLITICO's Madina Touré: "A Success Academy middle school in Brooklyn will eliminate a certain special education class this school year, said parents of fifth graders in the class who were informed of the news at the end of last year and told they would need to find other schools or be held back. The move has renewed scrutiny of special education services at Success, with state and federal law offering different interpretations as to whether the network is legally required to offer the class. It is also contributing to a narrative among charter critics that the schools cherry-pick students to boost their performance numbers.
Parents of fifth graders at Success Academy Bed-Stuy Middle School said that, in June, they were informed that there would no longer be a 12:1:1 class — 12 students, one teacher and one paraprofessional — at the school. The school's 12:1:1 class had 10 students, according to Success. The parents said that the school's principal at the time, Rishabh Agarwal, told them that it was too hard to find qualified teachers. Initially, they said, the school told them that the students would have to either leave the school or be held back in a fifth grade general education class. The group Class Size Matters intervened, contacting the city's Department of Education in July. Success, they said, reached out to the families again this month.
"This is a technique that many people have reported on that is a way to persuade parents to take their kids out of Success — that they threaten to hold them back, but they repeatedly hold them back," said Leonie Haimson, founder and executive director of the group. One of the parents, Jinnel, who asked that only her first name be used, said that the principal informed her that her daughter would have to repeat the fifth grade — which she said was frustrating given that her daughter had already repeated first grade when she started at Success.
"I found that [that] was really unfair because at the time, school was about to close," she said, expressing disappointment over the move. "It's a shame because every year, we go to the rallies. We supported these people and to get this kind of news, it's terrible." Read more here.

Saturday, October 1, 2011

Karen Sprowal: My question and Prof. Noguera's response at MisEducation Nation


For more on the MisEducation Nation forum, held Sept. 27 with Diane Ravitch, Pedro Noguera, Brian Jones, and Leonie Haimson, sponsored by FAIR, see Julie Cavanagh’s report, GothamSchools article, and Peter Murphy of the NY Charter Schools Association.  Here is video of the entire forum; which was excellent.  Michael Fiorello asked a question to Pedro Noguera about his role in authorizing charter schools at 1hr 12 minutes in, and Karen’s question to Noguera and his response are at 1hr 26 minutes in.
There has been a lot of controversy raised about my question to Prof. Pedro Noguera and his response at the MisEducation Nation forum on Tuesday night.  I would like to clarify the issues as I see them.
My son, Matthew, was kicked out of Kindergarten in the fall of 2008 at the Harlem Success Charter.  It took a long time for me and Matthew to get over this experience, and for me to feel comfortable talking about it, but our story was recently documented in an article in the NY Times and further described by me on this blog
Eva Moskowitz has confirmed to the Times that my son was indeed asked to leave, as her school couldn’t “serve” him properly.  He was kicked out along with three other little Kindergarten boys the first few weeks of school. After the article about Matthew appeared in the Times, I have heard from many other parents whose children have suffered a similar fate at her schools.
I have since learned that this particular charter, along with most all the other ones in the Success charter chain, were  authorized and are supposed to be overseen by the SUNY charter committee, which is headed by Prof. Pedro Noguera of NYU.  I also learned that Prof. Noguera has made many comments about the need to hold charter schools accountable for just this sort of behavior.
For example, in an article that appeared in the West Side Spirit last year, about the controversy over putting a new Success charter school into the Brandeis HS building, questions were raised about whether these charters pushed out kids, and Prof. Noguera said that he didn’t believe that this practice had occurred at any of the Success charters:
Success’ critics almost invariably make the claim that the schools force or encourage children with learning disabilities or academic problems to leave the school in an effort to pump up the test scores—but there does not appear to be much evidence to support the accusation….Even Pedro Noguera, an education professor at New York University....said the accusation looks to be bogus.“I think it’s true of some charters, but I don’t think it’s true of hers,” said Noguera… Noguera, who thinks it may be a good thing if other schools feel competition from the new charter, said the Harlem academies do a great job helping students with individual needs and “are the best charters in the city.” 
Then in May, in an article in GothamSchools, Prof. Noguera said that if any charter school pushed out kids, it should be held accountable:

It really concerns me when I see that there’s some evidence that some of the charters are screening kids and have adopted measures to either screen or to push out students that are more challenging to serve,” Noguera said. “Because it’s creating this very unequal playing field between the charters and the public schools. So I think that the authorizers and the state need to be more vigilant in holding those schools accountable.”
So at the forum, I asked Prof. Noguera that if he thought that authorizers needed to be more “vigilant in holding those schools accountable,” as head of the committee that authorized the school that pushed out my child and many others, what he would do about it.
That’s when he responded that every five years, when the charter comes up for re-authorization, they will look at the attrition data.  First of all, it is very hard to track attrition, because the school doesn’t accurately report how many kids leave and enter the school each year.  But more importantly, I don’t think this reflects a properly “vigilant” attitude on his part.  He and the other authorizers shouldn’t sit back and wait five years, when kids are being hurt every day.
His other comments were no more reassuring.  He said DOE schools push out kids just as much as charters, which is not the experience I have had with Matthew’s new school.  To the contrary, they have been patient and wonderfully supportive, and given him extra help he needed to thrive, despite his ADHD.  Also, Prof. Noguera’s claim that he authorizes “high performing” charters is not relevant either, if they are “high performing” as a result of screening out and pushing out children like my son.
At the beginning of the forum, Prof. Noguera had also said that he cares about promoting more integration in our schools, and I agree.  But it is well-known that charters lead to more segregation – the opposite direction that we should be moving towards as a city.
When I spoke to him after the event, he smiled and nodded his head, but I didn’t get the sense that he was taking my concerns seriously. I went into more detail about how after winning the lottery for Harlem Success Academy,  Matthew was screened, deemed defective and kicked out of the school, all of this happening within his first month of school. Did he have any idea what this does emotionally to an at-risk five year old black boy in this society? Prof. Noguera didn’t seem to care or want to hear from me about this, even though I have saved a meticulous paper trail, revealing solid evidence of the practices used by this charter chain to “cherry pick.”
I shared with him that Eva Moskowitz had personally emailed to me to say that “HSA will not be good fit for my son,” but when I refused to take Matthew out, and requested a non-punitive educational plan for my son, we were treated in a manner that was reprehensible and illegal. Prof. Noguera graciously smiled, briefly listened and brushed me off again!
Even though I found a great public school for my son after he was pushed out, I think more of us need to be angry about how many children like my son Matthew are being marginalized and victimized by the charter school movement. When your actions and policies hurt children, especially those most at risk – it feels extremely personal!
There are now nine Success Academies, all co-located in NYC public school buildings, with three more authorized by SUNY, opening in 2012. As the chief authorizer for the Success Academy network, I wanted to know whether Prof. Noguera would hold Eva Moskowitz accountable. It was a fair question that deserved a direct answer.  And in his way, he gave it, and the answer was no.  As a black single parent, living in poverty, with a special needs son, I am offended. -- Karen Sprowal

Sunday, July 10, 2011

“My special child, pushed out of Kindergarten at a NYC charter school"

Here is the story of Karen Sprowal and her son Matthew, that Mike Winerip of the NY Times writes about here. While charter schools have advertised themselves as open to all students through random lotteries, many have been shown to enroll relatively few numbers of special needs children and English language learners, and to have high rates of student attrition.  The charter school described below is a member of the Success Academy chain, the fastest growing chain in NYC.  Its rapid expansion has been enthusiastically supported by the DOE, and by their authorizer, the NY State University Board of Trustees, whose charter committee is headed  by Prof. Pedro Noguera.  There are currently seven Success Academies, all co-located in NYC public school buildings, with two more planned for the fall, and three more authorized by SUNY to open in NYC in 2012. 
If you have had similar experiences with a charter school as this parent, and would like to share them either on or off the record, please contact Karen at katherine_sprowal_cucs@yahoo.com and/or Leonie at leonie@classsizematters.org
This is a mother’s personal story about having child with different needs “counseled out” of a NYC charter school. It’s also testimony of how inclusion, a smaller class size, and the supportive attitude of a great public school made an astounding difference in my son’s life. My name is Katherine Sprowal and I’m the mother of a delightfully spirited and rambunctious son whose name is Matthew. Like most children his age, he’s a vision of pure joy and enthusiasm: often bursting with energy to play all day, every day! 

We live in the Washington Heights area of Manhattan. Back in 2008, both of our zoned schools were listed as “failing.” About a year prior to Matthew entering Kindergarten, we embarked upon a journey of securing an elementary school placement for him. I began my search with help from Early Steps, an organization that assist minority parents through the private schools admission and application process. As suggested we applied to about ten different private schools. To my dismay, Matthew was not accepted to any of the schools and was placed on the wait list for only two of them. 

I had no backup plan for school options except the neighborhood “failing” schools. I then recalled meeting a woman a year prior at a “School Choice” fair in a Harlem church. Her name was Eva Moskowitz. Not knowing who she was or her political background, we engaged in a conversation, as two parents expressing our thoughts about the lack of quality school choices. She then began to promote the charter school she founded, Harlem Success Academy. She explained how it came out of her own personal frustration as mother with no quality public school choices for her own children. She was most impressive in her presentation and argued that minorities need public school choices.  She went on to convincingly state how HSA and other charter schools were  filling that gap. She then asked if I would mind being interviewed by a media crew present at this fair and I happily agreed. 

My neighborhood was saturated with mailings, bus ads and pamphlets about Harlem Success Academy. I applied just in time for her lottery deadline. Matthew won the lottery and was accepted to Harlem Success Academy #4.  We learned of this news with great fanfare at the lottery drawing event held at the Armory on 142nd street.  This lottery received huge attention; both then-Gov. Paterson and much of the media were there. I ran into Eva at the event and she remembered us, we embraced in a hug and she shared in our pleasure from Matthew’s win. Matthew and I continued to be videotaped straight through to the August parent HSA orientation.

Shortly after this, we attended a mandated orientation and signed all required contract agreements, which included provisions stating that that parents had to respond within 24 hours to any request from the school, they had to purchase costly school uniforms, and children had to complete summer homework assignments. At the meeting, Eva also told us that because all the local elected officials were against charter schools, parents would be expected to attend hearings in support of the school.

Matthew and I couldn’t wait for the first day of school. One day prior, we were given a choice to attend Harlem Success Academy #3 as another Kindergarten class was being added, so it would be a smaller class size. So we changed schools to HSA#3.  On August 28, 2008, Matthew attended his first day of school, gleaming with excitement. Yet on the very first day, he was held back in detention for not walking through the halls in an orderly manner. I thought this was a bit harsh for a five year old, but understood that self-discipline was a major part of HSA model. 

During the first week of school, I noticed immediately how HSA classes were fully stocked with educational supplies and how nice and shiny their classrooms were in comparison to the existing public school space, which appeared dingy and dark. I thought to myself that it seemed a bit odd for HSA to share a building with another school, but never common areas of the building at the same time. The students didn’t eat, play in the yard or even use the same stairs together. I wondered what negative psychological effects this could have on students at both schools. I felt privileged to have my son in HSA and embarrassed all at once. I was anxious to meet the HSA and co-located parent reps to discuss these issues. I was also curious as to why parents didn’t appear to be welcome beyond the HSA entrance doors during drop off and pick-up. I had to literally force myself into the HSA school area during school hours the first couple of days of school. 

When I did, I noticed that the HSA school staff and children didn’t seem to laugh or smile much. I couldn’t help notice there were none of the typical sounds of laughter one would expect to hear in an elementary school. The atmosphere appeared sterile, militaristic and robotic, as the children walked the halls in silence. There were many other things that raised an eyebrow and gnawed at my gut as “not right,” but I quickly dismissed them because “We won the HSA lottery.” I was reassured that the physical appearance of the school and academic mode seemed to resemble a few of the prestigious private schools we had previously visited.  Additionally, Eva and other faculty enrolled their own children along with Matthew. I was certain all my concerns had reasonable explanations and my questions would be answered by Eva directly or by the PTA at a later time. 

Unfortunately, I would soon learn there were no HSA PTA and no meetings with parents at the co-located school. It became clear that parental input was not welcome, supported or encouraged in any meaningful manner. I would later observe students at the existing school taunting and teasing the HSA students whenever they briefly crossed paths. How could they not target the HSA students to express their opposition to the “separate and unequal” practices they internalized and witnessed daily? 

Matthew continued to be held in detention frequently for one reason or another over the next few days. I wasn’t too concerned about it until it was apparent he was no longer excited about attending HSA. He began to have frequent emotional meltdowns before going to school and complained of stomachaches. He became increasingly anxious about school work and not being able to behave as his teachers wanted him to.  This was known as going “Beyond Z.”,   a widely used HSA motto meaning that students should behave like little soldiers, work hard and keep quiet. After about a week of this, the principal blatantly stated my son was “not performing at the school’s social expectations.” She said he had poor interpersonal skills, was un-focused and disruptive to the teacher and the entire class. 

In response, I pointed out that he was only five years old, and had spent the last three years in a nursery with a Montessori philosophy – a very different setting. I asked for her patience and time for him to make the transition. I then offered to shadow him in class for a few days.  She was reluctant, but agreed to my request. My presence helped provide Matthew with some of the emotional support and the security he was seeking. But by mid-day he often became fidgety, agitated and just wanted to move around and play. The school psychologist told me she had to fight to have them put a tiny play area and provide play time in the Kindergarten classrooms.

There were three other children exhibiting the same behaviors as Matthew, all African-American boys. They were assigned seats together, separate from the rest of the class as though they were contagious. By the second week, additional HSA staff began coming into the class in shifts to observe my son and the other boys in his group. The staff sat quietly in the back of the room and wrote notes. One by one, all these other boys left the school, without any explanation, over a period of two weeks. I have no idea if their parents fought for them to remain as I continued to do with Matthew, but within a few days from the beginning of school, they had already been marked as not HSA material. 

By the third week, it became apparent that the school had deemed Matthew as defective and unapologetically wanted him gone. I outright refused to comply with the principal’s request for me to transfer my son to another school.   I told her it was not an option for us. I said that Matthew and I both felt threatened, unwelcome and that were being unfairly forced out of the school.  The following day I was told that I could no longer shadow my son in school. She stated that if his behavior was not corrected within a few days he would be suspended. Not knowing what my rights were as a parent, or if indeed Matthew required additional support, I continued as best I could to work with him to avoid any further disciplinary action from the school. I suggested half days for him through this transition, which they agreed to.

They proceeded to call home for him to be picked up within an hour of being dropped off at school over the next few days. On the third day of one of these pick up calls, the principal informed me that he was being suspended for disruptive behavior and not respecting another student’s personal space. The principal then scheduled Matthew for psychological testing, without any prior discussion, or my input, notice or consent. I only found out when a message was left on my voicemail to pick him up later than the regular dismissal time that school officials had scheduled him for psychological testing that day. 

In response, I sent a written complaint to the principal that challenged his suspension and for scheduling this testing without my consent. I sent copies to Eva Moskowitz and the HSA board of directorsEva responded to my complaint directly via email and assigned her administrative assistant to sit in meetings with myself, the principal and school psychologist. We had two formal meetings and HSA remained consistent and adamant that Matthew must leave the school. They insisted he was incapable of learning and behaving appropriately in a HSA school setting. I remained adamant in my position as well, and that transferring him to another school would not be an option. I explained that the way that they had dealt with us was insensitive and dismissive. I was not going to permit any further negative consequences due to their failure to follow the appropriate procedures.   

Yet Matthew’s awareness of not being wanted in the school and being scapegoat as the “bad kid” perpetuated his challenging behaviors. The HSA school psychologist wrote on September 22 that "Matthew has the intelligence and desire to learn. However, he is beginning to develop a negative sense of himself and is in danger of seeing himself as bad and a failure. It is very important that Matthew enter a school situation where he feels supported and successful…Matthew may need a smaller classroom than his current school has available.”

On the day of my third planned meeting with HSA, on the ride to school Matthew looked up at me and asked Mommy, is today the day that HSA is going fire me?” He recently learned the definition of this word as I had recently been laid off from a job I’d had for ten years. I realized at that moment the only real successful outcome had to be for Matthew to feel good about school and good about himself again. His emotional well being and happiness was the most important issue. 

I attended that final meeting and negotiated that HSA would transfer him to a public school of my choice that day. They eagerly accommodated me to the extent of arranging that he would be placed in a school outside his zone, at PS 75 in District 3, on the Upper West Side. Despite my best effort to advocate and protect my son, Matthew left HSA crushed, thinking he was an unwanted “bad child.”  A milestone period that should have laid the foundation to foster a lifetime of learning had the complete opposite effect. The ugly truth that our personal experience at HSA revealed is that this charter school is purposely designed to exclude!   

Matthew now attends the inclusive Emily Dickinson Public School 75. The principal, the guidance counselor, teachers, schools aides and support staff took the time to go above and beyond to make learning fun again for Matthew. They embraced his imagination and need to be active completely!  On his most difficult days they showed him more love and gave “us” increased support. They do this each and every day with every child, no matter how they learn or where they come from.  The principal Mr. O’Brien personally spent hours with my son and me, because he wanted to know who we were and what I thought would be needed for Matthew to thrive. They encouraged and welcomed my partnership, to ensure that my son would be happy and could achieve his full academic potential.

After a rough second year, they recognized that a smaller CTT class setting of 18 students with two teachers might be more conducive for his temperament and style of learning. And they were right!!!  Matthew will be entering the third grade in the fall with academic evidence that inclusion and class size does matter. He has done exceptionally well this year and has exceeded all academic expectations. 

In addition, the school has provided us with helpful referrals like the Boys Scouts of America and St Luke’s family services, for on-going comprehensive support. This is a school that unites communities rather than divides them and has opened their arms to me and my son.  With the help of P.S. 75 principal, teachers and support staff, Matthew and I have moved forward. But I have not forgotten about this awful start to his academic career.  I also hope that those other little boys who were separated from the rest of the class the first few days of school along with Matthew were as lucky as we were in finding a public school that would help them succeed.     

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

Save the date! Citywide parent conference on April 10


On Saturday, April 10, Class Size Matters will be sponsoring a citywide parent conference, with workshops on running effective Parent Associations and School Leadership Teams; toxic schools; how to reach out to the media; how to advocate for your special needs child, the rights and responsibilities of Community Education Councils, Title one issues, and more.
Click on the image to the left or here for a flyer you can post in your school.
The theme of the conference is "Building Bridges with Charter School parents" and one of the panels will be dedicated towards this goal. More on this soon.
The conference will be held at School of the Future on 127 E. 22 St; please come!