GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools

the charm? (updated)

IBO: Schools up for closure tonight enroll very needy students

A slide from the IBO's report about schools up for closure.

For the third year in a row, the city’s data watchdog has concluded that the schools the city is trying to close serve especially needy students.

In 2010 and 2011, the Independent Budget Office put together longer reports about the city’s school closure proposals on the request of Robert Jackson, chair of the City Council’s education committee. But this year, the office, which has a special mandate to scrutinize the Department of Education’s facts and figures, compiled details about the demographics, performance, and funding of schools on the chopping block on its own. Then it released the statistics in an easy-to-read, stand-alone format.

Among the many people who are receiving the IBO’s 13-slide presentation by email today are the members of the Panel for Educational Policy, who are set to vote on the closure proposals tonight, according to spokesman Doug Turetsky.

“It’s an accessible format so people can see the stats and come to their own conclusions,” he said.

UPDATE: Department of Education officials disputed some of the data in the slides and said the budget office had not given them as much time to review the report before publication as an agreement between the two offices requires.

They urged the IBO not to release the report and then to retract it once it was published because data on at least one slide did not match information the city had provided. The budget office retracted one slide that showed change over time in the number of students with special needs at the schools.

But other slides showed that the schools up for closure enroll more than the average proportion of students who have disabilities, are overage, or are considered English language learners, confirming analyses published elsewhere.

That comparison is central to the argument made often by critics of closures that the schools were set up to fail because they enroll especially needy students. City officials counter, on the other hand, by noting that other schools serve similar student populations with better results.

The tables also confirm that many of the schools slated for closure have been enrolling increasingly high percentages of the city’s most struggling students over the last decade.

At At Grace Dodge Career and Technical Education High School and Samuel Gompers Career and Technical Education High School, 47 percent of students had posted eighth-grade reading scores in the lowest third citywide in 2003. By last year, at least 61 percent of the schools’ students fell into that category.

DOE officials argued that the comparison over time obscures the fact that because average test scores have risen in the last 10 years, the lowest-scoring students now are on average higher-performing than the lowest-scoring students in 2003.

Key findings from the IBO’s presentation:

  • On virtually every measure of performance, from test scores to attendance to graduation rates, the schools on the closure list fell short of citywide averages.
  • All of the high schools enrolled more ninth-graders who were overage for their grade than the citywide average. At two schools, Grace Dodge and Legacy School for Integrated Studies, overage students made up more than half of the freshman class last year.
  • All of the high schools enrolled more ninth-graders with special needs than the citywide average. Two schools, Gompers and Legacy, had more than twice as many ninth-graders in special education than the citywide average.
  • The high schools on the closure list spent more per student than the citywide average last year, particularly on teachers and staff. They spent less than average on equipment and supplies.
  • A smaller proportion of the schools’ funding than average came through the city’s Fair Student Funding formula, which is designed to promote funding equity. They got more in federal funds and other funds from the city.

The budget office’s full, updated presentation is below.

  • Nycdoenuts

    This strikes me as the most profound pece of evidence yet that the DOE set these schools up to fail.
    But worse still is that it means that they set those students up to fail and that’s simply not acceptable.
    I can deal with the rhetoric and the policy changes and the loss of job protections. That’s one thing. But to learn that my school system actually put children in a position where they know they were going to fail (HS students are placed in their schools by one of the DOE offices) is nauseating. An act like that isn’t just wrong, it’s a sin.

  • nuff said

    Demographics table is most distressing of all–where is the outrage–87% in poverty—If you close the school how many just give up and drop out?

  • Mike

    I would be interested to see the data on middle school disciplinary records as well.  It’s not uncommon for people who worked in schools that closed to say that their school began to get more and more of the most difficult kids in the years leading up to closing, though there is probably some correspondance with test scores.

    The implication is always that the DOE has to dump its worst kids somewhere and that these schools are targeted.

  • http://profiles.google.com/bronxwanderer Rod Night

    so how is closing and transforming going to help exactly?

  • Sluch20

    What isn’t shown is how many of the “typical” students were funneled off to, or cherry-picked to be in charter schools?  What isn’t shown is which charter organization is waiting in the wings to take over another public school after arranging the failure?  What isn’t shown is that organizations like the Broad Academy have “toolkits” for participants in their administrative school that describe, step-by-step “how to close a school”.  It is a business.  It is the latest trend for outside business interests to suck public funds from our regular school system so they can teach those they want.  By eliminating English Language Learners, students with moderate to severe disabilities and foster youth (they also “recruit” specific parent types) – they will appear to be performing better.  By siphoning off the “easier-to-teach” students and leaving those difficult ones behind – it does become a business plan.  They then acquire control of the property (which is ultimately the big reason) and send those less desirable students where?  Are we seeing the warehousing of our more needy population of students?  And why has government gotten in bed with these businessmen instead of listening to academics, educators and child development specialists?  NCLB set up the playing field for business to infiltrate, the testing industry (Neil Bush’s big business coup) helps with “identifying” those low-performing schools that are then “offered up” to the Eli Broads and other wealthy businessmen who could care less about ALL children.  It’s despicable, it’s wrong and it’s out of control.  We no longer have true public education, just “business opportunities” for wealthy men who have found creative new ways to steal educational funds.  There is no “commons”, there is no “justice for all”…only a bottom line.  

Tips, questions, feedback?

Contact us at .

Word from Our Sponsor

Follow GothamSchools

RSS
Subscribe to the daily email digest:

Chalk It Up

Recent Comments

12 comments so far today

Archives

May 2013
M T W T F S S
« Apr  
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031