The Education NeoCon Plans for the NYC School System: Privatize and Walk Away

The Wire is over … TV is boring, but you find black humor on the DOE wesite.

The website announced the appointment of Chris Cerf  as Deputy Chancellor for Organizational Strategy, Human Capital and External Affairs. The press release says Cerf will be in charge of labor relations and politics and a range of other important areas. Blaring out of Cerf’s resume is his eight years as CEO of Edison, the for profit competitor to public schools, that has had a rather checkered career.

Klein, the numero uno is a lawyer and Clintonista, Andres Alonzo, the numero dos was a Special Ed teacher for few years in Newark before becoming the lead educator in NYC and numero tres lead a nationwide organization, with a shabby reputation, that tried to profit from public schools.

Who are these “masked men”?

The new motto of the DOE is “leadership, empowerment, accountability,” expect to see it on T-shirts and emblazoned on banners. Makes sense: the three leaders have taught for a total of less than ten years, none has ever lead a school and are thoroughly disliked, or unknown to the hundred thousand employees and million kids and their parents in the NYC school system.

The DOE has “created” 321 “empowerment schools,” and, of course, the DOE refuses to negotiate a labor agreement with the CSA – the supervisors union – senior teachers earn more than the folks that supervise them!!  And, of course, accountability, DOE creates an enormously complex and unwieldy evaluation/accountability system - schools will be “graded” on a scale – with 10% receiving an “F” grade each year – and concomitant “removal” of the principal. 

The leadership guru – Peter Senge – has written extensively on learning organizations and has translated his theories to school systems. The gnomes at Tweed ignore the soundest of advise and boldly move to the “new world.”

A world where schools are “managed” by outside organizations under a performance contract. In the totally cynical world of politics it might make sense: if schools fail it’s the fault of the outside manager, if schools succeed the Mayor can claim credit.

The “neo cons” of the world of education, cynically, have abandoned their mission of providing the highest quality education for the children they are legally mandated to shepherd.

With photos of Milton Freedman secreted away in their wallets they are either ideologically committed to “privatize” education or simply want to walk away from schools without being responsible for the debris they leave behind.

Elected officials bemoan the granting of imperial powers in the field of education to the Mayor, and the Mayor, with national ambitions negotiated a favorable contract with the powerful teacher’s union. Rather than imposing their educational “neo con” strategies they may have created an opposition: elected officials, parents, public schools advocates, teachers and their unions … that will drag them from their perch.

Educational Management Organizations: A Heritage or an Obituary?

It still amazes me that urban school districts  are turning to “leadership” types rather than educators.

Carmen Farina, the recently retired # 2 at Tweed, Dr. Cashin the Regional Superintendent in Region 5 and Barbara Byrd Bennett, the former Superintendent of Cleveland, and long time NYC educator spent careers “learning the ropes” and providing leadership to complex and diverse communities. The “leadership” types threaten, stumble and seek some “magic” bullet approach … and leave before their reputation is tarnished. Joel Klein is a perfect example. For three years he tried to build a mega school system with a topdown oppressive approach to personnel. Rather than turning around a school system Klein has only succeeded in antagonizing principals, teachers and parents.

Last spring he unearthed his magic bullet – Sir Michael Barber. Barber is a Brit, former official in one of the British teacher unions and a close advisor to Tony Blair, and, now, a consultant for Kinsey and Company, one of the highest powered of the consulting establishment. Barber lead the deconstruction of the British school system … devolving budget and decision-making authority to local and school authorities. He trumpets claims of turning around a national educational system  and suggests the same thing can be done in New York City – if only NYC didn’t have such a strong teacher’s union. Do we see dramatic increases in student achievement in Great Britain? The National Assessment of Educational Progress – International  data does not support Barber’s claims. No surprise.

With the Brit whispering in his ear Klein is about to embark on the “next big thing,” the devolution of the NYC school system – with a “twist.” Clusters of schools will be “managed” by Educational Management Organizations , EMOs, independent organizations, that under a contract run schools.

With the club of contract negotiations not hanging over the head of the teachers’ union Klein can’t use threats and intimidation to “charter-ize” the school system. In addition, a recalcitrant state legislature turned away a salary increase for themselves to resoundingly spurn his desire to sharply increase the number of charter schools in New York City (currently 50 – Klein wanted to increase the cap to 250).

Under the guise of devolving budget and authority to the school level, with his British guru vaunting success “across the pond,” (and with a substantial consulting fee) Klein is planning his exit strategy.

Rather than mayoral control, and mayoral responsibility, create a buffer of organizations, that can be hired and fired at will, to “manage,” (whatever that means!!) schools. If schools fail, it’s not Klein’s fault, fire the EMO and hire another one …

The powerful worry: what will history say about them? Will Klein’s heritage be the “creation” of a highly effective new school system or the architect of chaos? John Lindsay left a decentralized school system that was lauded by tshe social scientist is the 60s – and three decades later was abandoned as a miserable failure.

The arrogance of Klein has had unintended consequences: he created a coalition of stakeholders: parents, teachers, public school activists and grass roots organizations, not to support his efforts but to oppose him. It is an irony that what public school advocates could not achieve themselves has been fostered by the hubris of a leader without clothes.

“The Bigotry of Low Expectations,” with a Wink and a Nod

We have known for years that as kids progress through middle school they fail to continue to acquire literacy and numeracy skills. The early adolescence years are complex: peer pressure, self doubt, bullying, emerging sexuality and the growing pressures of academic work in schools.

Schools are overwhelmed with discipline issues and respond with “command and control” solutions: self contained classes or eliminating middle schools and creating K-8 or 6-12 models.

Teacher turnover rates in middle schools are appalling with new teachers stumbling and leaving to be replaced with yet another wave of new teachers.

Unfortunately in New York City the much lauded mayoral control has failed to deal with classroom instruction and has mandated models: from rigidly imposing proprietary models, (i.e.,Everyday Math) to 200 small high schools to Multiple Pathways, alternative models for overaged, undercredited students.

What is particularly distressing is the accountability model built into the new Empowerment Schools model. Each school will receive a grade, from A to F, based upon an “average student growth” metric. A key element of the high school metric is moving kids from grade 9 to grade 10. Rather than focusing on high quality classroom instruction the “magic bullet” seems to bee credit recovery.

Some principals, faced with being “graded” on credit accumulation have simply “cheated.” Either blatantly changing grades or leaning on teachers to give passing grades or designing “creative” methods of credit accumulation.

Integrity and Rigor should be the defining principles in all schools – for the school leaders, the staff and the students.

The Tweed administration is either duplicitous or inept – neither is acceptable.

“Outsourcing” the School System: The EMO Chimera

The corporate model to success has become a combination of innovation, automation and “outsourcing.” Find that new product, market it as hard as you can can, and, of course, produce it as cheaply as possible. Thirty years ago the United States had 30% of the world’s college graduates – now we have 14% and the percent continues to fall. An Indian engineer makes $7500 a year while an American engineer with the same qualifications earns $45,000 a year. In the realm of the unskilled: USA versus the world, wage gaps are astronomical.

 Schools, however, require a teacher in front of a class of kids, and if salary is not competitive, we can’t attract the “best and the brightest.” Report after report calls for higher teacher salaries, although calls for some sort of pay for performance are also heralded, and, experiments are growing (i.e., Procomp in Denever). 

For some the “answer” is non union Charter Schools, lower salaries, no union political pressures and you simply blame the charter for failures. However in spite of the beating of drums, charters are unpopular with the vast percent of parents and voters. In spite of the popularity of Mike Bloomberg he has been unable to successfully implement his charter school agenda. The NYS State legislature refused to lift the legislative imposed charter cap, and, whether Bloomberg will pursue his agenda as avidly with a democratic governor is open to question.

Does he want unionized charter schools? Would the charter school advocates support legislation that increased the cap and made it easier to organize charter schools? With the charter school route blocked it appears that Bloomberg/Klein are pursuing an “outsourcing” strategy.

The creation of Educational Management Organizations, EMOs, that would “manage” clusters of schools under a performance contract.

In the private sector the measurement of success is profit and stock price. In the public sector the metrics are more difficult. Lower crime rates, faster ambulance response, fewer potholes, in schools, it is always those pesky scores and graduation rates. For seemingly endless decades there was a wall between educational and elected political leadership. Mayors took credit for successes and blamed superintendents and school boards for failures. The movement to mayoral control is both risky and attractive. Boards of Education and elected lay school boards appear to be terribly inefficient and subject to local political pressures. A strong mayor can impose modern management and insulate education from the vagaries of local pressures.

After three years it appears that that Bloomberg is seeking an “outsourcing” route. Ten mega regions with rigid topdown management controls roiled teachers and did nothing to raise scores. If networks of schools can be shunted to EMOs their success can be claimed by the politicos and the failures can be blamed on their surrogates. And, it is a step down the charter path.

Will EMOs been seen as an innovative approach to school management or a way for the Mayor to sneak out the back school house door?

Charter-izing: Whether You Like It Or Not!!!

The Charter Folk has been castigating the state legislators for months and  now are aghast when they refuse to lift the 100 school statewide cap. Whispers are that the City administration wanted to have power to convert existings schools to charters without any consultation/approval by parents. (forget about teachers or their union).

The one thing they succeeded in doing is alienate the very folk that has to approve the legislation – drats, that democracy thing again.

Coming to a negotiating table with all the stakeholders could result in additional charters – and maybe Spitzer can act as the convener, of course maybe the charter folk would rather be outside the tent pissing in!!!

American Workforce Report Ain’t No Nation At Risk

The 1983 Nation at Risk report shook the education superstructure. It resonated throughout the nation and forced folk to take an introspective look … and Al Shanker, the leader of the American Federation of Teachers was an outspoken supporter.

 The “Tough Choices, Tough Times,” report by the Commission on the Skills of the American  Workforce gets off to a good start. What will the future of the American workforce look like? The United States, a nation providing the “creative work,” while the rest of the world providing the “routine work” done by men or machines? Those of us of a certain age have yellowed copies of Alvin Tofler’s work on our bookshelves: leafing through it we see that futurists had their hits and their misses … and I look forward to the panels on CSPAN.

The recommendation section of the Report is disappointing, especially those dealing with schools. It is not surprising that the national teacher’s union, the AFT skewers the Report while the NYSun gives it torah-like attributes. 

From this blogger: 1. Is school structures the answer? Those of us who toil in the trenches  know that structure: K-5, K-8, 6-8, 6-12, 9-12 and on and on don’t change what happens within the classroom. 2. Recruiting the “best and the brightest” is fine, keeping them is the issue. Teach for America and the Chancellor’s Fellows Program select teachers through a rigorous process – just the type of teacher we want – and they leave at a higher rate than the teachers in general. And, salary is not the primary reason. Lack of administrative support, student discipline, pressure, the bottom line: it’s a really, really, hard job!!! 3. Reducing health and pension benefits and using the savings to increase salaries!! I’m trying to think of a polite term: how about, this is a really dumb idea!!  Would you “trade” a 10-15% increase in salary for sharp reductions in health benefits and no pension … have they asked prospective teachers? It would achieve the opposite purpose!!  Teacher mobility drops after five years and continues to drop as teachers commitment to the job, both emotionally and economically increase – their pension grows in value.  The Report recommendations would result in “encouraging” teachers to move on to a “real job.” This recommendation is antithetical to the goal of the Report.

The cultural realities of the first decade of the 21st century is a much more mobile workforce. Job satisfaction is the key to retention and that means a highly collaborative worksite. The recent 90-90-90 Study points to a collaborative climate as a key to high pupil achievement in high poverty schools. Many of the other “steps” are restatements of what we all know and support: high quality universal childhood education, equitable funding to provide additional funding to schools with disadvantaged students, a GI Bill for our times and government funded job training programs.

I find the Report tinged with arrogance. The Report admits  it is “easier to implement changes with strong union support,” why would a union support this Report, especially when it’s members will be offended by it?

We await “the” Report that sets forth a national strategy this is collaborative rather than edicts from the mount.

testing

testing