GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools

Your title from Animal Farm is so apt. This is a ridiculous situation that too few people understand.

Sharing a school building with another school always causes problems. For about 20 years, my elementary school has shared its building with “an alternative school”; this is not a special needs school, but is similar to a charter except it get all its money from the same sources as public schools and is run by the BOE/DOE.

From the beginning the District Superintendent was not honest with us about this new and then small school that was coming into our building.

At first children were chosen using a process including interviews of the children and parents. The families had to “fit the school’s mission.” Now they do a lottery, but they still want families to fit their “mission.” And if the child/family do not fit, it is strongly suggested that they find a school which will suit them better. Some of those children have been bounced to us.

They threw out furniture that was better than what we were using, and replaced it with new furniture. Now their rooms are air conditioned. In the early years of sharing the building, our 5th and 6th grade children called the alternative school “the White School.”

Each year we struggle over shared space. Each year they ask for more rooms. We even struggle over the use of shared space –gym, auditorium, playground, even lunchtimes. Guess which school wins repeatedly! 20 years ago our Chapter Leader even warned that it would be a case of the tenant eventually taking over the entire building.

Throughout the years, there have also been questions about equitable funding of the 2 schools, especially which school pays for the services which were shared, such as maintenance and shared personnel.

1) Any word on the class sizes — or the adult:student ratios — of PS 123 and HSA?

2) I would most welcome an official DOE response, an office HSA response, and an official PS 123 (as opposed to DOE) response to this excellent essay.

Brown v BofE doesn’t care HOW the segregation occured — “de facto” or “de jure” — just that it needs to be remedied. At least that’s the common understanding.

To my eye, the “segregation complained of” is about the situation, not its cause, let alone the intent thereof.

I’m sorry, but Brown v. Bd. of Ed. was about racial segregation. Segregation by economic class or academic ability has sadly always been part of the public school system, here in NYC and, I suspect, in California as well. Say what you wish about the HSA/123 situation, but there is a long history of much uglier segregation in the NYC public school system – gerrymandered school zones, district lines and “de jure” selection criteria which lead to clear racial segregation, which is not the case at HSA/123.

I also agree that your school shouldn’t have to share space with a charter, but where else should the charter be located? Also I wonder if the charter was able to do these renovations because they were able to use their resources more effectivlly? I’m not suggesting that your school doesn’t know how to use its resources, only that the charter has more flexibility in how it uses its money.

Some will say that the money for these renovations comes from outside sources such as large evil corporate philanthropies. This may be true. But, if your school was willing to embrace more outcomes based accountability, don’t you think that this money could be available to you as well? However, even if it were available would you be able to use it or would DOE be responsible for spending it. This comment is rambling so i’ll stop now.

Any public school can apply to convert to charter status, and thereby gain that same level of flexibility with spending (and, apparently, lavish monetary gifts from the evil corporations…).

Cahill,

I’m certain you’re correct about the conditions at PS 123 predating HSA’s arrival. I also agree that such conditions are emblematic of DoE dysfunction. I work in conditions that are quite possibly worse than PS 123 kids see every day, and you’re absolutely right that the DoE should correct them.

I don’t believe unions are preventing Tweed from replacing the outdated trailers at my school or others. I don’t believe unions are forcing Tweed to send kids to study in half-classrooms, closets, or corners of cafeterias, even in bathrooms, and it behooves them to remedy situations like these.

I find it unacceptable that while my school and many others are stuffed well beyond capacity, with no remedy in sight, the DoE goes out of its way to find space for charters. For neighborhood schools it’s a Catch 22. Do well and you’re filled way beyond capacity. Do poorly and you close. Have extra space and a small school or charter is quickly dispatched to take it, and perhaps take space you’re using as well.

Thank you for writing this. I think it deserves attention.

Jacob’s comment. “But, if your school was willing to embrace more outcomes based accountability, don’t you think that this money could be available to you as well?” makes it seem that somehow the school is not willing to embrace accountability outcomes when in fact they have no choice since BloomKlein is in charge of the school and pays an enormous staff of accountability people. The pro charter people love BloomKlein but somehow manage to separate the school from the people in charge of the system. Not that I accept your premise about accountability outcomes since there is no accountabilty when the outcome of BloomKlein mismanagement is kids being forced to learn in broom closets.

For some interesting accountabily watch the video on Arne Duncan’s Chicago on Ed Notes where the entire mess of 14 years of market-based mayoral control is beginning to unravel.

Ken,

Isn’t there a big controversy over testing of kindergarten kids? They may not give multiple choice standardized type tests but there are certainly tests being given to kids in grades 1 and 2.

Maybe everyone should do some research Ken. Does HSA recruit? How do they recruit? Do they have access to test scores of kids in public schools? Did they send out letters to individual homes? How many? Where did they get the list? Do they test kids before entry? What kinds of tests? Are scores (not with individual names) available for public scrutiny? Do kids who take tests in pre grade 3 get scored on a 1-4 basis? How else will the doe manage to pay bonuses and try to deny teachers tenure as they would love to do without some comparison grades?

Enough homework for now. Or you can just go to the beach, like I am.

Ken,

Yes, children in K-2 are tested. ” E-Clas” is a mandatory ELA assessment that is given twice a year and uses such scores. If a child scores on or above level, they do not have to be retested.
If you were involved in public education, you would know that.

…except, Schoolgal, that ECLAS does not report scores on a 1/2/3/4 rubric. There are six or eight successive levels, and children pass through those levels as they grow and master skills and concepts. A child could be on level 3 in one concept and level 6 in another. Again, ECLAS scores would have nothing to do with the statement Arthur passed on.

I’ve been to many of these rallies/community board meetings, etc. in my day. Many attendeed are having a visceral experience and their righteous indignation stretches the boundaries of truth. I have a hard time believing the DOE would have any mechanism by which they could give scores to a charter school to differentiate enrollment. The first people complaining would be…other charter schools!

I just answered Ken’s questions regarding testing. And yes, the students are tested for each category of E-Clas and must get re-tested on those areas they do not pass. I for one do not know how a charter gets the scores so did not comment on that. Perhaps the charter can explain that given the strong ties it has with our mayor. Or maybe it’s on the application. I wouldn’t know since I wasn’t there. But there are ways to find out scores and K-2 students are tested.

But I do know that this particular charter has been having problems keeping teachers and administrators lately. And I do feel that charters should have a working relationship with the school that houses them. But in this case, this charter did use strong-arm tactics. There was a story reported a few months back (and I would need some time to find that link) where Moskowitz blatantly stated she would have her school despite the parents objections. Not a good way to start a relationship. I do have insight on this school since I know one of the founding administrators that is well respected and still works there. Moskowitz is not very respectful to her staff, hence the revolving door. Students need consistency and experienced teachers, and teachers need respect and the ability to collaborate.

I do believe there are charters that make sure they get the cream of the crop as well as charters who only take struggling students. And those that take in struggling students also have the right to discharge them if they don’t conform to behavioral standards or make improvement. What I would like to see for NYC public schools is a system that also makes student and parental responsibility as important a factor as it is for charters. I also believe that our students shouldn’t have to learn in an environment that is crumbling. Yet the mayor does not seemed concerned with that, and that message sends a signal to students that we do not think much of you if we don’t care about the building conditions.

In a single paragraph of this piece, I reported what I heard said about test scores, and presented it as such. If what the speakers said was incorrect, I apologize. I found the assertions interesting in view of what Juan Gonalez had previously written:

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/education/2009/06/03/2009-06-03_dont_these_kids_count_too_students_at_ps_123_are_pushed_aside_for_charter_school.html

“Klein often notes that thousands of parents have applied to get their kids into the four schools Moskowitz runs.

He never mentions the well-financed marketing campaign Moskowitz has fashioned to drum up those applications. Nor does he mention that the Education Department has sponsored thousands of automated phone calls to parents in Harlem to get them to apply to Harlem Success schools – something it does for no other public schools.

Hargrove and her parents association at PS 123 organized their own recruitment campaign this year with no money and no assistance from Klein. They held four open houses for the community and persuaded 644 parents to apply to their new middle school.”

It sounds like we can all agree that the allegation that Arthur included in his post sounds a bit odd. Perhaps, though, he will let us know what we might be missing. Meanwhile, Schoolgal, thanks for your help. With your continued assistance, I might one day qualify as “involved in public education”!

Dissenter says, “This is the problem about trying to report on Harlem educational issues while sitting in Queens. I live in Queens and I stick to issues in Queens.”

Yet follows with, “The school [PS 123] is not good.”

Took a road trip Dissenter?

Ken,
It just that some of the comments here that are pro this school have made statements that are not true of public schools–like the principal should fix up the school when it’s not in the principals domain to order such repairs as new windows, new walls and floors and new bathroom fixtures. Or that K-2 students aren’t tested. They are given assessments throughout the year including E-Clas. If you truly understood our public schools, you will know that everything I have stated is true.

For instance, public schools do not have to ask parents to sign a contract. From HSA:

Harlem Success parents care deeply about their children’s success and go “Beyond Z” to achieve our common goals. Our parents and students sign “The Contract” and commit to coming to school everyday, on time, dressed in uniform, ready to learn. We are strict about attendance because to us, every minute of instruction counts. We continuously review our school schedule to be sure we are making the most efficient use of our time. We are strict about uniforms because we want all energies focused on student performance – not on who has the latest sneakers.

Yet the mayor applauds this school (see their website under “News”) but does not offer the same support for his own schools. When parents are involved, no matter the location of the school, those students do well. But have you Ken ever encountered a parent that was drunk during a meeting? Or a parent that sends their child to school late or not dressed appropriately for the weather? Did you ever see a child fall asleep in class because they are not getting enough rest at home? Or a student that curses the teacher and starts fights in the classroom?
Do you know public school teachers do not have the right to prevent a disruptive student from going on a class trip? We used to have that right, but the state said it would hurt the self-esteem of that child. Parents have the right to refuse to have their child referred even if that child is struggling and needs additional one-on-one services. Many principals that are appointed by Klein do nothing to make sure discipline is adhered to. They are more interested in test prep and getting their bonus. And the “discipline code” set forth by the DoE is a joke. The tests are so watered down, students who need additional services are not getting it because they “pass” these tests. This one test determines everything about that student and school while teacher input is not taken into consideration.

Charters don’t have these problems yet the pro-charter people seem to forget that. These problems don’t exist for them because they can pick and choose and discharge those who do not follow “the contract”. If in the next few years all schools became charters and had to deal with the realities where such contracts could not be enforced, I will bet the level of success would not be the same. So instead of looking at charters, we should look to improve the responsibility of both the student and parent the way HSA does. Only then will our schools be truly successful and teachers can get back to teaching curriculum instead of teaching tricks to pass the test or adjusting grades and implementing “seat-time credit” which they are now forced to do under “test prep”.

It’s just terrible that nobody exercises “flimsy hearsay” better than Mike Bloomberg, Joel Klein, Arne Duncan, Paul Vallas, Michelle Rhee, and the oligarchs who back them. As teachers, we know, everyday, what is “Keeping It Going” for NYC public students, and it’s not right. Many who argue against this selective, charter school, union busting movement are the parents of NYC public schoolchildren and teachers. I’d like to see a bit more digging in the research about the real reasons for the better graduation rates and state scores by the so-called researchers and journalists. Teachers get very tired of being told how to help children, educationally, by people who’ve never taught.

Thank you Patrick (and CEC1)!

This is quite disturbing.

I’m sure I’m not the only parent interested in what data about my kids is being released by DOE without my consent!

Secondly, and secondarily, who is Vanguard Direct, and what money is changing hands between DOE, Vanguard Direct, and the various charter operators? What are the rules and restrictions placed on Vanguard Direct?

Third, how many OTHER data farms does DOE deal with?

Last, what criteria exactly are being tracked and requested? Test scores? Race? Gender? Age? Parent income? Single parent? Currently enrolled school (and implicity, distance from home to school)? Years at current school? Suspensions or other disciplinary action? IEPs?

(GS sleuths, how about a story?)

There is so much meat on the table in these comments I’m going to have my cholesterol checked.

Well, even though Partrick told us about the great work Lisa Donlan did as CEC one pres, I didn’t need that info to know that if Eva Moskowitz wanted test scores from the DOE she would get it.

To Dissenter, who said from his cozy perch in Queens: “Arthur’s repeat of the test scores is total bullsh*t. Individual test scores and students names, addresses are fully protected by FERPA — not even Eva Moskowitz could just be given them by the DOE without parent consent.”

Maybe you haven’t noticed that BloomKlein have broken numerous laws, as has Moskowitz who should be charged with B&E for sending people into teachers’ classrooms to remove their stuff.

I too heard parent speakers at PS 123 rallies talk about the selective recruitment sent to certain kids. Maybe they used the term 3 and 4 instead of other numbers from ECLAS. Intake people at charters- nice term – would be able to judge potential creams from those scores, so when Ken threw that on the table it was a selective red herring.

Thus Ken, it was not me who changed the subject, but you – from the main thrust of Arthur’s article that the kids at 123 and at HSA were being treated unequally. We saw the painters go in – probably non-union — and that paint was not for the kids from 123. (See the video at Ed Noted in the side panel as we chanted “Paint the whole school.”)

Now back to Dissenter from Queens who told Arthur he should not be commenting on schools out of his borough but feels free to trash the kids and parents of a school in Harlem. Why do people chose HSA with assistant teachers in each class and small class sizes and a spruced up building with corporate money? Duh!

Tell you what. Why not join me in venturing up to PS 123 and take a tour of the facilities of that school and HSA?

By the way all you corporate donators to HSA: Did you for one minute consider giving a donation to PS 123 to close the painting gap? Bet not. Trying to improve PS 123 is not on your agenda. Union people in there and all that, you know.

In addition to personal relationships, which I’m guessing would be your answer, I’m going to take a shot as to why corporate donors are not giving to PS 123 to close the paint gap.

(1) The principal probably isn’t asking.

(2) It’s not the principal’s responsibility, after all, to make sure the learning environment is safe, orderly and bright. It’s the DOE’s!

Corporate people – those who have given a modicum of thought to leadership – would laugh at such a notion. Leaders across fields, cultures and history have known since the dawn of civilization that rules restricting authority are designed to keep people in their places, and if they want elevate their people, they need to think beyond those rules.

You could argue all day about Eva Moskowitz’s approach and tone and statements, but you can’t argue to me (or to corporate donors) that if the PS 123 principal hasn’t savvily navigated the system for paint (and I don’t know the first thing about this person or his or her history of asking for paint) then in this endlessly complex and inefficient bureaucracy, paint he or she will not get.

And by the way, DOE custodians are required to paint 1/5 of their buildings with new paint every year. There is money for that paint. How many principals use this resource strategically? How many sit down with their custodian and make a five year plan? The custodians have free rein with regard to colors and the order in which they paint things.

This issue, whether it’s about Eva Moskowitz or PS 123 or any other charter or district school, isn’t about access and fair/unfair. It’s about leadership.

Maybe corporate donors are not giving to PS 123 because they’re not allowed to. When I was the Panel for Educational Policy representative for Manhattan I met with DOE over repeated complaints of schools that had their grant requests blocked or redirected by Tweed. These were federal grants and CBO grants that had historically gone to individual schools. DOE grants staffers had decided that those grants should instead be shared with other schools or even other districts entirely. I seriously doubt that a corporate donor who went to DOE with money would be allowed to give it to a single school. And for PTAs who want to provide additional staff or programs for their schools the primary obstacle is not the unions as the DOE press office would have it but new DOE rules requiring full funding in August for anything spent in that year.

Sure, it’s easy to anonymously smear teachers and principals on a blog. Some of the commenters here should actually do what they’re accusing others of not doing: go do some research on what goes on in schools.

The heart of the issue seems to me is that America has always paid lip service to equal opportunity. That is the justification for our supposedly competitive society, free market, what have ya. The obvious divergence of the quality facilities and services between these two schools located in the same building just put into focus what is present system-wide. Charter schools must succeed and public schools must fail if the privatization of public schools on a grand scale will come into being. Note, privatization is not for my own children. They go to school in Clarkstown up in Rockland County, where Randi Weingarten was raised and went to school. Come up to the burbs and talk privatization and people will look at you like you are nuts. This is an evolving caste system.

The privatization failure will play out in the cities or poor rural areas where the parents, for the most part, are AWOL. I don’t blame the parents, as victims of economic injustice have lives such that it’s much harder to take care of business; like go to PTA meetings, etc. Thus, BloomKein and others have exploited this situation to move a privatization scheme forward.

Where’s the teachers union in all of this? On the fence would be a gratuitous way to put it. However, our union believes in nothing. It, therefore, stands for nothing. Had we been serious about class size and school closings we would have put that into contract negotiations. We haven’t. We therefore lack the support from and merit the suspicion of parents. The union supported mayoral control and the closing of large schools (by doing nothing). Sure, we have passed one meaningless resolution at the UFT Delegate Assembly after another, but it’s all lip service.

I am the UFT chapter leader at Murry Bergtraum High School. It’s the largest of the remaining large high schools in Manhattan. There once was a time I would have been proud to send my own children to that school. However, in the past 10 years all of that has changed. We at Bergtraum have witnessed Bloomberg and Klein destroy our school. Dumping large numbers of high need students on us (to make their boutique schools look good and provide a landing pad for students from other closed large high schools) without offering any additional supports. Imagine a hospital designed to handle 10% of its patients with intensive care needs. What would happen to that hospital should that percentage increase to 30 to 40% without any meaningful change in support or structure? This is what we are faced with, as well as many other schools in the system.

Only through united action of parents and teachers will there be any progress. Parents need to be educated and the teachers union needs to wake up and realize its future rests only in the democratization of schools, and not cutting deal with the mayor. We have new leadership at the UFT. Let’s see just how “new” it will be.