(New York) City Panel Approves Closing of 19 Schools

by Sharon Otterman and Jennifer Medina
Jan. 27, 2010
The New York Times

In a contentious meeting that drew more than eight hours of public testimony, a city board voted early Wednesday morning to close 19 schools for poor performance, despite the protests from hundreds of observers who repeatedly drowned out the meeting with cheers, shouts and boos.

Protests showed up early at the hearing to express support for their children's schools.

More than 300 speakers addressed the board, the Panel for Educational Policy, beginning at 6 p.m. Tuesday at Brooklyn Technical High School in Fort Greene. By the time the panel began voting at 2:40 a.m. they had heard a litany of complaints from hundreds of parents, students, teachers and administrators and just a handful of speakers who said they supported closing the schools.

But as expected, the panel overwhelmingly approved the closures recommended by the Education Department. The votes to close the schools fell along political lines, with the appointees of the Manhattan, Queens, Bronx and Brooklyn borough presidents voting against the closings while each of Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg’s appointees approved them without question. Nearly every school shutdown was approved on a 9 to 4 vote, with the representative for the Staten Island borough president mostly siding with the mayor’s appointees, and the audience shouting “shame on you” and “disgrace.”

The panel has been widely criticized as a rubber-stamp to the Bloomberg administration and has largely held an obscure role in education policy. But under new laws governing the mayor’s control of the school system, the panel was required to make the final approval of closures of low performing schools, a centerpiece of the mayor and Chancellor Joel I. Klein’s effort to overhaul the school system.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/28/nyregion/28closings.html

When a school is struggling, the answer is improvement, not the wrecking ball! Clearly the parents really believe in change.

One of the schools that might be closed is Jamaica High School, alma mater of MICHAEL SAVAGE, hate radio drone and writer for woo.

What will replace them?

And probably no contract.

Then they're fired, and they NEVER work again in ANY school district in the United States.

Why anybody would go into education anymore as a career baffles me.

those future candidates finding other career options.

that goes on in public education, students will steer clear of training for this and going into piles of debt only to be fired a couple of years into their "careers." Education is supposed to be about children and an educated citizenry, not about administrators pigging out at the trough trying to milk the system for all it's worth.

unions and charter schools are not mutually exclusive. In fact, unions are increasingly cropping up — and thriving — in charter schools around the nation.

Unions are alive and well in many charter schools
Schools flourish with partnership
New York Teacher - September 22, 2008

. . . The AFT, one of NYSUT's national affiliates, represents charter school staff in more than 70 schools across 10 states. Here in New York, more than a dozen charter schools are unionized in western New York, Albany, New York City and Long Island.

In New York City, the United Federation of Teachers, led by Randi Weingarten, has pioneered union-run charter schools, with two successful schools in Brooklyn. This fall, the union became the first in the nation to partner with a charter school management company, Green Dot Public Schools, to open a new high school in the South Bronx.

"We embraced the idea of a partnership with Green Dot because of its work with students and its respect for teachers and their unions," Weingarten said. In addition, UFT represents educators in seven other successful charters in New York City." http://www.nysut.org/newyorkteacher_10946.htm

**********

July 27, 2009 - 9:36am

The New York Times reports that an increasing number of charter schools have unionized in at least six (more) states over the last two years.

One was mentioned here recently that would have been the teachers from that supposedly-failing public school talking it over as a "charter".

I don't know about you, but chopping out a level of adminstrative BS and giving the teachers more control over the educational environment (while still handling the financing through public dollars) doesn't sound like such a bad idea to me... and I can't imagine why those teachers would quit the union to do so.

Also - there's a good chance that unions would have a better shot at fighting against a for-profit corporation than an education department. As we've seen with the current DOE leadership... if the unions help elect an administration, they have a tougher time opposing things that they otherwise would be able to oppose. "Profit motive vs. teachers" is an easier sell than "teachers vs. taxpayer sacrifice"

>>>>As we've seen with the current DOE leadership... if the unions help elect an administration, they have a tougher time opposing things that they otherwise would be able to oppose. "Profit motive vs. teachers" is an easier sell than "teachers vs. taxpayer sacrifice">>>>

if that were the case. They're notoriously weak.

In my experience, anyway.

"all teachers" belong to a union, regardless of which type of school. However, it is also true that unions are aggressively seeking out Charter public schools to unionize.

I've never been a huge "union fan" in any arena. I've seen way too many abuses - you can't empty the trash can or mop up a spill because that's the ___________'s job protected by the union, etc. . . I know they (unions) did - and do - serve a valid purpose - a good purpose - but sometimes I think they many have "negotiated" things to an intolerable level in so many different businesses. Steel and automakers waged themselves out of how many jobs?

I'm an advocate of "common sense" - and common decency. Sadly it seems to be in short supply. A fair wage for a fair day's work. Equitable payscales. Decent benefits. Advancement potential. Retirement. Training. Cross-training. Accountabiilty. (And no, I'm not just talking about teacher's unions.)

I've ALWAYS said I think teachers are underpaid and underappreciated and overworked and over "regulated". There needs to be smaller classes. Smaller schools. Individualized programs. Better training (especially an increased awareness of "learning differences"). An "apprenticeship" period of at least two years where new teachers work as "classroom aides" to an experienced teacher. Mentoring relationships for at least another two to three years after that. Fewer "administrative personnel". Fewer meetings. Less paperwork. MORE PAY. Teaching should be treated as a career - not a "part-time job" like some people (the public, not the teachers) seem to think of it. Of course that might mean longer scheduled days, and working more weeks/months per year. (Not a popular opinion, but it's a perception of people that teachers don't "work full-time" so they don't "deserve" higher pay.)



As for Charter public schools being "for profit" - you do know that only about 10% of charter public schools are managed by "for profit corporations" - that doesn't mean the charter is "for profit" - just that the "out-sourced management firm" is. The school itself is still non-profit. That said, I don't think I like the idea of even *that* level of involvement.

Also - did you know that there are more than a few traditional/conventional public schools that are run by "for-profit" management companies?

Funny how people like to ignore the facts and raise hysterical - and false - claims. (I'm not saying you. You seem to try and keep a balanced approach . . . this is a good thing.)

Whether or not that's true... wouldn't it be evidence that not all chater schools are the same?

they're individualized. That's what's so great about them.

I'm not sure what you're getting at . . . ??