GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools

Concerns, criticisms dominate at Contracts for Excellence public hearing

<i>Photo by p_a_h</i>

Photo by p_a_h

Elected officials, teachers, and parents offered up a litany of concerns about the DOE’s proposed Contracts for Excellence — regarding both their content and the process by which they were developed — last night at the final public hearing in Manhattan.

The hearing, chaired by Terence Tolbert, executive director of the DOE’s Department of Intergovernmental Affairs (and soon to direct Obama’s Nevada campaign), was well-attended by representatives from numerous organizations, including ACORN, Class Size Matters, the Coalition for Educational Justice, the Alliance for Quality Education, the City Council, school level PTAs, the UFT, and others.

Legally, Contracts for Excellence funding must “supplement, not supplant” existing spending; several speakers expressed concerns that the money will be spent to close holes in the budget rather than create or expand programs. Others worried that the new funding would be used to make up losses due to budget cuts in low-performing schools, rather than expanding services for high-needs children in those schools. Complicating these issues, several speakers noted, the plan includes little oversight of whether principals spend the Contracts for Excellence money as intended.

A series of speakers addressed the effect of Contracts for Excellence spending on class size reduction, often drawing their points from Leonie Haimson’s “40 reasons why NY state should reject the city’s Contracts for Excellence proposal.” Speakers argued that without oversight and support, schools would not actually reduce class sizes, as was the case in half of schools that received special funds to reduce class size last year; that the collaborative team teaching (CTT) model in special education was not designed to be a class size reduction strategy, as it is being used; and that without alignment between the DOE’s class size and capital plan, it will be impossible for principals to reduce class size when no new classroom space is available.

Several speakers noted that last year, thousands of students who dropped out or were discharged during the year were included in measures of class size reduction at the secondary level. City Council member Rosie Mendez, who represents parts of districts 1 and 2, suggested that class size should be measured early in the school year to avoid this problem

Several speakers pointed out that the plan provides no examples of model programs for English Language Learners, and that few schools chose this funding option, and others mentioned that the Contracts for Excellence funding ought not to be spent on the DOE’s Leadership Academy, which has previously been privately funded and has not been independently evaluated as effective.

The contracts process also received attention. Speakers raised concerns that principals and school leadership teams had too little time to determine how to use the Contracts for Excellence funding when writing their Comprehensive Education Plans this spring. Ilene Feliciano Quinn, a teacher at PS 38, suggested that SLTs should have an opportunity in the fall to review and revise the Contracts for Excellence spending at their schools. Others said while they appreciated the new information released by the DOE before this round of public hearings, it was released far too close to the hearing dates, giving the public too little time to appraise the new plan.

  • Ira

    Went to the one in the Bronx (thanks to this blog). It took place in a hot auditorium, with fans ineffectively roaring in the background.
    Turnout was disappointing; fewer than 10 people showed up- a couple of UFT representatives, a parent and some teachers.

    Even with the small turnout, however, the speakers addressed many of the same issues, with several speaker touching on the fuzzy math around class size reduction. Concerns were raised about the emphasis on CTT classes, and a couple of people expressed concern about the timing of the budget process. I used the “40 reasons” article to make a statement about class size reduction and the failure of the C4E to address these goals in a real way.
    Comments were also made as to how this hearing was publicized.

  • JG

    How does the city claim that the C4E funds were supplemental when non C4E schools were given allocations to match in tax levy dollars. For example Brooklyn Tech was given over 1,000,000 in tax levy dollars upon the conclusion of budget negotiations to zero out the original budget cuts. C4e schools were given C4e dollars to zero out their budget cuts. See here :http://schools.nyc.gov/offices/d_chanc_oper/budget/dbor/allocationmemo/fy08_09/FY09_PDF/sam04.xls

    This chart shows you how C4e dollars were not EXTRA or supplemental becuae non c4e schools were given extra dollars to mztch.

    PLUS! c4e dollars have less spending powe then tax levy dollars. When you spend c4e dollars, schools are charged a fringe that reduces spending power by nearly 50%

Tips, questions, feedback?

Contact us at .

Follow GothamSchools

RSS

Feb. 10: You’re invited!

Chalk It Up

Recent Comments

26 comments so far today

Our Twitter Updates

  • Conflict of Interest Board "could have lost the power to enforce the City’s ethics law against all unionized employees of the City." 34 mins ago
  • Tenured teachers and principals can now be fined by the city's ethics board, a judge ruled today. Previously, only DOE could fine violators. 36 mins ago
  • As closure votes for 23 schools near, we mapped all the city schools that have closed or could soon close: http://t.co/Uv26t1tA 3 hrs ago
  • 13 statistical tables from the city's Independent Budget Office about the schools up for closure tonight: http://t.co/kPYikzgj 6 hrs ago
  • @Charter411 We are always happy to write updated stories when we get substantively new information from the city or anyone else. 6 hrs ago
  • More updates...

Archives

February 2012
M T W T F S S
« Jan  
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
272829  
?>