GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools

Ms. Donlan: do all of the people who choose charter schools not count as parents, students or community members. If all of the needs of students are being met, then there would be no demand for charter schools.

That said, I do like your idea of eliminating zones and letting parents choose any school in their district. How does District 1 handle too many parents applying to some schools and not enough to others. Is it a random lottery? The problem with this approach is generally transportation; many parents want to send their kids to the school closest to their home.

Again, why can’t Eva find her own space?

Why does she feel that she’s entitled to take space away from another school?

We will have much more to say on this in the coming days but would make two points: a) Ms. Moscowitz’s wine and cheese house parties, ubiquitous advertisements of every form, and glossy $10 mailings litterally burying every parent and child in District 3 didn’t “just start” but have been going on for over 2 months and long before Upper West Success’s charter had even been approved by SUNY. We estimate that she already has spent almost $1 million in taxpayer supplemented funds on these marketing efforts and will far surpass the $2 million mark by the time of her famous lottery in April. And this doesn’t include the massive free advertising she receives from the New York Post, the Daily News and the numerous other media outlets that her 3 PR firms generate. One needs to ask then, if the demand for Upper West Success is as strong as Ms. Moscowitz and her poll claims, and parent choice on the Upper West Side and in District 3 is so limited, why has she needed to spend almost $3000 per application to generate each of her 357 applications? (To put this into perspective for obscene spending, this is 20-30 times the amount that Bloomberg spent per vote during last year’s mayoral campaign). b) As picked up last week in El Diario, Ms. Moscowitz is bound in her SUNY charter application to spend a good portion of this money heavily marketing to – and then providing priority enrollment for – English Language Learners and students in DOE designated “failing” schools in District 3 first, with next enrollment priority given to these at risk and ELL students Citywide. Given these obligations and enrollment priorities, and the fact that D3 had but a single (not 12 as reported) “failing” school as per last year’s DOE progress reports, why is it impossible to find a single spanish language brochure or advertisement for Upper West Success, either in D3 or beyond? And why instead is Ms. Moscowitz telling the parents at her Upper West Side wine and cheese parties that their D3 kids will receive admissions priority? Which Eva is telling the truth? The Eva obligated by SUNY and the state legislature to reach out to citywide at-risk and ELL kids or the Eva seeking to fill her new school with applications from the townhouses on West End Avenue?

I live and teach in District 3, and those Upper West Success mailings are something else again. I live in a part of the UWS that is mostly white, and the brochures I get feature almost all white children and white teachers. It’s like Moskowitz is reassuring families, “Oh, don’t worry, it’s not *that kind* of charter school!” Parents at my school, however, report that mailings sent in mostly African American zips have mostly black kids and teachers in their brochures. Same story in the mostly Latino neighborhoods. I haven’t seen these other brochures, so I can’t confirm this, but if it is true then that is just grotesquely cynical. Not to mention exactly what you get when you apply capitalist business practices to public education.

As an UWS parent of a son who will be matriculating into kindergarten in 2011, I would like to make a number of observations about the article and the subsequent comments.

1.  I am zoned for a school in district 3 that received a DOE “report card” with a “D” and an “F” for “Environment” and “Student Performance” respectively.  In addition, other schools in the district where there is not overcrowding or an admissions test have similar grades in these areas.  I am not sure what these grades mean but in my educational experience “D”s and “F”s are never good or not identifying a fundamental problem.  I am sure the conspiracy minded will have some explanation of how the report card is rigged by Bloomberg / Klein in order to proliferate their evil education plan.  Nevertheless, in my view, these grades are unacceptable and do not represent a fair choice for my child.
2.  I recently toured one of the Success Academies and I was extremely impressed with the environment, the teachers and administrators, and the student experience I observed.  It was clear that there was a real commitment to education and teaching innovation.  As compared with other tours my wife and I have been to in the past month, the Success Academy was by far the most favorable visit and represented the institution that demonstrated the most commitment to its students and teachers.  
3.  There seems to be a lot of focus on the marketing budget of the Success Academy.  I for one am grateful for receiving one of the fliers as it alerted me to this potential opportunity early in the process.  In addition, with such staunch and organized opposition from the likes of the CEC and the teacher’s union, I can’t blame Ms. Moskowitz for trying to tell her side of the story in whatever way and however many times possible.  I would love to see the amount of money the teacher’s union spends each year opposing charter schools either directly through organized opposition or indirectly through campaign contributions to politicians that will do their bidding.  My guess is that they spend a lot more than Ms. Moskowitz’s budget.
4.  As for Mr. Gotbaum’s comments with respect to “middle-class white kids”, I am not sure what he is getting at with this comment.  Does he mean that middle class white kids don’t deserve decent choices in public education?  Should people on West End Avenue be forced to fork out $30K+ per pupil per year in addition to their income, sales, and property taxes in order to alleviate the over-crowding in his district and continue the indirect segregation of our city’s children?  I simply don’t understand comments like these.  I do not live on West End Avenue but I am white upper middle class.  I also cannot prudently afford to spend college-like tuition for the next 17 years on my two children as well as live in the great city of New York.  These comments, however, make me interested in getting more actively involved in community politics and elections as I believe Mr. Gotbaum is one of our elected officials.
5.  There are number of comments with respect to the treatment of special needs children (ELL and learning disabled).  I do not know whether the practices mentioned are happening or whether this is truly an issue.  My understanding from visiting the school was that there are around 15% special needs kids admitted to the Success Academy schools.  They are held to the same standards and provided an environment that can help them achieve those standards (even if they need additional help or different teaching methods).  Children that are at the far end of a spectrum and with intensive needs are counseled into programs designed for their needs and endorsed by the city.  I am not sure what the problem is with these practices outside of fear mongering on the part of the charter opposition.  Ironically, the NY school system and many parents already gladly embrace the idea of isolating children with special “gifts”.  The city and district wide gifted & talented programs are all about segregating children at the high end of the intelligence spectrum at the early age of 5 and by using a test that many parents have found can be coached in advance.  Personally, I am in favor of ensuring that children with learning disabilities, language barriers, or other needs are provided with an education system that tailors to their needs in order to help them achieve throughout their lives, and I am willing to have my tax dollars ensure this.  I think a gifted and talented program that starts at Kindergarten is silly and does a disservice to the community by not allowing our children to mix at an early age.  There are valuable lessons to be learned from a broad spectrum environment and the G&T program stifles this.  It is, however, a “choice” that many parents desire in order to avoid underperforming zoned schools.
6.  Overall, I think the debate around charter schools and how they integrate with existing public education and the needs of the community is a great debate with good points to be made from both sides.  Charter schools are certainly not the only solution particularly for a school system with the size and scope of the NYC system.  They do, however, provide an alternative for some parents who may not have many good choices.  They also provide needed competitive pressure within the existing system.  Growth in this area should be managed and encouraged by our education leaders.  From what I can see from the education establishment, the growth in charters is seen as threatening and thereby discouraged and hampered.  In addition, like technology incubators in Silicon Valley, the charter schools have a size and scope that allows them to innovate in ways the current system would never allow.  Rather than treat the charter schools as pariahs, the public education leadership should embrace them as innovation partners and work with them to improve the practices and education for all teachers and students in the system.