Join the GOOGLE +Rubber Room Community

Friday, November 23, 2012

Brooklyn Charters And Co-Location: Does This Make Sense?

The Success Academy, the city's largest group of charters, opened a Williamsburg branch (above) this summer and is planning on starting Fort Greene and Prospect Heights locations next. - Pearl Gabel/City Limits

 

Charters Target Middle-Class Brooklyn

Originally launched to offer more choice to low-income parents in poorly served neighborhoods, charter schools are increasingly targeting more affluent students in areas that have lots of school options.Printer-friendly version
By Gail Robinson | Monday, Nov 19, 2012
The fifth graders, dressed in white shirts and navy slacks or shirts, sit in neat rows as the teacher offers up some basic principles of division. "How can you divide 0 into 64 pieces?" she asks, before telling them to write a definition in their notebook–taking care to write neatly and use complete sentences.
Down the hall, an English teacher offers explicit directions to another group of children. "If you do not have your written material, wait and put your hand in the air," she says. "Every binder should be zipped and standing next to your desk."
This middle school, Brooklyn Ascend in Brownsville, goes beyond academic basics–students read Shakespeare and study art, Spanish and music. But it smacks of discipline and tradition. The school's founder, Steven Wilson, says such routines avoid wasted time.
"We have a tremendous amount of work to do here to overcome deficiencies" that the school's largely low-income, black students arrive at the school with, Wilson says. "Teachers leading very purposeful activities are the way to allow our students to catch up and make a middle-class life."
For almost a decade, schools such as Brooklyn Ascend have represented the face of charter schools in New York City. Overwhelmingly black and Hispanic, they stress academics and discipline in their efforts to push children in the city's most blighted neighborhoods to excel academically.
Now, though, charter schools in Brooklyn have entered a new phase. Led by Eva Moskowitz, whose Success Academy network is the city's largest and most controversial group of charters, operators have started to open charter schools in more diverse and affluent parts of the city, including Williamsburg, Cobble Hill and Fort Greene. To attract parents in these areas, some schools now stress diversity and a more progressive curriculum.
This trend is most evident in Williamsburg. James Merriman, executive director of the New York City Charter School Center, estimates that among all the charters in the city, only five currently open or approved to open next fall have intentionally marketed themselves to white parents in an effort to create an integrated school. Of those, three are in Williamsburg: Moskowitz's Williamsburg Success, which opened in August, and two schools scheduled to launch next fall that were brought to the area by the Tapestry project, which works to create charter schools in North Brooklyn. Tapestry's executive director, Eric Grannis, is Moskowitz's husband.
Supporters of these new schools say they will provide parents with more choices and counter the racial segregation endemic to urban public education. Opponents charge the city has promoted charters, giving them a leg up on the competition for space, funding and students, in an effort to privatize the city's public schools.
Where the charters are
Since New York City's first charter school opened in 1999, the movement has spread rapidly, boosted by the Bloomberg and Obama administrations, hard-driving charter operators and backing from Wall Street. Parents, particularly in lower-income neighborhoods, have responded enthusiastically, flooding the schools with applications and creating demand for seats.
Some 159 charters now operate in New York City, with Brooklyn home to more charters–61–than any other borough. With 11 schools, Community Education District 14, which includes Williamsburg, and Greenpoint, has the largest number of charters. "We're inundated with elementary charter schools, and the city continues to give us more and more charter schools," says Tesa Wilson, president of the district's Community Education Council and a parent whose daughter attended district schools before going on to Stuyvesant High School. (She is not related to Steven Wilson.)
Charters also have become a major presence in District 16, which encompasses much of Bedford Stuyvesant. Across the borough, District 21 (Bay Ridge, Dyker Heights, Borough Park) has no charter schools. The swath of South Brooklyn that is District 20 has one. Overall, only 4 percent of city public school students attend a charter school.
While the city and state encourage charter schools, they do not dictate where the schools will be or what kind of programs they will offer–after all, each school, while publicly funded, is privately run. "Chartering is a choice movement in two ways," says Merriman. Parents choose whether to go to a charter, for one. For the other, "It's a choice movement in the sense that charters don’t exist unless people choose to start them."
In reviewing applications to open schools, the authorizers—the State Board of Regents, the city Department of Education or the SUNY Charter School Institute—consider whether the operators can do what they say they will. The level of demand in the community plays at most a small role. That is more likely to come into play in the discussion about where to locate the charter, particularly if the new school wants space in an existing public school building.
While nationally charters have a spotty record–they do not perform better than conventional public schools, according to many studies–students in New York City charter schools generally score higher than students in traditional public schools on standardized tests, despite the charters' high concentration of low- income students. The Charter School Center calculates that 72 percent of charter school students scored proficient in math on standardized tests and 51 percent in English language arts, compared with 60 percent and 47 percent respectively for district schools.
Critics including the United Federation of Teachers, on the other hand, argue that charter schools, exempt from many Department of Education rules, have a less challenging student body, with fewer English language learners and special ed students than nearby district schools. They also charge that some of the charters shed lower performing students who might bring down test scores.
Back to Brooklyn
By many accounts, the charter movement in New York City got its start in Williamsburg in 1992 when Joe and Carol Reich fought a corrupt community school board and opened Beginning with Children, a forerunner to today's charter schools, on Bartlett Street.
Since that time, Tesa Wilson says, the district schools have changed along with the neighborhood. In addition to zoned schools, the district now has eight magnet schools, created at least partly to spur integration and provide more progressive choices for parents.
But there are other options, too, and they’re multiplying. Across the five boroughs, 24 new charters opened this year. Among them are two new Success schools in gentrifying Brooklyn neighborhoods, Cobble Hill Success and Williamsburg Success. Another elementary charter–Beginning with Children II–also opened in Williamsburg this year.
More schools in such areas will begin classes next school year. Williamsburg will see the two schools midwifed by Grannis. New Success schools are slated for Fort Greene and Prospect Heights. Success will continue its push for diversity with two new schools in Manhattan's highly regarded Community Education District 2. (An Ascend school will also come to Williamsburg, though Steven Wilson says it will be in a low-income area and he does not anticipate an influx of white students.)
Some parents welcome these choices. "I think parents need more options," Grannis says. "I don’t think parents in Williamsburg think they have all the options they would like."
Henry Mazurek, a lawyer with two young children, is one. He does not deny there are good district schools in District 14, but they are not, he says, on the south side where he lives. So he is seriously considering Williamsburg Success, impressed by what he sees as its strong leadership and organization. "The energy in the classroom is impressive," he says and "the kids—beautiful brown, black and Asian faces and a couple of white faces—are all engaged."
Seymonnia Cutkelvin, who grew up in Williamsburg and attended PS 21, has already chosen Williamsburg Success for her son, now in kindergarten. About two months into the school year, Cutkelvin is convinced she made the right decision. "So far, we love it," she said of Success.
Shifting to aim for whites
Like so much in New York, the battle over charters in Williamsburg and Cobble Hill involves race and real estate.
Blacks account for about 60 percent of all city charter school students, according to the New York Charter School Center, compared to about 30 percent in the public schools as a whole. On the other hand, while 14 percent of all city public school students are white, less than 6 percent of charter school students are. Even though only about 9 percent of all city public schools are charters, a full third of the city's most highly segregated schools are, the New York Times recently found.
This is no accident. Charter operators saw it as their mission–or opportunity, skeptics might say–to go into communities where regular public schools seemed to be failing their students. In New York and much of the country, those tended to be black and Latino neighborhoods. ((This, Merriman says, does not include some charters in Queens that, by virtue of where they are, have a large number of white students.)
"People interested in starting charter schools have a social mission and see the least amount of need in affluent areas," Grannis says, adding many in the charter community believed "that every seat that goes to a white child is wasted."
Families in largely minority neighborhoods took a close look when charter operators came to their neighborhoods offering a no-cost option. They bought into charters, Tesa Wilson says, because "the slightest breeze is a breath of fresh hope." In the minds of many—such as the makers of "Waiting for Superman," the 2010 documentary film about the frenzied competition for charter school seats—the large number of applicants also served as a damning indictment of district schools.
Many charters still concentrate on poor neighborhoods–Steven Wilson, the founder and president of Ascend, says he has no interest in moving into affluent parts of the city. But Moskowitz, after years of focusing almost exclusively on black and Latino communities, has begun seeking out white students.
The organization is going into more diverse districts, says Jenny Sedlis, Success' senior managing director of external affairs, because even high achieving districts have some areas where test scores, graduation rates and academic performance lag. Success' goal remains what it has always been, she says: "We have an incredible commitment to serving children in low income communities." At the same time she adds, "we feel strongly that schools across the country are segregated and that integrated schools are hugely beneficial to children."
Merriman sees this as a trend in education today. After years when integration was virtually ignored, the pendulum has swung back–and charters are part of that. People, he says, are rejecting "this notion that schools should be that segregated, that somehow that's a good thing or something we should tolerate …. I think there's an increasing sense that we've got to do something about it."
Grannis, a former teacher and attorney, is a longtime charter school advocate who has done legal work for some charters. He serves on the board of Bronx Preparatory Charter School and Girls Preparatory Charter schools. Both are overwhelmingly black and Hispanic and feature the kind of structured approach long emblematic of most New York City charter schools. Over the years, Grannis says, he began thinking that communities should play a bigger role in the planning of charters and that charters needed to be more diverse as well.
Williamsburg struck Grannis as a good place to launch diverse, progressive, carter schools. To move the project along, he contacted white, middle class families on a listserv frequented by them. He talked to them about charter schools, telling them, he says, "I'm here because I believe in this." They told him what they wanted in a school.
The goal, Grannis says, is diversity. To achieve that, he says, "you have to deal with where people are coming from," and many white parents, he says, don’t feel comfortable sending their children to a school unless there are other affluent white children there.
The charter operator he contacted, Citizens in the World in Los Angeles, currently has only two schools, both in California and one of which has only been open for a few months. But the network has a particular interest in diversity, according to Tara Phillips, its senior director of community relations. The plan in Williamsburg, she says, is for "creating a school that really reflects the diversity of the community–economic and racial."
According to Grannis and Citizen of the World, Grannis has no official connection to the schools themselves. The schools will open for the 2013-14 school year
Picking winners?
But some question the couple’s motives, and the impact their focus on white students will have. The Grannis-Moskowitz connection itself makes some uneasy. Critics talk about whether the couple is working together to divvy up desirable students and communities.
One critic is Noah Gotbaum, a charter critic who served as president of the District 3 Community Education Council and is now running for public advocate. In his view, having inundated black communities and taken the best students, the charters have turned to white areas to build political support and attract more students likely to score well on standardized tests. Moskowitz's combative personality—in an interview with New York Magazine, Grannis compared his wife to "the sand in the oyster"—and her possible mayoral ambitions fuel suspicions.
Critics say she advertised for Williamsburg Success mainly in the whiter parts of district 14. Success Academy Upper West on 84th Street in Manhattan, which welcomed students in 2011, first launched a marketing campaign in the largely white areas south of 96th Street, according to Gotbaum.
Rather than bringing diversity to schools, many activists fear the charters' effort will undermine what little integration exists in the regular public school system. Put bluntly, in an overwhelmingly black and Latino school system, there may not be enough white students to go around. Even with gentrification, only about 12 percent of District 14 students are white. The district has received federal funding to try to integrate its schools through several magnet schools but, as the Timesrecently reported, has made little progress in attracting white parents.
Williamsburg and Greenpoint Parents for Our Public Schools, or WAGPOPS, which has opposed the charter proposals, contends the Citizens of the World schools will make the situation even worse. The schools, the group argued in a lengthy letter urging SUNY to deny Citizens of the World's charter request, will "do a profound disservice to our educational landscape by siphoning the diversity out of our public schools, re-segregating our only recently diverse schools, and ensuring socio-economic and racial isolation in the schools that most desperately need diverse families."
"One of the few benefits to gentrification is that the schools can improve and you finally get diversity in the classroom," says Brooke Parker, a former Community Education Council member now active in WAGPOPS. She means that as areas like Williamsburg have become more popular destinations for white parents, the district schools there have become less monochromatic. Now she feels Moskowitz, Grannis and others are chipping away at that progress.
Criticized in the past for running segregated schools, Grannis, Moskowitz and others say they now face attacks for trying to integrate, "If we serve poor students, then we're bad for segregating kids, but if we serve affluent kids, then we're criticized for that," Grannis says.
Other charters in the coming years also may reach out to white parents. Children of the World hopes to eventually have eight schools. Grannis has been helping three onetime teachers who have embarked on what they call the Odyssey Initiative which aims to open a diverse, progressive school in northern Brooklyn, probably by 2014.
Meet the New School, More Like the Old School
Many charters, located in low-income black communities, have offered the traditional approach with long school days heavy on reading and math and light on frills. Now, though, as they look to attract progressive white parents, some operators have found a different model at Community Roots Charter School in Fort Greene.
There students sprawl on rugs or break into small groups as they embark on a study of the civil rights movement or look at slides of the Brooklyn waterfront. Children always seem to be up and about, moving from one class or activity to another. They call teachers by their first names and wear pretty much whatever they want. Students work on interdisciplinary projects beginning in kindergarten when they focus on themselves and their families, then as students advance in school they move outward to look at the bigger world, now and in the past.
Children of the World hopes to model its schools partly on Community Roots. In addition, the three former teachers spearheading the Odyssey Initiative once taught at Community Roots.
To Parker, such charter schools are a lot like reinventing the wheel. "They are now creating charter schools that will mimic what is in the public schools," specifically in the magnet schools that now exist in District 14.
WAGPOPS fears the charters will damage the progressive public schools that many of the newcomers to the neighborhood might otherwise choose. In its letter to the Regents, WAGPOPS writes, "Our district families can choose from a variety of public schools …. Creating additional choices for the sake of choice … will generate white flight from our public schools and undermine our Magnet schools."
Phillips denies any such conflicts. Citizens of the World, she says, wants "to make District 14 stand out as a community that is trying to balance the existence of charter schools with district schools."
Merriman says if the charter schools don't fill a need, "then those charters will fail. To my knowledge in the history of the state of New York no parent has ever been forced to attend a charter school."
No one denies, though, that in attracting students Success, at least, has one huge advantage: advertising. Although estimates vary, the organization spends at least hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to attract students.
"It’s marketing, marketing, marketing, and the parents they market it to believe it--and why wouldn't they?" Parker says.
War for space looms
The next round in the battle over the Citizen of the World charter push will come in the next several months as the Department of Education holds hearings on its plans to site the schools in two of its own facilities. In late October, the department announced it wanted to put one Citizens of the World School in John Ericson Middle School on 424 Leonard St. Ericson already shares the building with a charter high school, Believe Northside. The site for the second school has not yet been announced.
New York State's funding formula for charter schools does not provide money for purchasing or leasing classrooms. So most charters in the city rely on getting space in an existing Department of Education school building.
DOE has carved out rooms in what it considers underutilized buildings and offered space vacated by the schools it has closed. Moskowitz in particular has proved adept at getting the Department of Education to make room for her projects. In 2010, the Daily News obtained dozens of emails between Moskowitz and then Schools Chancellor Joel Klein in which she flattered, cajoled and pulled strings to get space for her expanding charter network.
The availability of space guides where charter schools open. Charter operators would like to go into Corona, Queens, Merriman says, but the regular school buildings there are over capacity, leaving no room for new charter schools. Ironically the declining enrollment and empty space in Williamsburg–the very thing that many residents say should dictate against more charter schools there–make it attractive to charter operators.
Last year, an estimated 600 people packed a hearing on the plan to place Williamsburg Success in the building with JHS 50. Parents have gone to court in unsuccessful bids to block co-locations by both Upper West Success and Cobble Hill Success. Already battles are shaping up over the department's plans to co-locate one Success Academy in Susan McKinney Junior High School in Fort Greene and another at PS 138 in Prospect Heights.
The district schools fear they will be the poor relation–and with some reason. Charters, their coffers boosted by philanthropic contributions, often can afford better facilities–labs, computers –than the district school. The schools in a shared building must negotiate use of communal space, such as cafeterias and libraries–decreasing the district school's access to facilities that once were exclusively its own. In a building in Cypress Hills, some district students now have lunch at 10:30 so the elementary charter school kids can eat in the middle of the day.
"No one really talks about what happens after charter school co-locations," Tesa Wilson says, adding she recently told a top Department of Education official, "You don’t get to see the havoc that's created with what you do."
A zero-sum game
The fight for space–and for students–reflects the Bloomberg administration's effort to promote competition in education. The stakes are high. When parents choose a school–district or charter–and enrollment climbs, the school gets more resources, meaning more teachers, more programs, more supplies. Falling enrollment, on the other hand, can cost a school teachers, classes and space, and can contribute to its eventually being placed on the closure list.
Many district school advocates see the administration favoring charters. "This administration says they want all schools to be great but I can tell you some of my schools do not get the support they need," Tesa Wilson said.
In an era of limited resources, Gotbaum says, you can't have competition and "say it will lift all boats." The charter schools, he says, are not there to collaborate but to compete and "no one should be surprised when the public schools, which are 90 percent of the kids, fight back."
The fight will continue–at least for now. Under state law, more than 50 additional charters can open in the city. Moskowitz, who currently operates 14 schools, has spoken of expanding to 40 schools. Citizens of the World has said it hopes to create eight schools in all, serving grades K to 12. A number of charter operators now running elementary schools foresee adding middle and high schools to give their student a full primary and secondary education.
As they compile such plans, though, the operators in Brooklyn and throughout the city face one big question mark. No one thinks charters could have grown as rapidly as they have without Mayor Bloomberg's support and his willingness–some might say eagerness–to turn space over to Moskowitz and others. After January 1, 2014, charter backers fear, that could all change.
EDITOR'S NOTE: The Department of Education will hold a hearing on the co-location of Fort Greene Success at Susan McKinney Secondary School of the Arts at 101 Park Avenue on Dec. 7 at 6 p.m.

Grading Teachers: A Mistake

 
November 22, 2012

When ‘Grading’ Is Degrading

Austin, Tex.
IN his speech on the night of his re-election, President Obama promised to find common ground with opposition leaders in Congress. Yet when it comes to education reform, it’s the common ground between Democrats and Republicans that has been the problem.
For the past three decades, one administration after another has sought to fix America’s troubled schools by making them compete with one another. Mr. Obama has put up billions of dollars for his Race to the Top program, a federal sweepstakes where state educational systems are judged head-to-head largely on the basis of test scores. Even here in Texas, nobody’s model for educational excellence, the state has long used complex algorithms to assign grades of Exemplary, Recognized, Acceptable or Unacceptable to its schools.
So far, such competition has achieved little more than re-segregation, long charter school waiting lists and the same anemic international rankings in science, math and literacy we’ve had for years.
And yet now, policy makers in both parties propose ratcheting it up further — this time, by “grading” teachers as well.
It’s a mistake. In the year I spent reporting on John H. Reagan High School in Austin, I came to understand the dangers of judging teachers primarily on standardized test scores. Raw numbers don’t begin to capture what happens in the classroom. And when we reward and punish teachers based on such artificial measures, there is too often an unintended consequence for our kids.
I went to lunch recently with a fine history teacher, Derrick Davis, who is better known in my neighborhood as the basketball coach at Reagan High. He has a particularly wide vantage on the decline of Reagan High, which opened in the 1960s as the pride of the city, complete with consecutive state football championships, national academic recognition and a choir that toured Europe.
When he graduated in 1990, the yearbook still showed a significant number of white faces mixed in with larger black and smaller Hispanic populations. Parents could see from the annual state report that 82.4 percent of 11th graders passed all the standardized tests, just a tenth of a percentage point below the district average.
In 1994, the state education agency started applying its boilerplate labels, which became shorthand for real estate agents. Reagan High was rated “Academically Acceptable,” the second-lowest grade. Families of means departed for the exurbs, private schools and eventually charter schools.
Even so, returning as a teacher, Mr. Davis had high hopes for No Child Left Behind, the federal education reform legislation enacted in 2002 with bipartisan support led by President George W. Bush and Senator Edward M. Kennedy. The law turned a powerful spotlight on the second-class education being provided for poor kids in places like East Austin. Finally, the truth was out. In that sense, Mr. Davis believed at the time, “No Child Left Behind was the best thing that happened to us.”
But that was hardly the case: instead of rallying a new national commitment to provide quality public education for all children, the reform movement led to an increasingly punitive high-stakes competition for standardized test scores, school grades and labels. Within just a few years, Reagan High fell to “Academically Unacceptable.”
In 2009, I watched the teachers at Reagan High raise test scores just enough to stave off a closure order, working against a one-year deadline. Teachers “taught to the test” and did their best to game a broken system.
Most of all, though, their efforts focused on something more difficult to quantify. I watched Coach Davis revive the basketball team, dipping deep into his own paycheck and family time to inspire the school with an unlikely playoff run. I watched the principal, Anabel Garza, drive around the neighborhood rousting truants out of bed, taking parents to court and telling kids their teachers loved them. I watched a chemistry teacher, Candice Kaiser, drive carloads of kids to cheer on the basketball team, attend after-school Bible study and make doctors’ appointments. I watched the music director, Ormide Armstrong, reinvent the marching band as a prizewinning funk outfit that backed Kanye West.
Together, they gave families a reason to embrace a place long dominated by tension, violence and the endless tedium of standardized test drilling. They improved the numbers. Mostly, they did it through passion, intelligence, grit and love.
No longer “Academically Unacceptable,” Reagan High has started to reclaim its proud stature, though it still serves a disproportionate number of poor families. Mr. Davis still works there. So do Ms. Garza, Ms. Kaiser and Mr. Armstrong, all trying to build a sustainable public school for our neighborhood.
Still, the most significant obstacle they face is the very same myopic policy suggested by Mr. Obama’s erstwhile opponent, Mitt Romney, in the weeks before the election: we grade our schools, he said, so parents “can take their child to a school that’s being more successful.” As for the parents, teachers and children who can’t make that choice, they’re left to salvage what remains.
Michael Brick, a former New York Times reporter, is the author of “Saving the School: The True Story of a Principal, a Teacher, a Coach, a Bunch of Kids, and a Year in the Crosshairs of Education Reform.”

Thursday, November 22, 2012

Boys and Girls HS Principal Bernard Gassaway Defends The School's second "F" Rating

Bernie Gassaway and I had several very interesting conversations before he was appointed Principal of Boys and Girls High School. He was disgusted with the NYC Department of Education... so disgusted that he had quit his position as Superintendent. He told me that anyone who took a job as Principal of a public school in NYC took the position under the directive that he or she must downgrade the school so that the school can be closed.

He has certainly proved his point.

For the past year I have been contacted by staff at Gassaway's school, and I have been given information about classrooms where students are kept for now more than 2 years without a teacher, not even a substitute. Superintendent Suspensions are used to take care of any student who doesn't like being without a curriculum, books, or a teacher; the rubber room is getting stuffed with faculty members Bernie thinks do not go along with his plan.

Boys and Girls is a mess.

Betsy Combier



Gassaway Defends Latest 'F' on BGHS Progress Report; Says Needs More Time for Change

LINK

This year’s “F” continues downward trend for the school that has struggled over the past three years to stave off possible closure.

Although New York City public schools progress reports for academic year 2011/2012 will not be made public until the week of November 26, Bernard Gassaway, principal of Boys and Girls High School, met with his staff on Tuesday to inform them early that BGHS would receive yet another “F.”
Bernard Gassaway and Dennis Walcott

This year’s “F” grade is the second in a row for BGHS, but Gassaway insisted that despite the grade, the school-- Brooklyn's first and oldest high school-- was making progress and simply needed more time for improvement.
News of the "F" will continue what has become a downward trend for BGHS, known to most in the community as The Pride of Bed-Stuy.

However, "Bed-Stuy's Pride" has struggled over the past three years to keep its doors open, as the school's progress reports have shown no improvement. Aside from its failing grade on the 2010/2011 progress report, BGHS received a "C" in 2009/2010 and a "D" in 2008/2009.

New York City principal wants 'turnaround' or nothing at all... Demands Chicago-style power for Boys and Girls High School in Brooklyn



A New York City public school principal with a long history of self-promotion had declared that he would rather not take extra funding for his school than miss the chance to do a "turnaround" and fire lots of teachers. Thanks to members of ICE, the following article has come to Substance from Brooklyn.

The confrontation between a principal who once served as chief of the New York City school system's "Office of New Schools" and the city's school board (and the United Federation of Teachers) has been developing around the implementation of the Race To The Top models for school change. Bernard Gassaway, principal of Boys and Girls High School in Brooklyn, is demanding the right to do "turnaround" and get rid of his teachers (while ignoring that the models for turnaround from Chicago also involved getting rid of principals). The union and New York City school district are proposing a different approach. So Gassaway has taken his claims to the media.

Below are two articles (both combined into one from a local newspaper in Brooklyn). The first is the report on Gassaway's standoff. It contains material from his website.

BELOW IS THE ARTICLE FROM NEW YORK ON GASSAWAYS'S DEMAND

Gassaway Rejects Restart Model And Possibly Millions in Funding for BGHS
 
BGHS Principal Bernard Gassaway says current funding model will do little to improve his school
By C. Zawadi Morris May 31, 2011, BED STY PATCH NEWSPAPER (Brooklyn New York)

It appears that the millions of dollars earmarked to save Boys and Girls High School may be in jeopardy.
One reason is due to stalled negotiations between the teacher’s union and the City around how to best implement teacher evaluations, which will greatly impact the way teachers are hired and fired. But until an agreement is reached between the two parties, the State will hold the money. 

The second reason has to do with the school’s principal Bernard Gassaway. In a letter he released to Bed-Stuy Patch this morning, Gassaway presented a resounding objection to Restart — the school reform model under which the money would be awarded – insisting that most of the $3.5 — $6 million grant that may come with Restart would be restricted primarily to professional development. 

Gassaway has long stated a preference for the Turnaround (Transformation) Model as the most viable approach for student improvement at Boys and Girls, as it would grant him authority to replace teachers he deems ineffective. 

"Money alone is not the answer," said Gassaway. "I have espoused that of all the models being offered, Turnaround would give us the best chance to speed-up the reform of Boys and Girls High School. While I defend all efforts to keep Boys and Girls High School open forever, I do not defend the right of incompetent staff to remain with children indefinitely.” 

Boys & Girls High School has ranked as one of New York State’s lowest performing schools for the last two years, and less than half of its students graduated in 2010. In December, the city narrowly spared Boys & Girls from complete closure.

The Restart Model is one of four improvement plans outlined by the Obama administration in its education initiative designed to improve struggling schools, better known as Race To The Top.
The Department of Education’s reaction to Gassaway’s stance squarely addressed the stalled negotiations surrounding teacher negotiations, which have imperiled the funds’ allocation, but also made clear of DOE’s intention to implement the Restart model.

“We have been in near constant consultation with the State Education Department about our intentions to use Restart, and our plan is consistent with the law, so it’s unfortunate that the State would change the ground rules at this late juncture,” Deputy Chancellor at the New York City Department of Education Marc Sternberg said. 

“We agree with the State about the need for a rigorous and meaningful teacher evaluation system, but thus far we have not been able to reach an agreement with the teacher’s union, and that means we are likely to miss out on more than $125 million in federal funds to improve these schools.”
Still, while negotiations remain on the table regarding teacher evaluations, Gassaway has taken a hard stance on the conditions of the funding:
“I know in my heart and soul that the recent decision of the DOE to move forward with the Restart model is not the best option for Boys and Girls High School,” Gassaway said. “In the end, any model that we adopt must allow school leadership to aggressively address staff incompetence.” Tom Dunn, director of communications at New York State Education Department, said the department had no comment in regards to Principal Gassaway’s position. 

GASSAWAY WEBSITE BELOW HERE 

From his Website, it’s clear that Gassaway is a relentless self-promoter, who has also promoted home schooling and “New Schools” for New York City. 

Bernard Gassaway Cares About Helping Today's Youth
Bernard Gassaway is the son of Annie Gassaway. He was born in Macon, Georgia in 1960.
Bernard attended New York City public schools. From high school, he attended LeMoyne College, a
 Catholic school in Syracuse, New York. He was elected President of the Minority Cultural Society in
his junior year. He went on to graduate from LeMoyne with a Bachelor of Arts degree in English, in
 1982. Two years later, he earned his first Master’s degree from the State University of New York at 
Albany, in public administration.

Bernard worked for two years at the New York City Department of Transportation. In 1986, shortly 
after his mother passed away, he resigned from the department of transportation to pursue what he
called, “meaningful work,” and began his teaching career at Public School 40Q, in Jamaica, New
 York.
Two years later, he transferred to Boys and Girls High School where he taught English and
computer literacy. After several years as a high school teacher, and a brief attempt to start a small
 computer consulting business, he returned to teach at Intermediate School 59Q, in Springfield
Gardens, New York. While teaching at 59Q, he completed his second Master’s degree in Education
Administration and Supervision at Baruch College. Shortly after, he became an assistant principal at 
Junior High School 192Q, in St. Albans, New York. Six months later, he transferred to become the
assistant principal of pupil personnel services at Far Rockaway High School, in 1994.
In April 1997, Bernard was assigned and later appointed the first African-American principal at
Beach Channel High School. After his first year at Beach Channel, he was the recipient of the New
York State Title I Distinguished Educator Award. In 2001, the Queens Borough President’s African-
American Advisory Council selected him as Queens Educator of the Year. He also received an
award for Educator of the Year from Zeta Phi Beta Sorority, Inc., in that same year.
After five years as principal, Bernard resigned to become the Director of New School Initiative for the
New York City Board of Education Alternative Schools Superintendency. In July, 2003, he became
Senior Superintendent for Alternative Schools and Programs. He was also selected as a Revson
Fellow at Columbia University.
In June 2005, after 18 years with the New City school system, Bernard resigned to “continue to fight 
the good fight for children.” He is currently an author, child advocate, doctoral student and educator.
Bernard’s most important roles are father and husband.

Comments:

June 8, 2011 at 2:38 AM
By: Sean Ahern

New York City principal wants 'turnaround' or nothing at all... Demands Chicago-style power for Boys

A few points of information on the situation in NYC regarding "turnaround" which Chicago readers may not be aware of:
The current UFT contract retains bumping rights for senior members in title in the event of layoffs. In other words, tenured teachers in NYC who have no permanent assignments may not be laid off simply because they lack a permanent assignment. UFT members can look for a permanent assignment or remain in the "Absent Teacher Reserve". Layoffs under the current UFT contract are based on seniority in title city wide. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe that the CTU contract offers no such safety net. "Turnaround" in Chicago has led to layoffs of teachers who remain without a permanent assignment for more than a year regardless of the fact that they may have more seniority than another teacher with a permanent assignment. Suffice it to say that the CTU experience with "turnaround" is not the UFT's at least for the time being.
In NYC the "turnaround " model has not to my knowledge been used by the DOE. "Turnaround" does not give the DOE space to 1)"co-locate" a charter school, 2)break up comprehensive High Schools in the Black and Latino communities (which Boys and Girls HS is one of the few remaining examples of) or 3)layoff higher paid senior teachers.
Consider the "turnaround" scenario in NYC under the present terms of the UFT contract. Up to half of the staff may be transferred or reassigned including the Principal, provided that the Principal has served in that capacity at that school for more than 5 years.
In the case of Boys and Girls HS, Gassaway has served three years so he would not be removed under the "turnaround" formula and he would amass considerable powers to shape the direction and staff under "turnaround." In most cases this is a formula to remove experienced Principals in favor of the corporate Principal Academy clones, but Gassaway is not a product of the Jack Welch/Broad foundation clique.
Why is the Principal at Boys and Girl's HS rejecting the "restart" model which was presented to him by the DOE?
I was told by a reliable source that Bernard Gassaway was given less than a day's notice to accept the "Restart" model after it was first presented to him by the DOE. Apparently he balked and took door number three. "Restart" had little to offer in his opinion apart from some professional development money yet simply saying none of the above risked closing. He preferred "Turnaround" and he had the temerity to say so in public. Did he upset some deal underway between Walcott and the UFT?
I met Gassaway and heard him speak after he had resigned from the DOE a few years back in what seemed to be frustration with the Bloomberg/Klein regime.
Gassaway came back to work for the DOE after the long time Principal of Boys and Girls HS, Mickens, died unexpectedly. The school seemed headed for the skids under Micken's sucessor. Gassaway's return to the DOE as Principal of B&G was welcomed and supported by leaders in the Bedford Stuyvesant community. Boys and Girls HS appears to have made progress under his tenure and he continues to enjoy a considerable measure of community support.
Gassaway's outspokeness on "turnaround", as troubling as it may be to teachers at Boys and Girl HS (admitably a speculation on my part since I am not in contact with teachers there), may have more to do with saving Boys and Girls HS from DOE closing and slice and dice than it does with establishing his own dictatorship over the staff.
Looking back on the planned destruction of NYC's large comprehensive High Schools over the past 10 years I think in hindsight mayoral dictatorship did more damage to public education, students and teacher unionism with the Gates small school slice and dice, privatization model than would have ensued with a "turnaround' model provided staff retained the current safety net.
I think the involuntary reassignment of staff members in this context is less damaging to both the staff member, the students, the community and teacher unionism in a school than school closings, slice and dice and charter co -location.
I say this relatively speaking, not as an endorsement of 'turnaround' in NYC and certainly not in Chicago given the absence of a safety net, but in the context of the UFT contract, in hindsight we would still have functional comprehensive public high schools, still struggling no doubt under increasing inequality and poverty, but intact nonetheless after the privatizers bubble burst and the small school benefactors cut the cash flow.
In the current context Walcott cannot dismiss Gassaway or force him to merely accede to the latest directive from Tweed.
Any effort by the DOE to close Boys and Girls HS or remove its Principal at this time would lead to a widespread unified response from the Black community in Brooklyn that would spread. Any effort by the UFT to pressure Gassaway to conform to Walcott's directive on "restart" objectively sets the UFT on an old self defeating path, that of siding with the school bureaucracy against the Black community.
The UFT rank and file need the parents and community to defend learning and working conditions. The parents and working class communities need public school staff to serve the people.
I believe that it is in the immediate self interest of UFT members to support the continued success of Boys and Girls HS under its current leadership. Not all differences merit being fanned into a conflagration. Some need to be put out before they spread. I don't know the views of the staff. I don't know why Gassaway feels he needs the power to reassign up to half of his staff. But this much is known: 1) Gassaway has a base of support in the Bed Stuy community and a plan for the school. 2)the Bloomberg/Walcott dictatorship is faltering and will soon pass from the scene. What will take its place is being shaped in part by our actions.
How staff, administrators, students, parents, and communities and unions of the poor and working class can resolve differences in practical terms, promote fairness, tolerance and equality, raise awareness to our mutual obligations,rights, and responsibilites. No magic bullet. Just folks with common interests working things out refusing to fall prey to the usual divide and control.
Peace,
Sean Ahern
NYC parent and educator.
 

ATR teacher researches animal intelligence 

LINK



Look! Nimbler than a chimp! Stronger than an elephant! Stealthier than a rat!  It's NYCATR's Philip Nobile, reporting from Boys and Girls High School in Brooklyn.


The magical ATR algorithm carried me to Boys and Girls High School in Bedford Stuyvesant last week. With 2000-plus students, a 44% graduation rate, 73% attendance, 83% of 9th graders reading below level in 2010, and an F on its 2010-11 report card (down from a C) B & G is on the verge of a breakdown, perhaps too big not to fail in the narrow eyes of the DOE. 



It is unfair to rate the school from just five days in an abandoned Special Ed Bio Skills class, but here I go: F for fiasco. 
The students told me that their original teacher moved to a different section of the school at the beginning of the marking period. Since then it’s been sub after sub (maybe ATR after ATR) with no quizzes, tests, homework, or grades. 
Ms. Bozeman, an “academic community” supervisor, met me on my arrival Monday morning and escorted me to a large, unadorned, windowless room on the fourth floor with a blackboard instead of a whiteboard or smartboard, the sort of place that says when money is short black special ed kids take the worst hit. I asked her for lesson materials. She said that she would bring me some, but she never came back. 
On Tuesday, I tried to get my hands on lessons before school started. No luck again. The office that Ms. Bozeman shared with an A.P. named Ms. Williams was locked. 
On Wednesday, both women were in early. Ms. Bozeman introduced me to Ms. Williams who seemed unaware that I was covering the class. I requested a lesson for the second time. Nothing was ready, but Ms. Bozeman soon dropped off a clutch of stapled worksheets. When I passed them out, the kids complained they had done them before. Sure enough, on top of a file cabinet I found a bunch of the same set filled in by the same students from the previous week. Apparently, Ms. Bozeman neither bothered to collect this classwork, nor did she make a single inquiry about what I was teaching or how the students were doing. 
In this festering anti-learning environment, the discipline code was strangled by an endless loop of obscenities, harassment, fighting, bullying, insubordination and music from smuggled-in, aluminum wrapped iPods. The F-word, N-word, and the S-my-D imperative, even from girls, dominated the nonstop chatter. Several girls in one class wore revealing tops and some occasionally fondled themselves. A fiercely oppositional boy who called me “whitey” and “asshole” resisted removal by two aides, Ms. Bozeman, and Ms. Williams, relenting only when a security agent appeared. 
As a sub, I had almost no control over the mayhem and hesitated to intervene physically. The last time I broke up a fight at Cobble Hill High School I was framed by an emotionally disturbed special ed boy, his lying para, a hostile principal and a sleazy OSI investigator. Consequently, I spent three years in the rubber room before gaining a pro se acquittal on corporal punishment. (NYSUT refused to defend me because I insisted on accusing the investigator of corruption.) 
On Thursday, despairing of help from my ostensible supervisors, I improvised a lesson plan drawn from PBS Nature and NOVA programs: 
AIM: Are animals intelligent?
Do Now: List the three smartest animals you can think of.
Activity: Explain why these animals are smart. 
Next, I presented and the class discussed the 10 most intelligent animals followed by a mnemonic device to test their memory of the list.
The results were very mixed, but my engagement reduced the tension and related nonsense. Two boys who paid attention succeeded in repeating the 10 animals in precise order: chimp, dolphin, orangutan, elephant, crow, pig, squirrel, pigeon, octopus, rat. 
Since Friday was the final day of the marking period, the kids requested a movie. Why not, I thought. On Thursday night I found a suitable sequel to the day’s lesson--a documentary about exotic pets in the U.S. titled "The Elephant in the Living Room." On Friday morning I sought Ms. Bozeman’s approval, but once more, neither she nor Ms. Williams was around. To my delight, the first period class became engrossed and watched the film without a peep. 
But before showing the film on my laptop, I decided to send a message to B & G’s administration via student evaluations of the course, which received four Fs and two generous C-pluses in the 1st period. Herewith the verbatim replies: 
►What I learned in this marking period in this class was nothing. The reason I say nothing is because we always have a different teacher every week as we never have time to learn anything. This class to me is an F. If we have a teacher that would stay for the whole six week of the marking period maybe I could learn something. 
►F: What I learned this marking period was nothing because every week my class and I have a different teacher. So its actually possible we have no time in learning. 
►F: The last six weeks in this class I learning same thing from diffent teachers but I have to say I still learnd nothing because they teach us nothing that have nothing to do with scince. 
► I only learned about the 10 smartest animals and my grade is an F bcuz I only came here this week. 
► C+: What I’ve learned semester in this particular science course is the different kind of cells and functions. I’m able to identify the differ type of organs and put them from least to greatest. 
► C+: What I learned in this science class is the organs and functions. I also learned the different between them to organ. Now when somebody ask me what the different I will have the answer for them. 
A family emergency forced me to leave the school after 1st period. In my rush I did not have time to hand in the short-circuited evaluations. But I will email this post to Principal Bernard Gassaway, whose title includes “Chief Child Advocate.” 
Since ATRs have almost nothing to lose, we should consider rating our weekly assignments as a service to the DOE.
Photo credit: http://saintluke.files.wordpress.com/2007/12/giant-rat.jpg

11 comments:

  1. What a shame! I think I will save my sick days for when I am sent to this school! Disgusting!~ Do you if any other ATRS were there?
    Reply
  2. sounds like the school that I was at last week. 4 ATRs have been paraded before a 3 sections of sophomore English! The kids have learned nothing and by now they are completely out of control. I sure wouldn't want to be their permanent teacher at this point. The kids have no reason to trust that they will ever have a permanent teacher. Hey its only English. What a great example of the DOE policy of Children First. On a side note many many schools are covering up their vacancies by making teachers teach 6 classes. 3 classes in a subject = a program. Once again the ATRs are being screwed and ignored.
    Reply
  3. Good idea. I strongly support grading the schools.
    Reply
  4. Great post. This crap is happening all over the city.

    Education Mayor = BS. Ten years of closing schools and destructive, child-abusing policies. And, the moronic editorial board at the Daily News states, "there is more work to do".

    Pathetic.
    Reply
  5. Great piece. Clearly this ATR plan is benefiting kids no more than it benefits teachers. The sheer idiocy of this plan boggles the mind, and this piece shows that better than most.
    Reply
  6. Im in the In house suspension room at my school all day long
    Reply
  7. ditto for me...we are just fill in staff...use where needed. when money is tight pay the most to do less? Bloomie thought this was a good idea? hard times...they want us to go rather than teach...makes no sense.
    Reply
  8. Great idea Philip. Keep doing this rating stuff and they will send you to the top schools to keep you quiet.

    This is a golden opportunity for ATRs to fight back by exposing the shams that go on. With so many ATRs reporting from so many schools we have a chance to expose the DOE for what they have done.

    We will be moving on to the next steps in organizing ATRs by announcing the next meeting and potential actions within the next few days.
    Reply
  9. I was stuck in the inhouse detention room last week. Monday was light wait til the end of the week. Is it the School of International Studies in BKLYN??? That school is a joke.
    Reply
  10. awesome account of the real behind-the-scenes disfunction of the "new and improved" DOE. bernard gassaway was the superintendent of district 79 a few years ago. he is an incompetant *&*(&*&%&. he supposedly retired, but i guess he couldn't stay away from the nice F status paycheck that he so rightfully deserves!
    Reply
  11. Good work. I also endorse this weekly review of the DOE nonsense. Lesson plans are a joke everywhere and it is difficult to manage a group of kids you just met with nothing relevant to do. Have been lucky so far and had pretty good experiences in the 4 schools I have visited. Next week to Leadership and Public Service on Trinity so I can hang out all week with the OWS crowd.


    Second straight F puts Boys & Girls High’s future on the line



    Boys and Girls High School is one of 24 schools that now face closure.
    Boys and Girls High School’s latest progress report grade — an F, its second in a row — came as no surprise to its principal, Bernard Gassaway.
    “We definitely fell short,” Gassaway said in a phone interview today. “When you get the progress report and you are surprised by it, that means you haven’t been looking at the numbers all along.”
    But even though it is one of just four schools to score a second straight failing grade, Gassaway said he is not concerned about the future of the school, a Bedford-Stuyvesant institution revered by some neighborhood leaders even as it has posted graduation rates well below the city average in recent years.
    “Closure is not an option,” he said. “I don’t think that’s an option that’s on the table. … I’m not entertaining any conversations about closure.”
    In fact, Boys and Girls is set to be the subject of a formal conversation about closure for the first time. The Department of Education has informed Gassaway that the high school is among 24 that will undergo “early engagement,” a process through which officials meet with community members to assess whether struggling schools are likely to improve or should be closed.

    Last year, Boys and Girls was one of just three F-rated schools that did not undergo the early engagement process, even though its performance on some measures ranked near the lowest citywide. Department officials also considered closing the school through an atypical federal reform process called turnaround earlier this year, but quickly abandoned the plan.
    Gassaway said he has already prepared his strategy to defend the school. He will argue that the city and union have not worked together to give him enough authority over his staff, and that new programs to help the school’s many high-need students cannot be expected to pay off right away.
    “[The] case that I made last year is the same case I’ll make this year,” he said. “If you ask yourself honestly, what has changed as it relates to, let’s say, the makeup of the staff from last year to this year, the plan that everyone agrees is a good idea has not been implemented.”
    Since Gassaway came on as principal in 2009, he has pressed department and union officials for the power to overhaul his staff, charging that as many as half the teachers aren’t equipped to address the school’s many challenges. The city’s contract with the teachers union precludes principals from sending teachers away in most cases.
    He has also maintained that the school needs new services to address students’ health and emotional needs, and special programs for the many under-credited and overage students who make their way to Boys and Girls after spending parts of high school outside the city or in jail. With new programs only starting to get underway, Gassaway said today, it will be years before the school begins to reap their benefits on paper.
    Gassaway said he asked teachers, administrators, and support staff to take a hard look at the school’s performance data last week when he shared the preliminary progress report data.
    “We basically looked at the different data sets: credit accumulation, Regents pass rates, the graduation rate, [students in] the bottom third,” he said. He added, “The primary focus is on instruction. There’s no magic bullet other than hard work.”
    Despite concerns over the numbers, Gassaway may continue to find the support from top department officials he needs to keep the school afloat.
    “We have a very high opinion of Bernard Gassaway,” Deputy Chancellor Marc Sternberg told reporters earlier today. “We’re going to take the time to go out to the school and talk with Bernard, talk with parents and students and teachers, and a group of community organizations that have deep roots in support that school, and ask that same question about Boys and Girls as we will about the others: Is there a capacity to improve?”
    Sternberg said it is possible the early engagement team will find that the school has its best chance of succeeding if it has more time to see Gassaway’s vision through.
    “If a principal is saying they want more flexibility to get the right adults in a building so they can improve their capacity to execute on a good plan, I would, as a former principal, I would say I agree with that,” Sternberg said. “The question is whether there is the right plan…and that’s what we’ll explore.”