Post a comment about the budget cuts at your school on our interactive comment map. more »
GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools
the big squeeze
November 12, 2008
Pushed to relocate, Center School parents put up a fight
This flier, which disparages Center School Principal Elaine Schwartz, appeared on the building's fence and around the neighborhood.
A tiny middle school on the Upper West Side that has flown under the radar for much of its 26-year history has become the object of intense scrutiny in recent weeks as its principal and parents threaten to derail the neighborhood’s plans to alleviate overcrowding.
A plan proposed last week by the Community Education Council for District 3 would require the school to move from its longtime home to a larger space several blocks away. That plan, and the Department of Education’s response to it, will be the topic of a CEC 3 meeting tonight.
But Center School Principal Elaine Schwartz has opposed relocating since the DOE originally suggested the idea in September, and the school’s loyal parents have lined up behind her.
“We are totally unified,” parent Alan Madison told me. “When it comes to the education of our children, we listen to [Schwartz].”
Schwartz, the 26-year-old school’s founding principal, told the New York Times last week that she opposed a move under any circumstances.
As Schwartz and her school have dug their feet in, tension has wracked the PS 199 building on West 70 Street, where the Center School is the sole occupant of the top floor.
PS 199 parents say they can’t figure out why the Center School is so intent on staying in a too-small space, and parents zoned for PS 199 have mobilized to support CEC 3’s plan, which would guarantee their children a kindergarten seat next year.
For their part, Center School parents are lobbying just as hard to oppose the plan. They have dutifully shown up for every CEC meeting since the rezoning process began; the school’s Web site calls for “a sea of Center School parents” to sit front and center at tonight’s public CEC meeting.
The tension has at times gotten ugly: Someone posted fliers that called Schwartz a “principal/dictator” on the fence around the building. And Center School parents charge that racism and class prejudices are behind the move to evict their school, citing postings from last January on the gossipy Web site Urban Baby that called Center School students “thugs.” (PS 199, a zoned school, is two-thirds white, while the Center School, which draws its students from throughout the district, is half white and has a higher proportion of black and Hispanic students.)
Center School parents say the real issue is a pragmatic one: Because moving the Center School would free up so little space, the CEC will have to revisit the space issue within a few years. “The draft proposal for the CEC does not focus on the district-wide overcrowding,” Joanna Carlovich, the school’s PTA president, told me.
A superior solution, parents say, would be to move Anderson to the MS 44 building, which the citywide gifted school has said it would do, and then to create a new elementary school in the free space at PS 9.
But that plan, floated informally at one meeting by a DOE official, would require PS 199 to have only two kindergarten classes next year, down from seven this fall, and those would be made up wholly of siblings of currently enrolled children. Families zoned for PS 199 consider such a plan unacceptable.
It would also prevent the overcrowding at the Center School from being relieved, but parents there aren’t worried. “Our kids learn in the hallways and we’re totally fine with it,” Madison said.
Tonight’s public meeting where CEC 3 will hear comments about the plan is sure to be charged. But if the council’s proposal becomes policy, Madison warned that Center School parents might pursue “nuclear options,” including seek a legal injunction to stop the move.
-
November 12th, 2008 5:37 pm
One thing Alan Madison frequently “forgets” to mention is that he is Elaine Schwartz’s son in law. And that Elaine Schwartz’s grandchildren attend the school where she is principal and where she chooses who gets in….oh, and the grandchildren’s best friends are “randomly” or “miraculously” also among the few accepted to Center School. All paid by my tax dollars.
-
November 12th, 2008 10:55 pm
Indeed. Here is proof that nepotism is alive and well at Center School. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=950DE7DB153FF93BA15756C0A96F948260 By the way, I attended the CEC meeting this evening at Joan of Arc. Center School parents and adminstration were disruptive, rude, and beligerant. When the CEC voted to pass their resolution for a further vote, the got up and stormed out of the room shouting “Shame on you” to the CEC. Their behavior bears a painful resemblance to that of a cult. And some parents including Cynthia Nixon brought their kids to see this. They are hardly setting a positive example for their kids and community. Shame on them.
-
November 13th, 2008 9:57 am
We were lucky and got out. We left the Center School because we found out first-hand that flying under the radar means a teacher who throws things in the classroom and another teacher who sprays children with a squirt bottle for discipline. It also means a teacher who gives handouts on historical events that are rated “PG-13″ by the source because of descriptions of graphic violence and sexual abuse of children. When we tried to address the counterproductive behavior of the teachers and the inappropriate material presented to our 10 year old, we were rebuffed and ignored. Flying under the radar means very few check’s on the director’s power.
-
November 13th, 2008 10:45 am
The numbers speak for themselves. The CEC proposal is a fair and solid one, based not on emotion, but on the facts. The choice to move Center School has nothing to do with diversity and inciting ugliness by the use of race baiting is a desperation measure. 199 parents are not racist; they simply want their children to be able to continue attending a neighborhood school. Center School, with its highly questionable admission policies, does not add diversity to 199. The schools share a building but have nothing to do with each other. People are operating from a place of self interest here, which is natural. So instead of race baiting, they should just admit that they are working in the name of self interest. At least it’s honest and doesn’t lower the level of discourse so dreadfully.
-
November 14th, 2008 9:20 am
Yeah yeah - and the head of the 199 PTA got in from out of catchment when they should not be taking kids from out of catchment because they are soooo overcrowded. And Theresa Arboleta of the CEC is related to a teacher at 199. I also love the concern of preschool parents who drag their kids 20-30 blocks away to expensive pre k and wont take a cab ten blocks to 191 or PS 9. We are all hypocrites - that is the given so why can’t we work together to find a mutual hypocritical solution.
-
November 14th, 2008 9:57 am
What astonishes me the most is how Center School can dare to call the community parents elitist when all we’re looking to do is to send our children to the public school that we’re zoned for. This is not a fight for the right to attend some privileged private school. This is a PUBLIC school. We are hard-working families, and we just want a good education for our children at the school down the block that we chose when we moved here years ago. Why are Center School parents using such bullying tactics? Why are they threatening to “end the partnership” with PS 199? It’s all so disgusting. They were given the opportunity to go to their zoned school — many of them to PS 199 in fact. Step aside and let the community continue to operate in the very same ways that you benefitted from years ago.
-
November 14th, 2008 10:22 am
I also attended the CEC meeting on Wednesday regarding District 3 overcrowding. What I can’t figure out is why 199 wants to be a big school? Where are they going to get the teachers? Aren’t we in the midst of a terrible shortage of qualified teachers? Do they have a plan on how to attract teachers as good as those they have now?
How are they going to accomodate all those extra kids in the teeny cafeteria, playground and gym? At PS 87, lunch hour is staggered with little kids eating lunch at 10:45 and bigger kids having to wait till almost 2… are they ready for that? Or do they have such deep pockets that they can undertake big capital improvements to make those spaces work for all those children. Its a cinch the DOE isn’t gonna cough up much if any funding for that.
I am also baffled by the idea that taking your kid on the bus or subway to a school is such a deal breaker. We always used that time to read, or socialize with other kids. It was fun.
What I don’t see is that this plan to move Center School offers anything but the most stopgap and shortsighted of solutions, addressing none of the needs of 199 in accomodating additional kids, save for giving them seats. If I were a 199 parent, I would be wary of increasing the size of my school, and fear that it would extract a very high price in the quality of the education there. I didn’t notice any of these issues being raised at the meeting on Wednesday. Why is that?
-
November 14th, 2008 10:44 am
The Center School folks are partly right in that distance isn’t really the issue for many prospective 199 parents. (Just as the distance between PS 199 and PS 9 isn’t really the issue for them). The fact is that 199 is a terrific school, and that 191 is not. Look at the reading and math scores of the 2 schools. Having moved into (or stayed in) the neighborhood specifically because of the school, they don’t want to suddenly face the prospect of sending their kids to an underperforming school.
In the long run, I think 199 and 191 should be combined, with all the K-2 kids in one building and all the 3-5 in the other. That would increase diversity while maintaining a connection to the leadership and resources of 199. But that plan isn’t on the table. Right now, the only choice provided was between moving the Center School (to a larger facility that has served Anderson well) or sending zoned kids to as-yet-unspecified schools. Some of which would be fine (e.g. 87) and some not (191). If the DOE plan had at least specified where kids who were capped out would be sent, there might not be as much concern over distance. Although it is infuriating to think my kid won’t be able to go to the school that I can see from my house, when we specifically chose to live in this zone for the school.
-
November 14th, 2008 1:13 pm
Note to Ms. Nixon (my fictional mom): It is hypocritical to criticize and advocate against folks who selected a specific neighborhood for a specific public school. After all, selecting a neighborhood for its school is exactly what Ms. Nixon did years ago.
[Cynthia Nixon]: I first became involved with Alliance for Quality Education when my daughter went to pre-K at P.S. 75. I visited about 7 or 8 schools in this neighborhood, and one of the reasons we moved here was because it had really great schools. I’m very pleased.
http://www.uft.org/news/issues/press/fight_city_budget/
We all have agendas, and I respect the work my mom is doing on behalf of the entire school system. But let’s not let this good work succumb to hypocrisy. That’s not very pleasing.
Leave a Reply
Mapping the Budget Cuts
9 Comments
Subscribe to comments with RSS or TrackBack