GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools

turf wars

September 30, 2009

Girls Prep charter wants more space, but doesn’t want a fight

by Maura Walz, at 7:02 pm

In the tug-of-war between charter school advocates and opponents over building space for the city’s charter schools, emotions frequently churn and bubble over; protests and shouting matches are not unheard of. But it doesn’t necessarily have to be that way, a team of district and charter school administrators who share a Lower East Side building said today.

Gearing up for a community meeting tonight about space issues in Manhattan’s District 1 that will feature their own building, administrators said they want to emphasize the need for a neighborly conversation.

“I’m not going to say it’s easy,” said Mary Pree, the principal of P.S. 188, which shares space with another district school and the Girls Prep Charter School. “Everyone would always like 10 extra classrooms.”

But Pree emphasized that her school’s relationship with the two schools is vibrant, and that the schools are working to develop even stronger connections between the parent associations at the school. “We’re a place where this collaboration is working,” she said.

Girls Prep is requesting more space in the district to expand its middle school program. The middle school launched this August with one fifth-grade class of 25 students.

While the school’s request is not specifically on tonight’s agenda, Girls Prep administrators said they wanted to take the opportunity to spread information about their needs and plans for more space.

“We’re going to explain our plans for expansion and parents will speak to how much we want to be part of this neighborhood,” said Girls Prep founder Miriam Raccah.

The school is requesting space not in the current building they share with P.S. 188 and P.S. 94, a special-needs school for students with autism, but rather elsewhere in the district, school administrators said.

The school had to turn away 50 fifth-grade students this year for lack of space, administrators said. And Raccah pointed out that next year, as 50 current fourth-graders graduate into the middle school program, the need for space will intensify.

“Space is a challenge. It is the challenge,” said Girls Prep middle school principal Kimberly Morcate. “It affects instruction. It affects how we can get the girls to focus.”

The middle school occupies one room of the third floor wing of the building that Girls Prep shares with the two other schools. The elementary school classes and an administrative office take up the rest of the wing, as well as a portion of the second floor of the building.

Today, Morcate led half of the fifth-grade class in a discussion of how to draw conclusions from inferences in a reading passage. The rest of the class was divided into two smaller groups, who worked on practice worksheets in circles on the floor of the school’s yoga classroom around the corner.

The class breaks into small groups like this every Wednesday, but Morcate and teachers said that usually the yoga room is used by the elementary school students. On those days, the students break into small groups at tables tucked into corners of the hallways.

The single classroom must fill the functions of an entire school for the fifth-graders in it. Desks are gathered towards the front of the room, to make room for a “library” area fitted with a couch and bookshelves in the back. All four of the middle school teachers share desk space in the back of the classroom as well.

Girls Prep administrators and teachers said that they wanted the middle school program to stay in the Lower East Side. Fourth grade teacher Elizabeth Ballard said that when she visited families of children slated to move to middle school next year, a main concern was that the school would have to move out of the neighborhood. Just under half of the school’s students live in District 1.

Girls Prep teachers and administrators said they wanted to highlight the school’s relationship with the community at the meeting tonight.

Pree said that she also planned to attend tonight’s meeting, to emphasize that there are civil and productive ways that schools can share space together.

“I want these kids to look back and say, ‘I know that diverse communities, with sometimes conflicting needs, can work together well,’” Pree said. “And I want them to say, ‘I know that because I lived that.’”

Print Print
← Older Comments
Newer Comments →
  • Michael M.

    One more analogy for Norm:

    How would the public react if we went to the “charter” model for fire department or police department services?

    “9-1-1. What is your emergency?
    Which provider have you contracted with?
    You say you weren’t happy with the TPS (traditional police service)?
    In that case, what was your lottery number?”

  • Michael M.

    Lisa,
    Under the revised Mayoral Control law, I believe you would have been eligible to run again. There’s a new two year grace period for parents whose kids have “aged out.”

    All,
    I echo Lisa’s sentiments re DOE and OFEA, especially as pertain to the Chancellor sidestepping the prior law, especially when it came to undercutting the District Superintendents or the CECs.

    Which is why a number of CECs filed suits (including CEC2, see cecd2dotnet for the legal papers).

    Given this new/revised law is nearly the same, I am only guardedly optimistic they will follow it any the more, especially after election day. One indication my optimism may be misplaced: DOE says they need a year to implement some of the requirements they helped ghost write. Sheesh.

  • http://curious2.typepad.com Ken

    Thanks Lisa, Michael, and Norm. Your comments, as is often the case, help me to understand this stuff a lot better.

    Lisa, since you are the President of the CEC, I would hope that you are focused on the most important issues with respect to the entire community. Given that, it seems a bit odd to me that you seem to be spending so much time (on this blog thread alone!) trying to limit the growth of a school with an great track record that is in great demands by parents in your community. I am honestly perplexed by that dynamic. I would love to have a conversation with you to better understand what I am missing.

    I would hope that each CEC would represent its entire community with respect to education issues. My concern is that a tiny group of people, in effect, select CEC members. Who are these people? What are their motivations? Do they really represent the entire community or are they tilted towards certain particular interests? Can anyone point me to online records of the election results so that I could better understand how this works?

  • Michael M.

    Ken,
    I dare say your para above re Lisa is LOADED. Why aren’t you asking why charter zealots are importing hostility to the local CEC? Why are you giving Lisa a hassle for laying out such a thorough case, not in defense of anything, not in opposition to anything, but just to shed sunlight on process, dynamic, and fair play?

    Refering to CECs as a “tiny group of people” is also loaded. Would 32 PEP-esque pro-charter puppet panels be more to your liking?

    For the most part they (we) are parent-leader-elected representatives, and parents ourselves of kids in those district TPSs (2 of each 11 are BP-appointed), under state law whose councils provide the ONLY forum for all stakeholders in NYC schools to air things out.

    I appreciate your civility, but please. And please re-read my 1:12pm re CEC info you are requesting — and DOE masking it — and then click through the 1:28pm to the legal papers. The gist of that suit is DOE running roughshod over ANY community input, TPS OR charter, in school siting and zoning matters, which Albany CLEARLY intended originally and upon renewal to vest at the LOCAL level.

    Apologies for the heat, but your slights are unwarranted.

  • David

    > GPC also got the names of all of the enrolled students in the district in ATS and used that
    > enrollment information to send out glossy post cards recruiting kids and their parents BY
    > NAME:

    Now Lisa, you know this isn’t true. What Girl’s Prep did was what the CEC did (on your watch) which was supply the DOE mailing vendor with the mailings and have the vendor mail them to every student in the District, as is required by law. This is unlike what apparently happened with the afterschool in one of the District schools, where the law was broken as the school released the names to the afterschool

    >The question is who will need to give up what in order to make those seats available to this
    > privately managed charter that serves no ELL’s (in a district that averages over 12% ELL),
    > while 8% of their students have IEPS requiring SETTS ( in a district with the same 8%
    > average of SETTS IEPs, plus additionally 15% on average of our district elementary students
    > requiring the More Restrictive Environments of either CTT or Self Contained classes, classes
    > that Girls Prep does not offer, while in middle schools the district average is 21% of students
    > requiring CTT or self contained classrooms.
    > Will GPC take in thsoe students with IEPs requiring thsose settings if they do not offer them?

    You are using the wrong statistics here, and in the process rewarding the public schools for failing their students. The relevant statistics is the IEP percentage for entering students, not the entire student population. GP uses a reading curriculum designed for dyslexic children and does a great deal of small group and one-on-one instruction. Some (perhaps large) percentage of the 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc. grade students at GP will thus be reading (perhaps below grade level) where they would not be had they attended a typical (i.e., 70% Title one) District school. Had they been at that District school, they would have surely been given an IEP sometime during their school career, exacerbating the difference between GP and the District schools.

    The real measure of the difference in student population is the prevalence of IEPs in entering students, not through the life of the student. If GP is cherry picking students (hard to believe since the DOE and an independent auditor both examine the GP admissions procedure, unlike DOE schools) then this statistic would tell us.

    As for the CTT classes, I asked the school administration about this and was told that when they enroll a student with an IEP calling for CTT, they mainstream the student (since the DOE has not seen fit to provide them with the extra space they would need for CTT classes) and add necessary support to ensure the student does well. I suppose that you would prefer that the student instead be labeled and stuck into a CTT class. I thought that went out in the 1970s, but I guess I’m wrong.

    You also neglect to mention that there is a District Public school that still denies that they have any CTT classes (although the DOE tells me that they finally have started one this year, after years of fighting it.)

  • http://curious2.typepad.com Ken

    Thanks Michael,

    A few points:

    1. I really do learn from all of you about the details of what goes on in these rather arcane (for me) areas of the education world. I am not mentioning that in my comments as fluff.

    2. I think Lisa, as the President of CEC 1, has a responsibility to her community and I am genuinely confused as to how her investigation here is the best use of her time in that capacity. Lisa is more than your average commenter given her role. I think my questions are entirely appropriate.

    3. I don’t mean to defend the DOE in their role in the issues you raise. Often, and in this case, I really do not know nearly enough about the situation to comment one way or the other.

    4. A concise summary of Lisa’s investigation, by her or someone else, would be helpful. As mentioned before, I often get lost in her long, intricate comments. I am guessing that I am not alone on this.

  • http://curious2.typepad.com Ken

    More stuff on that last one…

    As regards the CEC’s: I am not assigning blame in any of the problems in the system, i.e. this could all be the DOE’s fault, but as a New Yorker, it concerns me that a group that might be elected/selected by a very small number of people might be acting in a manner that doesn’t well represent the community it is intended to represent.

    Of course, I could be wrong, and large numbers of people might be responsible for Lisa being the President of CEC 1. Moreover, the bulk of the community represented by CEC 1 might be happy that she is putting significant efforts into getting to the bottom of the Girls Prep situation. Of course, I doubt that. Regardless, I would like to get the facts.

  • Michael M.

    David,
    Re CTT only.

    IEP is NOT a stigma, though a private matter. Certainly, CTT is NOT a stigma. In my kids’ school, many parents want to be in the CTT simply for the teacher:student ratio — at least two teachers and sometimes an aide.

    You make is sound like IEP kids with CTT recommendations have leprosy and yet would be better off mainstreamed than warehoused. CTT *IS* mainstreaming.

    In the CTT classes I have seen, it’s not known or obvious which kids are the IEP kids and which are the “model students” in roughly a 50-50 ratio, in roughly 1 section of 5 or so per grade.

    Further, as I understand, not all IEP kids are good fits for CTT. And CTT can be an efficient way to provide the additional services those kids need. That being said, it would take a certain number of sections per cohort for that to make sense. Too few and you’re right, in-Gen-Ed support might do fine.

    Ken,
    If only Lisa had as much support to level the informational playing field as the pro-charter folks (subset: the space-grabbers) have support in, well, space-grabbing…

    As a parent in an overcrowded school and district (and a CEC member myself), I wouldn’t give a hoot at the district-or-below level were it not for the space issues. Parent choice? Fine.

    At a public policy re privatization level, and given Kleinberg’s biases, I’d still object, and more broadly, but for an entirely different set of reasons.

    At the district and school level, it’s about space and community — via the CEC — empowerment. See my prior comment on “rights” re the cage-fights repeatedly perpetrated by DOE. Michael Vick did hard time, and those weren’t even kids.

  • Lisa Donlan

    Ken,

    I am not writing these entries to stop the growth of GPC.
    I am trying, in good faith, to answer your questions and raise some questions of my own.
    I do not say that GPC has no right to grow. I do not question the merit of their desire to expand. I only want to look at the possible lost opportunities for all of the students in the community should we choose to commit scarce resources to benefit one group at the possible cost of others.
    That is what my job should be, and gathering facts and data is a responsible part of that job.
    Your personal attacks are unwelcome and take away any trust or dignity that our civil debate had built.

    And David,
    I do not know what you mean by my watch. I was not president, but I was a member of the CEC that used all of the district families’ ATS addresses to send out a brochure listing all of the district schools and explaining clearly the choice policy and opportunities for parent involvement.
    DoE ran the list, the DoE vendor made the labels and sent out our mailing.
    We used our CEC OTPs budget to create and mail the school directory ( rather than reimburse our own out of pocket expenses) because the DoE was, as you know, completely negligent in informing parents in any meaningful or equitable manner, about our district choice policy.
    I would not compare an elected parent council’s mailing to inform parents of their admissions rights and choices to one school using public funds to mail out a promotional postcard to students enrolled in other schools in order to recruit them (and their public dollars) away.

    Also, the fact that some district schools have shirked their responsibilities to special education students does not justify a charter doing the same.
    As you know, we have asked DoE to address the same lack of equitable service of special education students at PS 184 , and this year the school is serving a class of Kindergarten CTT.
    It is my understanding that if a student has an IEP that requires either CTT or a self contained class then that is what the school must provide.
    It is not my choice to label or place that child in a more restrictive environment- it is my understanding that the IEP mandates that the student receive the service.
    Your ( I mean GPC’s) argument should be examined by the special ed experts, since I do not have any expertise in this area to evaluate your ( I mean their) claims for success.
    All I have is the number of student who are ELL or Special Ed diagnosed in each school to compare.
    And by the way- district schools are told by the DoE all the time, usually in late August, that they must open a new CTT or self contained class, without however the DoE providing the necessary room, or staff, or material, etc.
    Yet you want this same DoE that the charters are so pleased to be unfettered from to provide GPC with a room, before they will offer CTT services?
    I don’t follow your logic!

    It has been interesting but I draw the line at ad hominem attack and bad faith arguments.
    SNIP!

  • Michael M.

    Ken,
    We’re lapping each other. ; – )

    Again, the important thing about CEC’s is they are the ONLY public forum where this all gets hashed out. The number of members, or even how many school selectors voted, is not as important as the transparency — more than the PEP I dare say.

    I would love it if more people voted for CEC’s. All 1.1 million kids’ parents even. The fact that it is limited to school PTA officers I see as one more way Bloomberg et al undercut the validity of the CECs.

    The CEC’s have been marginalized by the people who established them. By who is entitled to vote for CECs. By limiting the powers of the CECs. By letting Klein get away with quashing the few powers that are even on the books. And ONE of them is programmatic and space utilization approval.

    It’s not that parents do not want meaningful community forums. On this topic, it’s that the powers that be excluded charters from the umbrella of CEC overview — then excluded the CECs (illegally in my view) from a say-so re in-district new school approval and space allocation.

    Hardly fair play.

  • Lisa Donlan

    Ken:

    PS We CEC memebers are all volunter parents. I do not get a dime from the DoE.
    So how I spend my time is really my personal business.
    I chose to engage with the community on this blog to explore some issues that concern my community and others.
    Your attack of me, the way I use my personal time, as a volunteer, and your questioning my support in the community on this issue strike me as suspect.

    Full disclosure please- What is your connection to Gotham Schools and the charter school industry?

    Lisa
    ( hope that was short enough for you!)

  • http://ednotesonline.blogspot.com/ norm

    Ken
    Despite the air of civility, it is clear you have an ideological dog in the race as indicated by a willingness to support a balkanized school system with 1500 schools under no public management.

    Teacher unions with their pay scales are a no-no. It might make sense to the financial world but the fact that the very same system works in many successful public school systems in the affluent suburbs (and abroad) seems to escape people. Systems that have a degree of parental involvement that urban systems are denied.

    It is the same dog in the race BloomKlein have, who often intentionally mismanage the school system in a way that helps you make your points. Witness the entire convoluted CEC situation with the intentional aim to keep parent input at a minimum. Or the multiple crazy reorganizations. Do you think what looks like enormous incompetency at the DOE is just that or part of the political agenda of BloomKlein.

    I would also claim that charter chains also don’t want parental involvement in any level of management but only as a political support mechanism. I am not talking about mom and pop charters generated by the community and started by parents and teachers and run by them. Most charters begin as a force from outside the community and have no roots in the community. That is part of the basic model of separating schools from their communities. Thus you will KIPP schools all over the place and other charter chains in the same neighborhoods but no real community stake in the schools. Again, totally counter to the suburban (white) model followed outside the urban (people of color) centers.

    If there was a real attempt to meet the needs of kids in urban areas we would take a hard look at the schools deemed as failing and figure out what it would take to fix them. But if you start with the theory that the problem will exist as long as there are teachers working under a contract and some opportunities for parents to get involved in making some basic decisions, then the only solution the the market based ideologues (of which I believe you are one) is to create the “choice” argument which leads to the “close ‘em because they can’t be fixed” argument. (suburban parents have the “choice” of local schools or private schools.)

    I think may of us know how to fix the schools. Put in the kinds of resources in terms of teachers and other social services. But that has not been tried anywhere despite all the money floating around. Except maybe the Harlem Children’s Zone. How about calling for some of that stimulus money going for an experiment in drastically reducing class size and emulating HCZ in at least some schools to see if they can be fixed? That this is not on the table is a clear sign that charter schools are a political not an educational movement.

    If I hear the response that there is not money all I have to say is BEAR STERNS.

    If I hear about the ridiculous bureaucratic limits of a public school system managed by BloomKlein, I just have to laugh.

  • David

    Lisa,

    > I do not know what you mean by my watch. I was not president, but I was a member of the CEC
    > that used all of the district families’ ATS addresses to send out a brochure ….

    Sorry if I implied you were the president. I admit, you were a member of the CEC at the time.

    > I would not compare an elected parent council’s mailing to inform parents of their
    > admissions rights and choices to one school using public funds to mail out a promotional
    > postcard to students enrolled in other schools in order to recruit them (and their public dollars)
    > away.

    Perhaps, but that did not seem to be your point:

    > GPC also got the names of all of the enrolled students in the district in ATS and used that=
    > enrollment information to send out glossy post cards recruiting kids and their parents BY
    > NAME:

    Note: I was responding to “GPC also got…” which they did not. They did exactly what the CEC did and had the DOE vendor send them out. As far as the substance of education vs. promotion, I’d term what GP did as “outreach” to the community, which seems to be fine when the District public schools do it. What’s good for the goose….

    > All I have is the number of student who are ELL or Special Ed diagnosed in each school to compare.
    > have you asked for the data? (hint; there is FOIL, under which you (or the CEC) could request
    > entering student IEP and ELL data; I have requested the data to see if their assertions make sense).

    I do tend to agree with Ken that the CEC process is not particularly democratic. Parents do not elect CEC members, but rather PA/PTA members.

    Additionally, we should be clear that the CEC represents the children already in the public schools, not the children resident in the District. How do we know? Look at the eligibility criteria for parent members of the CEC (Borough President appointees don’t even need to have Children): A parent of a NEST+M child who lives on the UES is eligible (despite no District preference at NEST+M). A parent of a 2 year old who will be in District schools soon, is not eligible. A parent of a child at a District school who lives in another District and who was enroled in a District school due to a stupid DOE practice (e.g., no waitlisting of District students at their #1 choice when they get into their #3 choice) is eligible. A parent of a student at a District Charter’school, which does give District residents preference in admissions, is not eligible. None of this is the fault of the CEC, but we should remember who the CEC represents when viewing the CEC’s opinion.

    Finally, I should note that while Lisa is the president of CEC District One, her views are not necessarily those of the CEC. For the CEC to take any official action they need 6 members to vote affirmatively on that action. The CEC is subject to the Open Meetings Law, and thus any such vote would be public. It seems that the CEC has not, as a group, made a decision to support or to oppose the GP Charter Renewal application. I applaud Lisa in publicizing her views, but we should remember that they are her views, not necessarily those of at least 6 members of the CEC.

  • http://curious2.typepad.com Ken

    Hey Lisa,

    Thanks for keeping it short(er)!

    Your role and what is appropriate for you to be doing as president of CEC 1 is an interesting area. I am open to other opinions, because I might be thinking of this incorrectly. With that said, let me tell you how I see it at the moment.

    My understanding is that the CEC represents the community in some manner. I know the powers and exact role of the CEC is controversial and, in some ways, unclear. However, my impression is that the CEC is supposed to represent the community.

    You are the president of CEC 1. On education issues, particularly ones related to public schools in your community, I question whether how you spend your time is your “personal business”. Since you are the president of CEC 1, it is also the business of your community. If a city councilmember came onto Gotham Schools, I wouldn’t view it as just his or her personal business. (To be clear, regardless of your role, you have every right to write whatever you’d like.) I would appreciate other opinions on this, because I might be thinking of this incorrectly.

    Meanwhile, as has been reported on this site multiple times, I am a supporter, financially and otherwise, of Gotham Schools, several charter schools, and a variety of other education reform organizations.

  • David

    Michael,

    > IEP is NOT a stigma, though a private matter. Certainly, CTT is NOT a stigma. In my kids’
    > school, many parents want to be in the CTT simply for the teacher:student ratio — at
    >least two teachers and sometimes an aide.

    Interesting, but this is not universally the case. At one of the District One schools a parent was recently livid upon learning that his child, again, was placed in a CTT class. He asserted that “none of the PA/PTA children or DOE employee’s kids are in the class”. I’ve filed a FOIL request to see if there is any support for his accusation; we’ll see whether we can get the data.

    As a point of comparison, GP has, at least in the lower grades, two teachers per class (although I admit, they might not have licenses)

  • http://www.sinksalive.blogspot.com KitchenSink

    @norm: Bloomklein DOES want to re-create the HCZ social services, creating two new “zones” in the So. Bronx & Central Brooklyn.

  • Michael M.

    David and Ken,

    Shame on you both.

    The “air of civility” per Norm is valued, but in turn we’ve got Ken kneecapping Lisa for taking the time to write at length, and David doing the nominal public service (cough) of reminding the home audience that Lisa may not be (or may yet be) representing the official position of a CEC (which as an entity he denigrates as well) — as if any organization’s president is not usually afforded the courtesy of being presumed to speak on behalf of the organization.

    Fellas, raise your game, if not your aim. Civilly, of course. Enough shots below the belt.

    The attacks on CEC One, and its President, and Lisa the individual aren’t winning you any points in this otherwise informative string. Shoot the messenger when you can’t shoot the message?

  • Michael M.

    David,

    CTT classes are in high demand at PS41. Not by ALL parents of course. By model student and IEP student parents both. My understanding is that is MORE common the case than the stigma you describe.

    CECs certainly DO have an interest in kids not yet 5. And for elementary school kids, CEC2 is on record supporting neighborhood elementary schools for neighborhood kids. (Middle schoolers more mobile, etc.) We are looking at younger kids as well, in terms of Pre-K, in terms of future teeming cohorts ready to exert pressure on class sizes, in terms of advocating for a robust capital plan that won’t even benefit many of our own kids, and in terms of making sure DOE runs admission processes better for our neighbors and broader community (in the cases you cite) than what WE were put through, etc.

    The CEC process is “not democratic?” Rullly? Compared to what? The nation’s electoral college system? Indeed, we are not directly elected, but neither is the PEP which is mute while Kleinberg steals space from under the noses of the CECs and over “democratic” will at times. At best, the votes for councilmembers by PTA officers can be thought of as a way to “norm” schools of different population sizes. OFEA makes sure we run things by the Open Meetings Law. Does that pertain to DOE? PEP? Charter siting decisions? How is charter governance any MORE democratic? You want more democratic CECs? Lift the ban on PTA officers serving on the CEC, and let ALL parents, or ALL citizens vote.

    Two teachers per Gen Ed class? Must be great in charterville.

    Should CEC One vote on GP simply based on information that backers and investors provide? Or is it ok if the President does a wee bit of due diligence. On unpaid time, of course.

  • Michael M.

    Ken,
    As being a charter-backing philanthropist is indeed YOUR “personal business”, let me ask you at least to parse:
    personal information or personal financial investment?

    Given your philanthropic ability, inclinations, and biases, what proportion (I don’t need the dollars) of your giving is to TPS schools that may in fact be more financially needy or without alternative sources of funds?

    See, to me, if I had the wherewithal, I’d not call myself a “philanthropist” unless I expected nothing in return, had no “dog in the race” per above, and had an eye toward needs-based charity.

    Otherwise, I’m an “investor,” whether or not I expected a financial return, and my neutrality would be long gone.

    But I sincerely tip my hat to you, I appreciate your writing and analytic work. But there’s a lot more partisanship in it than I first realized.

  • Bijou Miller

    I have been following this thread with much interest as my District (3) is also going through similar turmoil between our public schools and charters that have been placed (I love the word “incubate”-that is better) in them. We have a situation like the one at PS 188 and GPC and I can guarantee you that there will a similar war of words about it. We got a notice from our Tweed Family Advocate yesterday(I don’t know how else to describe her- she isn’t not a DFA) yesterday stating that there will be the required hearing held by the Charter School Institute to get feedback on the renewal of one of our charter schools. Coincidentally, a member of our CEC was visiting the building that this charter resides in and the principal of the public school handed her a copy of a letter stating that the charter was trying to expand from a K-5 to a K-12. Nowhere in the hearing notice does it state that the charter is trying to change its charter to a k-12, only that they want to renew the charter. Our CEC president fired off an email to the Family Advocate asking for clarification- Why was there no mention of the change in this charter’s contract and will it be brought up at this hearing? Here is the response to our CEC president::

    ” The purpose of this hearing is to solicit feedback from the community as it relates to the renewal (renewal was italicized and underlined) of Harlem Link’s charter. If the school has decided to expand (expand also italicized and underlined) its school’s configuration, a request would need to be submitted to SUNY-CSI, the school’s authorizer. Please feel free to reach out to Ralph Rossi, SUNY-CSI, at ralph.rossi@suny.edu for additional information.

    As the school district, NYCDOE is only required to hold a public hearing once a hearing request is submitted to our office by the authorizer. As of today, I have not received any correspondence from SUNY-CSI requesting that a charter revision hearing be held in the district.

    Let me know if you have any additional questions or concerns.”

    So the DOE person doesn’t seem to know that the charter is also trying to expand. Do I believe her? Not really. It seems odd that a public school principal would get this expansion letter and the DOE would not. At any rate, my point is that I see a trend here-Because of an aggressive influx of charter schools placed in the upper part of our District, the DOE stated that they would put no more new charters into the district but of course, that does not prevent them from letting the existing charters expand, which will ultimately crowd out their public school partners. I don’t have a solution. I am so appreciative of this dialogue and the thoughts that have been expressed here. Yes, there are great charter schools and yes, there are some really bad charter schools, just like there are great and bad publics- but, (and the question has been asked here), why is the DOE turning its back on the publics? Because they are- they tried to close several schools last year to enable charters to take over the spaces and we filed a lawsuit so that the DOE backed off but they continue to hover like hungry hyenas over a dead carcas- just waiting for these schools to fail- they let the charters woo the kids from the publics and they don’t give them any support. To me it is just criminal. GPC may be the best school in NYC but if it success imperils the public school it shares space with, then that is not okay- End of story. The DOE should be supporting the schools that are under its umbrella- A lot of these charters not only have the support of SUNY but they have the DOE cheering them on. What is fair and equitable about that? Bijou Miller

  • http://curious2.typepad.com Ken

    Hey Michael,

    My intention is not to attack, kneecap, or hit below the belt. I apologize if it came across that way.

    Lisa can and will write at whatever length she likes, but it can be quite difficult to follow for me and, I would guess, many others. If you review the thread and don’t relate to my comment in this regard, we might have to agree to disagree.

    Separately, I think it is great that the President of CEC One is involved in this GS conversation. However, I think her position as President is quite relevant. I am truly interested in learning how she deals with issues like this one given her position. Many people (probably most people) and certainly I don’t have a clear idea as to how the CEC’s are actually functioning and how they are approaching issues like this one. I am particularly interested since it seems that CEC’s want much more power with respect to our public schools.

  • http://curious2.typepad.com Ken

    Hey Michael,

    On your last comment, I really enjoy your writing too. I appreciate when you suggest that I have crossed a line or that I am sounding excessively one-sided, because there is very possibly some truth in those statements and I am always trying to improve. In many of my posts, I have tried to write in an “opinion free” style. In others, and in most of my comments, I let my opinions come through. I think I usually know the difference between “fact” and “opinion” (not always!) and I hope you will enjoy the facts that I research even if my opinions are sometimes annoying.

  • http://ednotesonline.blogspot.com/ norm

    Note how the political/ideological agendas underlying the charter school movement as being based on an anti-union, anti-parent involvement and a breaking of local community involvement in neighborhood schools are never addressed by kitchen sink or Ken. Or the underlying (often racial element) of the urban/suburban gap – who gets to control their schools.

    The idea is KISS. Sweep these issues under the rug and make it about the so-called quality of schools when the elephant in the room is that the ideologues basically believe it is the teachers/union/contract fault when public schools fail.

    It should be pointed out that the progressive teachers I work with are severe critics of the UFT on a number of grounds. I have been for 40 years, naturally not for the same reasons as the right wing.

    As to expanding HCZ, Kitchen sink misses the point (intentionally?) I am talking about the total package of HCZ for public schools under public management, not expanding the HCZ privately controlled franchise. If people think that model works then why not? I’ll tell you why. There are union teachers in public schools and the ideologues will snicker that it just won’t work. The real reason it won’t work is that with BloomKlein in charge the program would be totally mismanaged. One more reason to have public schools run in a democratic fashion instead of a fascistically (is that a word?)

  • http://ednotesonline.blogspot.com/ norm

    Talking about girls. I once had a 6th grade class with 18 girls and 6 boys. Easiest teaching year of my life. The boys love being in a sea of girls and rarely acted out.

    Let me say that I am in favor of some separation starting in the upper elementary grades. I and another teacher even had a grant to do gender gap science with 6th grade girls that ultimately led us to win a national engineering contest sponsored by the company that made erector sets. When we once let some boys into the room things fell apart.

    My point is that I can appreciate a school like Girls Prep. But to talk about what a great school it is (and I believe it) we also have to consider that there have been law suits over the fact that the overwhelming bulk of kids who end up in special ed have been boys. Let’s say Girls Prep expands exponentially and we end up with a dual school system. Girls in charter and boys in the public schools (I am pushing a bit here) the public schools can end up with the same boy/girl ratio as China.

    By the way, this thread could become a book. Or an encyclopedia.

  • http://curious2.typepad.com Ken

    Hey Norm,

    One more comment for the book!

    I usually don’t address some of your more general statements because I feel these threads are prone to heading off on tangents.

    For the record, though, I am not anti-union, anti-parent, or anti-local-community-involvement. I do believe that the UFT contract is a disaster, that the most efficient forms of parental control start with parental choice, and that local community involvement should come from the local community and not special interest groups that pretend to represent them.

  • David

    Norm,

    Actually my understanding is that the reason the umbrella organization of Girl’s Prep has become “Public Prep” is that they hope to expand the model to boys schools.

  • David

    Michael,

    > You want more democratic CECs? Lift the ban on PTA officers serving on the CEC,
    >and let ALL parents, or ALL citizens vote.

    I agree about the All parents or all citizens vote. As for the ban on PTA officers, I disagree; if can’t find enough parents to staff both the CECs and the PA/PTAs. then what does that say about the desire for “parent involvement” in the district?

  • Lisa Donlan

    hey Ken and David ,
    Because I am a member or President of a CEC does not mean I can not be a citizen with an opinion.
    Did I sign my posts as CEC president? Did I claim to represent the CEC in my posts?
    If I gave the impression I was speaking for the CEC then I made mistake and hope you will show me where in my long complicated posts I did so.

    Did I take an anti charter position at any time?
    Did I say I am against Girls Prep expanding?

    Or did I say the issue is not whether or not this school should grow but the issue is who will have to give up what to accommodate that wish.
    I have tried to focuss this discussion on the children served and the process by which the CEC is to respond to the request for space under the newest structures and laws. These have been my questions and probes.

    I have also taken some of the posters responses and their logic and pushed them a little farther to see how well they hold water.
    Ms Raccah the Executive Director of the Girls Prep, for instance, stated that parents who are tax payers get to decide what happens in the public schools. I simply asked about the many many instances where tax paying parents in NYC have had no say since the arrival of mayoral control over anything that happens in the public schools. I cited several oversubscribed schools that were granted legal rights to expand but were given no space to do so by the DoE.

    I do not defend the current governance structure nor do I claim it is democratic. In fact I spent a lot of time ( volunteering) to try to change it over the last year and a half.
    The work of the Parent Commission was thoughtful and deserves your scrutiny.

    Finally, try to find another CEC that mentions charter parents in its mission statement. Find another CEC president who has attended or hosted charter hearings in order to invite Charter parents to be represented on CECs and Presidents councils.

    So I double dog dare you- show us where I claimed to represent the CEC.
    Show us where I came out against charters or Girls Prep.
    The only charge I cop to is writing long and complex pieces that refer to a whole lot of arcane DoE knowledge garnered over years volunteering as an elected parent ( PTA Treasurer- 5 years, PTA VP, PTA President, member of my DLT and liaison to the District One Presidents Council).
    Guilty, guilty, guilty. Lisa

  • Michael M.

    David,
    Where is all this cynicism and bitterness coming from? About DOE I can understand, but about parents? Are you not a parent? Are you not fighting for the best for your kid(s)? Why would you suggest other parents are not?

    And why do I say the above? Your last jab at parents, especially those who would take on PTA and/or CEC duties. It is so stunning, I won’t even parse it. This on top of an afternoon of potshots at CECs and Lisa Donlan in particular, and barbs I’ve never heard before about CTT classes, IEP kids, and again, more on CEC’s.

    Now I’m curious as to what’s your beef. Care to share? The doctor is in.

  • David

    Michael,

    Why not parse my last comment–it’s very simple; I don’t understand the desire to allow a single person to have both rolls; The division of roles (and the spreading of power) is key to many administrative and government functions. If there is a desire for parent involvement, a slate of PA/PTA and CEC people should be easy to fill. If there is widespread apathy, allowing a few people to concentrate power by holding multiple positions would just allow them to impose their will on the masses. If there aren’t enough parents to fill school and CEC roles, then the solution is to increase parent involvement, not allow the same group of people to take on more roles.

    As for my position, I’m a GP parent who resides in the District, and who does not agree with the emphasis on protecting current students at the expense of District residents. As a bit of background, District One is a District of choice, where there are no zoned schools, and parents bid for the schools for their child to attend. Schools are desirable for a variety of reasons (culture, test scores, locations, educational philosophy, extracurriculars) and some schools are oversubscribed, leading to lotteries for slots at those schools. The scramble for slots is exacerbated by sibling priority, where up to 66% (in the case of one District school) of slots are already taken by the siblings of existing students, some District residents and some residents of other Districts. The CEC has, not surprisingly given that it represents parents of current students not District parents, consistently argued for the preference of out-of-district siblings over other district residents. I understand this, but disagree (hence my view that the CEC should represent the parents of the District).

    I’ve also heard (in person) current CEC members make statements to the effect that they don’t care if students were admitted using fraud (fraudulent addresses or siblings), once the students are in the system the CEC represents the interests of those students and parents, apparently over the interest of other District resident students. This I don’t understand. If the parents of a student fraudulently stole a spot at a District school, then the rightful recipient of that spot should get it.

  • http://www.classsizematters.org Leonie Haimson

    Ken, I’m certain that Lisa has a lot more support and respect in her community than Joel Klein has among public school parents or even New Yorkers in general. Moreover, who selected Klein for his position, aside from one very wealthy billionaire who bought his way into office in the first place, and overturned term limits so he could buy his way into a third. Lisa has done incredible work for the district, for no pay, as opposed to some of the charter school administrators you support who make over $300,000 per year, partly on the backs of our tax dollars. And she is right that the charter school data is less transparent than for regular public schools. Where is the class size data for charter schools? Where is their student attrition and discharge data? Where is the per pupil spending? The DOE obscures this latter info for charter schools as much as possible, so much so that in response to questions from a member of the PEP they wrote, that some people say that city spending on charter school students is more than for regular public school students, some people say that it is less; and they are both wrong. The IBO has been working on a cost comparison for over a year and still hasn’t been able to untangle this mess.

  • Cora

    Out-of-district siblings are a simply matter of practicality for the whole family, how can anyone argue for the whole child and leave behind the whole family and the stress of different pick-up times in different schools or even districts? That would be stress for every child right there made by politics. Single child parents don’t understand that (some do), they usually never put themselves into the shoes of a family of more children. To be in your school of choice versus keeping a family school routine manageable (besides PARENTINVOLVEMENT chances, how about that in different districts at the same time?) I daresay pick the latter. Especially since I care about parent involvement, there is never enough at the school level, even at the schools that seem to model that.
    Diversity is key also.
    To create a middleschool for an existing Elementary school population with 50 % out-of-district without asking the parents in the area is very questionable for me. As a mother of a boy middleschooler and a girl elementary student I was never asked about my estimation of needs for a single-sex school. There are more successful elementary schools in district 1 that would be great in creating a middleschool for their children but as ‘regular’ public schools they have no chance, was tried before and failed with lots of efforts in vain.
    As a charterschool it seems: all is possible.
    Don’t ask, pretend you got permission before to go ahead and then just go ahead by taking up space from another school (not really asking anyway) and serving 50% out-of-district.
    Looks like there is a catch for somebody, why do it otherwise?
    We (the ‘regular’) public school elementary parents depend on the middleschool choices we have in the district and there is always room for improvement but also great choices out there.
    And then going after the most dedicated person for equality and public school students in general we have in district 1 and then questioning her motives? How dare you! Shame on you. I am a parent volunteer since 5 years, having served in various positions at CPAC (Chancellor’s parent advisory council) President’s Council (as president) and my local school PA as president for almost three years and NEVER did anyone dare to question my motives besides myself, since it take s so much time away from your family and the reward is ? Everybody was supportive of my efforts and information spread is key here!
    To make the CEC look like this ideal powerful institution is way off the actual reality. But to use contact info for a mailing because the chancellor allows you to and then telling the CEC they are misusing their power is just wrongdoing!!
    Now I became am a CEC member because of Lisa! Her dedication is so inspiring and her knowledge goes beyond anybody’s I have met at DOE (and I met the chancellor on a regular basis). This discussion should be about the equality we need and how to get there.
    A charterschool run lose doesn’t do it for me. If the parents of the district (now in elementary school) favor a new single-sex choice for middleschool. let’s do it, if not… But they need to know about ALL the choices they have before they can make that decision. Outreach was never a strength of the DOE, especially not in district 1 with the choice policy. There is a lot of work ahead of us if we mean it.
    Is your dedication real?
    Then let’s do it. (maybe with your money and our dedication?)

  • Lisa Donlan

    Cora makes a number of excellent points, but I want to pick up on her message about DoE outreach.
    The CEC had to use its member reimbursable budget to create a school directory because parents were wrongly and routinely told they were zoned for schools with no zoning by the DoE!
    To compare the CEC doing outreach to district families to provide information on all the schools and admission policies with a glossy post card promoting one school is the height of intellectual dishonesty.
    One is information that public school parents had a right to receive, (and one the DoE had an obligation to provide, but failed) and was provided by the CEC with the full support of the district and regional superintendents and Enrollment office, The other is a marketing tool designed to pull kids out of one school and into another.
    Does anyone else have trouble seeing this clearly?

    Please weigh in if you think that a glossy postcard from a charter to enrolled students and their parents is OUTREACH or direct marketing.

  • Jennifer

    Ken, I do not find Lisa’s comments confusing. If several worthy schools in a district want to expand, what is the process for deciding how scarce space will be allocated? What are the criteria? What do you think the process and criteria should be for those several schools?

  • Michael M.

    David,
    Your familiarity with CEC and policy nuance, juxtaposed with your continued personal axe-grinding about CEC’s is puzzling, but need not be resolved in public.

    Perhaps best if we swapped emails. Mine is witzerooATyahooDOTcom.

    Enough with the public spiked tea party if you don’t want to put all your cards on the table.

    I respect that choice given the public forum, but it’s not fair to the topic, the debate, the PTA’s, the CEC’s, parents of kids regardless of home address, or Lisa Donlan on either a personal or CEC Preznit level.

  • http://curious2.typepad.com Ken

    Hey Leonie,

    As usual, we agree that school finances in general are too opaque. You and I and others should continue to push for more transparency on this issue.

    I think charter school spending is much more transparent than traditional public school spending. Do you disagree? Do you know of anything even close to the financial detail of an annual charter school audit for a traditional public school? (To be clear, I had to FOIL SUNY and SED to get copies of these audits!) Do you know of a comparable report for, say, PS 188? Let’s try to get some consensus on this issue.

    On non-financial matters, which reports for traditional public schools are missing for charter schools? I am not saying that they don’t exist, but I would like to focus on particulars. Can you pick one that provides the best example? Maybe we can get some agreement on this too.

    On the flip side, can you tell me which TPS reports match, for example, SUNY charter school reviews that are available on the SUNY website? For example, here is a recent Girls Prep report: http://www.newyorkcharters.org/documents/GirlsPrepCharterSchool-3rdYearInspectionReport-FINAL2%2027%2009.pdf. Where can I find a comparable report for PS 188? Again, I’m not saying that they don’t exist, but I would like to learn where I can find them. Be careful not to refer me to reports that also exist for charter schools, like the large number of progress-related reports that people on GS usually insult.

  • http://curious2.typepad.com Ken

    Hey Jennifer,

    I’m glad you don’t find Lisa’s comments confusing!

    Your questions are great ones. If we assume that public school space in NYC is a scarce resource and that that space will be allocated free of charge to one of several school operators, I would hope that the goal would be to give the space to the school operators that have some combination of the greatest parental demand and the most promising plan for success in educating children. Of course, “the most promising plan for success” requires significant judgment and raises the question of who makes that judgment! Parental demand is probably easier to measure through enrollment figures and lottery results. Also, there are frictional costs of changing operators and school configurations, so any change should be judged to have benefits that outweigh those frictional costs.

    In a situation in which one school operator is in tremendous demand by parents and seems to have a fantastic track record, it seems like a good idea for the system to try to find space for them. The other side of the equation is very important, too, i.e. who, if anyone, is being displaced? I hope that Lisa and others continue to study both sides of this issue to help us to arrive at the best set of educational opportunities possible.

  • http://www.classsizematters.org Leonie Haimson

    Ken: I dont know what info is in the audits since I havent seen them. Do they contain comprehensive info on how much is spent per student at the school level; as well as the value of the other subsidies provided by DOE, including food, transportation, energy, testing, recruiting, etc.? If so, I’d love to see it.

    As I wrote in my previous comment, there is no detailed school level class size reporting for charter schools that I know of as there is for regular public schools; you can see the regular class size reports on the DOE website if you look up “class size”. There is some charter school class size data available from SED, but it is spotty at best. The report you shared from SUNY is like a quality review. I dont know how to assess its accuracy or helpfulness, as I dont know with the quality reviews either. There is also a huge issue of equity here. The DOE promotes the success of charter schools at every instance; helps them recruit students, encourages their private fundraising, and allows them to cap class size and enrollment at any level they prefer. Meanwhile, they refuse to reduce class size in our regular public schools, despite state law requiring them to do so. The mayor says he wants to provide 100,000 new seats for charter schools, yet is creating only 25,000 new seats over the next five years for our regular public schools. Is this fair or equitable? I think not. You think competition will lift all boats. I see a two-tier system developing , one with all the advantages and the other with none– including an administration that doesnt give a damn if a regular public school fails. In fact, they prefer it because it gives them more space for charter school students!

  • http://www.sinksalive.blogspot.com KitchenSink

    One correction, Leonie: the chancellor doesn’t allow charters to cap class size, etc., but the NYS Charter Schools Act of 1998 does.

    For all the issues and fears associated with decentralization and “1500 self-governed schools,” many of those legitimate and which I share, the charter law allows charter schools to follow their roadmaps laid out in the charter. Very, very few mandates from above, once the basics are agreed to in the charter document.

    Those of us who have left the system because we’re tired of broken promises or broken windows and joined the charter movement have done so because this flexibility (to use Ken’s word) allows us to be more effective at serving kids. It’s not “us vs. them,” or a two-tiered system. It’s just, in my experience, a way for professionals to deliver educational services to kids and families with fewer barriers getting in the way. There are charters with 30 or 35 kids in a class, charters with upwards of 45% IEP students, 70% foster care students. These are design elements, and the school board is free to propose whatever it thinks it needs to do to get the agreed upon outcomes. And then empowered to stick to those design elements.

    If I were the chancellor (and my spouse, my family and probably all of New York City all are thankful that I am not whether they know it or not), I would want to divest myself of as much responsibility as possible, spinning off students to charter schools that I could hold accountable by pushing that red “non-renewal” button. 1.1 million kids = inevitable trade-offs. Separate charter agreements = schools that will go out and find the resources they need when they are not available through the system.

  • http://www.sinksalive.blogspot.com KitchenSink

    Ken you raise a really interesting and important question about governance: How can the public, or those trusted with serving the public’s interests, judge which schools are worthy of scarce resources?

    Just remember that high demand doesn’t necessarily indicate high quality. People can be sheep, whether they are going after living in the zone for the “fashionable” Upper East Side district pubilc school of the moment, or following the buzz about a new charter school.

    I don’t have any answers, but I do think the chancellor is moving in the right direction with these report cards. Obviously when 98% get A’s or B’s something is amiss and the nuance is lost, but the general idea should be to make performance data more transparent and accessbile – or at least, the focal point of public debate. I think the report cards for all their flaws have succeeded in moving the needle on that scale.

  • http://www.sinksalive.blogspot.com KitchenSink

    @Lisa: Direct marketing. (But I don’t see anything wrong with it – provided the DOE is doing what it’s supposed to be doing vis a vis disseminating information about the district schools)

  • Bijou Miller

    Hi, Kitchensink, Well, from where I sit, the DOE is NOT doing what it’s supposed to be doing vis a vis disseminating info about my district schools. In fact in some instances, they appear to be corrupting the info that goes out. We have one elementary school that was told that they would have to either increase enrollment or lose space to a charter school. But when the DOE put out a list of district schools that had openings, they listed this particular school at capacity with no seats available. Yet another example of DOE incompetence? I think not. Additionally when parents asked John White that the playing field be leveled so that public schools could get support to send out flyers to their areas, he agreed but as far as I know that support never materialized and when there was a school fair, the public schools that participated were given tables in the back of the gym and the charters were right up front.

    By the way, I posted yesterday that a certain charter in my district had applied to become a K-12 but the hearing to extend their charter did not include this info. The principal of that charter emailed me and told me that this was a mistake and that they have not applied to become a k-12. He was calling the Charter Institute to tell them to correct this. I am glad that this is the case as the school is a very good school and the principal is very eager to get along and work with his public school partners. (Unllike another charter school operator in my District that I could name but won’t)

  • Lisa Donlan

    Kitchen Sink, I think I like you more and more! You have no problem laying it out as you see it, PC or not, damn the torpedos.
    I like that.
    But what is with the pseudonym?

    come out, come out, whoever you are!

  • Lisa Donlan

    Ken,
    I did post my email once earlier so you could contact me for the details and explanations you crave.
    I could send you the charts I have pasted in that got so jumbled in this blog format, (no doubt confusing you further) and answer any queries you may have.
    Those of us in the front lines bring a lot of details and real life consequences that the constructs you big players do not live with or necessarily even see.

    We are in the weeds but can see the patterns, too. It is just that the patterns read very differently down here. This is why folks should declare up front what kind of skin they have in the deal; we readers can’t read the text properly without the decoder ring!

    lisabdonlan@hotmail.com

  • http://curious2.typepad.com Ken

    Thanks Lisa.

    I look forward to communicating with you offline!

  • http://curious2.typepad.com Ken

    Hey KitchenSink,

    I don’t have the answers either. It is a very tough problem.

    I agree that it is possible that some or many parents make poor decisions. Of course, one must question whether they will make better or worse decisions than government officials over time, especially considering the risk of regulatory capture of government officials by special interest groups. I might be comfortable with Bloomberg and Klein affecting the options and decisions, but others might find that comfort laughable. What happens if and when the anti-charter people get a mayor they like? I will probably be quite uncomfortable with that mayor influencing choices. In general, no one cares as much about a particular child as the child’s parents. That gives parental choice a huge head start over government choice.

    I agree, though, there is no easy answer.

  • Khem

    I would like to suggest a parent-to-parent meeting with the Girls Prep Parents because they don’t understrand their governance and their charter.

    They just want more space for their children and the organization is using them to ask for it and parents are fighting unnecessarily.

    Charter School parents must understand what they are getting into when they choose charter as their school of choice.

    I would love to partner with you to have this conversation with them but they have to be willing to hear objectively.

    Their charter is authorized to serve K-4 or K-5. They have to plan for their children’s futures. This is why they cannot completely
    remove themselves from caring about the plight of the neighborhood public schools and work to ensure quality education no matter
    where they choose it. They must always be a part of the process. They also cannot be selfish in trying to take space from
    the existing school children.

    This charter school issue can only be solved with the parents, board of regents, supts, President’s Councils and CECs. More parent talk,
    less TWEED influence.

    Let’s work with GEM to reach out to this parent population.

    Feel free to forward my comment.

    Khem Irby
    CEC13

  • Full Disclosure

    I saw you wanted to see just who has a dog in ther fight.
    David has a few dogs in the fight.
    He tried very hard to win a seat for his child in the same PS 184 that he is now complaining does not serve special education students. It had more applications then they can fit.
    Many kids are not form the district.
    David made himself very active in the local admissions policy advocacy, getting real cozy with all of the big names in DoE and politicians and digging up dirt on schools.
    When the daughter got in to a different school then the one he wanted he signed her up to Girls Prep. That way she still can maybe transfer in to PS 184 from the wait list, since students normally can’t transfer from one district school to another (no stealing students). David was on the CEC in District One when he was parent of a district school student. Now he had to resign since he is a charter parent.
    There is a rumor he is blackmailing DoE to get his spot in the school.

  • Cora

    Lisa:
    This is unbelievable but looking back it makes sense somehow, I guess. David should better NEVER try to return to the CEC then.

    Ken:
    regarding the pro vs contra charter school issue. It should not be political but is and that is very sad. Information is political, sadly. The way charter schools are being ‘distributed’ into school buildings is due to a lack of space in general and due to a willingness to profit on education. These are all political and even economical motifs (how else is it possible that a charter school director/ manager/ you-name-it can give him/herself a salary of $300.000 or more?).
    I want good education I so chose in my neighborhood for my children and that same choice for all children and also all other neighborhoods everywhere and that does not seem political at all to me. To me as a parent the differences on how to make that happen through a charter school or a ‘regular’ public school only complicates everything and adds to the confusion you already have as a parent altogether. I am a happy parent at two great and successful ‘regular’ public schools and all that comes down from the DOE does not help them to get better does puts little mini-surveys on a daily basis and other rocks into their way and the principals away from the children and in front of the computer all the time. Data collecting mania vs educational support? It is very hard to measure the real success of any educational institution but it should not be hard to be transparent about it’s finances and decision making processes. And it is not hard to find out what ‘the people’ in a neighborhood want, except that in order to make an educated choice it all comes down to INFORMATION… (you may now start over at the point it says Ken:…)

  • http://curious2.typepad.com Ken

    Thanks Cora,

    If there is one theme in which I think most GS readers agree, it is that the public should have access to as much information as possible in order to improve our ability to make educated choices and, separately, to improve oversight over public institutions by private citizens. Although I am supporter of Bloomberg and Klein, I wish they did a better job in making all information available to the public (that wouldn’t compromise the privacy of a private citizen).

← Older Comments
Newer Comments →
Take the GothamSchools Survey

Tips, questions, feedback?

Contact us at .

Follow GothamSchools

RSS

Chalk It Up

Recent Comments

0 comments so far today
View all comments »

RSS Feeds

Newsroom posts Community posts All GothamSchools content

Our Twitter Updates

Archives

May 2012
M T W T F S S
« Apr  
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031  

Copyright Notice