Schools

clayfilms

Take a look at this. Uptown Manhattan is getting a music-focused charter (http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20150210/washington-heights/music-focused-charter-school-proposed-for-northern-manhattan). Whereas we in District 17 get "Explore Exceed," KIPP, and Success Academies, the known law-n-order charter schools. Not fair. I hope our new superintendent takes note of this. 

Here! Here!

whynot_31

Even in the present housing environment, rich people have the means to actually move near the schools they want their kids to be in:

http://therealdeal.com/blog/2015/02/15/ues-buildings-near-private-schools-see-springtime-bump/

Those of "us" seeking music-focused charter schools have no such ability; we either get "lucky" because one opens near us, or we don't.

As the middle of class of NYC shrinks, my sense is that the arts focused charter schools will lose out to the discipline focused ones.

NYS only allows (forces?) NYC to host a fixed number of charters, and I believe that the discipline focused ones cater to low income folks, and easily attract parents and donors who perceive them as "offering a chance to kids and parents that would otherwise have almost none".

On the otherhand, the music focused ones have a much harder time making that speech, and hence receiving that financial and political support.

@xlizellx
@clayfilms

heightsmom

Why do we hope for charter schools of any kind? Better to put our efforts and our funds toward quality public schools. You want the Arts? New York State has comprehensive standards and requirements in all areas of arts education. These were regularly waived, however, when Bloomberg and Klein gave narrow-minded, poorly-trained principals the ability to cry "NCLB" and dump the arts in favor of extra math and reading time.

I believe (hopefully) that this tide will turn under DeBlasio and Farina.

whynot_31

NCLB = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Child_Left_Behind_Act

@heightsmom -
The middle income parents I know hope for charter schools because they perceive them as being smaller and thus more responsive to their demands than the zoned public schools. They would send their kids to a private school, but can't afford it. Eventually there becomes enough of them in a given zone that they form a cadre of parents and perform a flank attack on a local public school, but until then they dream of an arts charter and/or figure out how to get the kids into a far away public magnet school...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flanking_maneuver

The low income parents I know (I worked with foster and kinship parents for over a decade), perceive charters as being able to supplement the behavior modification they are doing at home. Private schools are outside of their wildest dreams, and they perceive their zoned public schools as being overwhelmed by children who come to school only 60% of the time, and literally unwashed and hungry.

crownheightster

House Crownheightster is pretty middle income (with landed gentry dreams) and we're not excitedabout charters. We just get pissy when, in the variety of charters schools available, all of the ones "easily" available to use are pseudo-military academy style schools that seek to inspire the kids to become managers and families in nearby Districts 13 and 15 get s few charters that actually sound like they have progressive educational pedagogies. Of course, the ideal is a great public school. If I was zoned for PS 705 I wouldn't bitch so much, but i fear my zoned school (PS 138) is going to be taken over by a charter before the kid turns 4. 

My hopes are lifted by Farina and deBlasio. I really love the new chancellor.

whynot_31

The parents I worked with rarely dreamed that the children in their care would become managers. They "merely" hoped that their kids would not be caught in the school to prison pipeline: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School-to-prison_pipeline

They "merely" hoped that their child would gain the ability to follow verbal and written instructions to the degree that they would be employable at a level that would allow them a fulfilling life: http://www.cscc.edu/academics/departments/medical-laboratory/pdf/Professional Attitudes Evaluation Form.pdf

heightsmom

We are squarely middle income, with 2 public sector employees. I've been a public school teacher for 13 years, and couldn't imagine sending my children to private school. Even if I could afford it, it's not my world.

We're VERY happy at 705, fwiw. I am so impressed by the quality of the teachers, and agree with the principal's philosophy of elementary education. I'm holding out hope that they expand to a MS...

xlizellx

Ugh. I don't want to comment because then I can't stop. Principals should be allowed more say at their schools. If they're progressive but have an old school staff, no space, and few resources, how can they be progressive? Our system is going to get worse now that Networks are disbanded. Now the lone progressive school in a district like 17 or 18 will be back working with traditional schools rather than other progressive schools from around the city.

clayfilms

I'm on team heightsmom/crownheighster. 

 I'm all for:

1. Getting rid of the charters

2. For tax dollars to be being poured into providing better resources for public schools

3. Farina and DeBlasio making it policy that only persons with AT LEAST 10 years of classroom experience can apply to become principals. 

clayfilms

I really hope ps 138 doesn't get taken over by a parasitic charter. 

whynot_31

Once public schools lost the ability to segregate disruptive and impoverished kids in special education, charter schools really took off.

I can't imagine that charter schools will be gotten rid of until IDEA is repealed or not enforced.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individuals_with_Disabilities_Education_Act

heightsmom

Whynot, that is a GOOD thing. Inclusion/desegregation/anti-tracking is the way of education, going forward. It's unfortunate that NYC schools aren't given substantial enough budgets to cover mandated support to make inclusion work. This is not the case in the rest of the state.

Charter schools need to be charged rent for the space they occupy. I can't believe the new administration hasn't taken this on yet.

whynot_31

I can believe it: Charter parents don't want their kids near those kids, and they (along with their PACs) are increasingly politically active.

The parents I know want the disabled and impoverished to be included in some other child's class. Not their child's.

heightsmom

That sickens me. I'm biased by working in a full inclusion district for so many years. Get this-we don't track either! It is frustrating to see what my kids could get if we moved just a little to the east, or the north.

When incomes down to it, they are getting a great deal by being raised in an urban environment. I'm fortunate to be able to supplement their education with things like swimming, soccer, music, etc.

whynot_31

If you are a discipline focused parent who is afraid of the prison to school pipeline, DeBlasio is actually feeding the charter school movement by weakening the school discipline code.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/02/14/nyregion/suspension-rules-altered-in-new-york-citys-revision-of-school-discipline-code.html?referrer=

These parents believe that the discipline charters are the only chance their kids have to learn the skills required necessary to follow verbal and written instructions.

xlizellx

I can believe it: Charter parents don't want their kids near those kids, and they (along with their PACs) are increasingly politically active.

The parents I know want the disabled and impoverished to be included in some other child's class. Not their child's.

Which is interesting. I work in a public school in high demand. Over 400 applications for our 36 prek spots each year. I give 15 tours to 30+ people each year for kindergarten admissions- for an additional 10 spots above those not taken by pre-k kids. We are over 1/3 special Ed and 100% inclusion classes. Always have been. We barely can afford or models but we are ICT consistently in all grades. We have celebrities, local families, kids in shelters, and everything in between. So I know there are some close minded people who want what you say - but I know an awful lot of people completely disagree.

xlizellx

We need more funding to fully staff what we believe in. And we wish there were more schools doing what we do - and clearly parents agree. Also, that charter I mentioned, Community Roots, is 100% ICT (integrated co taught) meaning 40% special Ed and 60% gen Ed all together in classrooms with 2 full time teachers.

whynot_31

None of the public schools I worked with were in high demand. Very little of the diversity you describe existed. Few of the parents had full time employment or a traditional high school diploma, and those who had a credential often were Home Heath Aids.

What I heard a lot from the "pro-discipline parents" I worked with, is that they knew their kids might get pushed out of a charter school, but they saw the charters as their only chance.

They felt they cared about their kids, and the parents of kids in their zoned schools (for many reasons) did not, or could not.

They wanted a school whose staff was not bound by the "we can't do anything to control him" discipline rules that exist in public schools, and seem to be increasing in the present administration.

xlizellx

"We can't do anything to control him"

I get why that becomes the sentiment. But if we could fund school social workers, guidance counselors, family social workers (past pre-k), school therapists, etc and could fund programs to help kids maybe this wouldn't be our mentality.

9 times out of 10 when you learn the story - the true story - about why a kid is misbehaving or acting out, it will break your heart not make you angry. We need to help these kids not have a stricter discipline code. But I know what you're sayinf, whynot. I worked in East Flatbush/Brownsville for years and saw R same thing. That 9/10 stat is hard to work with when out of your 30 students all have behavior issues. You can't help all 30 - so you end up treating more like the 1/10 than you should.

whynot_31

They often are not angry at their fellow families, and understand the struggles they face.

They just view charters as a chance to escape that mess, and (should they get into one) will often sincerely wish the staff of the public school they are leaving luck.

heightsmom

The interesting thing is that many Charters in east Brooklyn are less equipped to service students with high needs. As xlizellx said, they need social workers and psychologists, not harsh discipline.

Community Roots is an excellent school. No question. What if those teachers and administrators and parents channeled their energy into the public school in that building? Wouldn't that have a wider impact?

Charters are well intentioned, but inherently give up on the public schools. It's a "save yourselves" mentality that seems narrow and myopic. We need broad education reform in NYC, and it needs to start with giving all kids a safe, quality, elementary education. All this nonsense about changing HS admissions? The specialized tests are not the problem, it's the fact that the kids in question were given up on in elementary school, so they don't have a chance of getting into Stuyvesant.

whynot_31

I don't know that charter schools give up on the zone public schools anymore than the prior system, which allowed fortunate children to escape them via magnet (gifted and talented) schools and forced unfortunate children out of them into Special Education.

Now that that the both options have been effectively assailed as being over used (ie classist, racist, etc), discipline-focused charter schools have stepped forward.

The charters seem to serve low income students whose parents don't want their kids to have to mix with the children that used to be segregated in special ed.

As a result, they seem to be effectively insulated from the cries of elitism that Stuyvesant and the G&T schools must constantly endure.

xlizellx

I agree 100% with Heights Mom. I work with the coaches at Community Roots a lot. They're great educators who want to help their kids. My school didn't have any out of classroom teachers for years. Due to some admin reshuffling we have 1 "coach" now. Someone who pushes instruction, aligns curriculum, plans lessons and professional development, supports teachers, etc. this one coach deals with reading, writing, math, science, social studies, and behavior issues. They have a math coach for K-2, a math coach for 3-5, etc. they are so much better supported, able to do so much more for their teachers and kids just due to staffing. Never could a doe school afford such staffing.

whynot_31

I am not familiar with Community Roots, but I suspect that it has far more advantages over public schools than just funding.

...it is not bound to union rules, it serves a student population whose parents were active enough to seek it out...

It sounds as if it is designed to succeed, whereas many of the public schools are not.

Comparing it to a public school doesn't seem fair to the public school.

heightsmom

Union rules are not the enemy. Poor administrators who give bad teachers tenure, and fail to properly discipline failing veteran teachers are at the root of the problem.

whynot_31

By their nature, the union rules are designed to protect the teachers.

As a result of never giving teachers tenure, the adminstrators of charter schools don't have to pay for past bad decisions.

As a result of having no protections, the young teacher can be told to work 65 hours a week, and then (for no reason) be told that they are no longer needed.

The new teachers are aware of this dynamic, yet the charter schools have no problem filling their vacancies. ...presumably, they like working in an environment in which few staff members are over 32 years old, and/or believe they will have greater support and success.

heightsmom

The new teachers are aware of this dynamic, yet the charter schools have no problem filling their vacancies.

They're just waiting for vacancies in better paying, more secure, public schools.

Unions also secure longevity. I'm a much better teacher now than I was at 22. I have 2 MA degrees and over a decade of teaching experience. My district can't get rid of me simply because I cost more than a recent college graduate. Luckily, I work for a place that wouldn't want to.

whynot_31

Some teachers are charter schools are wating for a public school job at a "non-failing" school, but others are just going to leave the field.

[They tried "urban teaching", and then decided it wasn't for them.]

When you have charter that is focused on discipline, they find seasoned teachers unattractive not merely because they are expensive.

They want to have a young teachers who do not have the obligations that come with having families of their own.

Senior teachers (such as yourself) do not have to choose between "failing public schools" and "discipline based charters".

...charters seem to know that they are the first choice for only a small segment of teachers (young ones), but that there are enough of them in that situation to make it work.

whynot_31

Cuomo seems to be completely outside of NYC's control:

http://m.nydailynews.com/new-york/education/andrew-cuomo-owes-billions-city-schools-report-article-1.2120976#bmb=1

clayfilms

Cuomo seems to be completely outside of NYC's control:

http://m.nydailynews.com/new-york/education/andrew-cuomo-owes-billions-city-schools-report-article-1.2120976#bmb=1

This. This. This. NYC is being raped by the state. And our children are the victims.