Thursday, April 27, 2017

John the Ringworm

“We are hopeful that the winners are ready to get to work to put Newark back in local control,” Abeigon said. “We also want to make sure that resources come back to traditional schools. Corporate charter schools, we view them as parasitic. I don’t see any compromise coming from their sector at all so I don’t see why the city feels that they can compromise with these people.”

That’s John Abeigon, president of the Newark Teachers Union, comparing the public schools that educate one out of every three Newark students to organisms that survive by ingesting their hosts. Abeigon also tells The Advocate that NTU members “do not agree that working with charter school advocates is in the best interest of Newark students” and that he hopes that “the newly elected members of the school board move toward a moratorium on charter schools.”

There are three types of public schools in Newark, all accessible to families through the Newark Enrolls program. Traditional district schools educate about 33% of Newark schoolchildren. District magnet schools, which restrict admissions to schoolchildren who meet their academic criteria, serve about 36% of Newark schoolchildren. Charter schools educate about 31% of Newark schoolchildren (although shares will shift as charter schools expand in response to parent demand).

Mr. Abeigon suggests that two-thirds of this diverse system turn on the smallest third. Who’s the antagonist in this picture?

Wednesday, April 26, 2017

Newark's School Board Elections Results Signal But a Superficial Unity

Newark’s School Board elections are over and the this newly-configured nine-member School Board -- for twenty-two years demoted to "advisory" but now just a baby step away from full control of New Jersey’s largest and most politically-convoluted school district -- will include Josephine C. Garcia, Reginald Bledsoe, and Flohisha Johnson. These three winners ran together on the “Unity Slate,” a joint venture initiated last year by a new and well-funded organization called the Parent Coalition for Excellent Education (PC2E).

Last year PC2E also funded a three-person Unity Slate that swept the election. Up-ending the usual practice of top power brokers running competing slates, 2016 signaled a rare melding of minds in this fragmented city. With coaxing from PC2E, Mayor Ras Baraka chose a candidate, North Ward Councilman Anibal Ramos chose a candidate, and pro-reform PC2E chose a candidate.  That year each member of the Unity Slate garnered about 6,000 votes, a huge increase in these typically low-participation elections. Much of that increased turnout was attributed to charter school parents, who voted at twice the level as previous years and supported the two pro-reform candidates Kim Gaddy (PC2E’s choice) and Tave Padilla (North Ward Councilman Anibal Ramos’ choice). Mayor Ras Baraka chose Leah Owens, an old-school Diane Ravitch clone who won because when the Mayor speaks people listen.

But this year turnout was low (the rainy weather didn't help) and the unity extolled during last's race was fractured by candidates more attuned to pro-choice parents' politics. The ostensible reform candidate, Flo Johnson, got only 2,703 votes, less than half of what Kim Gaddy got last year.

It is premature to draw conclusions from a mere two years of data. But there is fear among education reformers, primarily parents who choose charter schools for their children, that last year was an anomaly and nothing has changed. There are few cities where the Mayor and his fellows-in-arms wield such power, but Newark is one of them, ruled by Ward leaders who control jobs, construction, political and apolitical appointments, and, yes, public education.

Tacitus, the  esteemed historian in the early days of the Roman Empire, said that “success has many fathers but failure is an orphan.” But in subversive Newark, a century of failing schoolchildren has many fathers, among them this culture of subjugation, patronage, and nepotism.

There are good people of substance and vision on the Newark School Board but the concerns of groups like the Hands off Our Future Collective are valid. The public education available to Newark schoolchildren has improved dramatically over the last decade and this improvement is due in no small measure to the increasingly large footprint of a flourishing and high-quality charter school sector. If too many Board members -- now or three years from now -- are beholden to the Mayor or his successor, then that improvement could slow. Already too many of Newark’s students attend schools that fail to deliver the “thorough and efficient” education promised in the State Constitution.  And, after all, it was Mayor Baraka who told a closed Council meeting  (youtube video here), in an image that could have been lifted from the old film serial “Perils of Pauline,” that  students who attend the traditional district schools are like a damsel “tied onto a train track” and the train bearing down on that person is the city’s charter school sector.

Not exactly a vision of unity.

An article today in the Wall Street Journal discusses the power of county bosses within the context of N.J.’s likely next governor Phil Murphy, who neatly secured the “backing of all 21 county Democratic organizations, because county parties are the core of political power in New Jersey for both Democrats and Republicans,” Jennifer Duffy, senior editor of the Cook County Report, commented,
Boss-run politics, that’s exactly what it is. Once these organizations have their say, historically, it’s kind of a done deal.
Hopes among pro-choice parents to the contrary, Newark's school board election was kind of a done deal.

Those who cheer on Newark’s educational improvements, especially a new generation of empowered parents after a century of neglect and malaise, were heartened by last year’s results. This year, probably not so much, especially as many defected to candidate Charles Love who, coincidentally, used to work for PC2E. Word on the street was that he was proffered as the PC2E candidate but Mayor Baraka vetoed him because Love was inadequately deferential.

What does all this mean for Newark? What does it mean when elected officials owe their office to powerful patrons? What does it mean for the future of PC2E when the Unity Slate was won not by newly-empowered parents but by the heft of Boss Baraka?  Most importantly, what does this mean for Newark’s public schoolchildren, who are almost evenly divided among magnet schools (the one type of public school that truly "creams" students through selective admissions), charter schools, and traditional schools?

Soon this new School Board will start the process of choosing a new superintendent to replace state-appointed Chris Cerf. New Jersey School Boards Association instructs boards that their most important responsibility is that choice, an especially hard slog in New Jersey where superintendents flit like hummingbirds from district to district and where educational leadership of Newark is not perceived as nectar.

The Unity Slate was supposed to be  one -- okay, two -- rungs of the stepladder towards district unity. The top step is a Unity Board supported by a Unity electorate. That outcome is not yet a done deal.

Thursday, April 20, 2017

It's Time For a State Takeover in Lakewood and Here's Why

Anyone who has been following the Lakewood School Board’s antics over the last decade can only sigh at the most recent news: the founder of  a Jewish special education yeshiva  that masquerades as a nonsectarian special education school was recently indicted for stealing public funds and laundering them in a scheme to enrich himself and a fundraising arm of the school.

The school is called SCHI, or School for Children with HIdden Intelligence. (Ignore the faces of color you see on the site; that's part of the charade.) The founder and current director is Rabbi Osher Eisemann. According to the Asbury Park Press, he has been charged with:
Theft by unlawful taking; misapplication of government property; misconduct by a corporate official; and money laundering — all second-degree offenses that carry up to 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $150,000, state Attorney General Christopher Porrino said in a statement.
Eisemann’s method was simple: he overcharged Lakewood Public Schools by about a million dollars by paying for uncertified teachers, overpaying administrators, and proffering receipts for items that don’t seem to exist (ex: an expensive generator for SCHI’s summer camp that no one could find). Then he gave the money to the school’ s fundraising foundation, the non-profit Services for Hidden Intelligence, LLC, and used the money for purchases unrelated to SCHI.

This shande far di kinde (Yiddish for “scandal for the children”) barely  qualifies as the tip of the um, iceberg regarding the school’s illicit behavior.

Lakewood is complicated: the public district’s 5,000 students are Latino, Black, and largely poor.  Student outcomes are grim. This is largely due to the lack of funds available to public school students because the district spends over $18 million of its $128 million operating budget to bus 25,000  kids to over 100 Jewish day schools (the transportation is managed by an unaccountable consortium) and another $22 million to SCHI for providing what is supposed to be a secular education to 200 Jewish special needs children. (Contrary to statements by the omnipresent legal eagle Michael Inzelbuch, “most if not all of [SCHI’s students] are Orthodox.”) That leaves only $13,236 per pupil for public school non-Jewish students, well below what N.J. considers “adequacy.”

In a letter last month to the community, Lakewood Superintendent Laura Winters wrote,
It is with great sadness that I must inform you that the Lakewood School District is unable to provide its students with a “thorough and efficient” education required by the New Jersey State Constitution. The level of education that will be offered to the students of the Lakewood School District in the 2017-2018 school year, is in my professional opinion, tragically inadequate and inferior compared to the education offered to those students in wealthier towns in Ocean County and across the state.
SCHI's “palatial” grounds were raided by the FBI last June for exploiting the federal E-rate program. Last April Lakewood U.N.I.T.E., which represents Black students, filed a civil rights complaint against the school district for "disparate treatment of minority students" in special-education placements.

Annual tuition at SCHI is listed as $97,000 per student, but usually approaches about $125,000 to cover extra services.

But the school board is controlled by Orthodox Jews and so is the town. The State DOE sent in a fiscal monitor, MIchael Azzara, several years ago and he regularly overrules the Board. But there are limits on what he can do.

This disparate treatment is old news. SCHI’s duplicity is old news. Lakewood School Board’s disregard for Black and Latino students is old news. It’s time for something new. How about a state takeover?

Friday, April 14, 2017

All Signs Point To The Waning of the Opt-Out Movement: Just Look at Princeton

Princeton Regional Public Schools is the bellwether of the opt-out movement in New Jersey. The wealthy and mostly White district is the birthplace of Save Our Schools-NJ which, with assistance from NJEA, is a primary lobbyist against accountability. (SOS-NJ's other bailiwick is opposing school choice -- easy to doif you have access to districts like Princeton, which spends $24,634 per student per year.)

Two years ago 340 Princeton High School juniors opted out of the language arts PARCC test, Fewer than 10 percent participated.

This year, however, 66 percent of juniors, 36.8 percent of sophomores and 96.4 percent of freshmen took PARCC.

From Central Jersey:
Superintendent of Schools Stephen C. Cochrane said Monday that participation rates last week were up "considerably over our first couple of years of PARCC testing, particularly at the ninth-grade level, where now it becomes a graduation requirement."
No doubt SOS-NJ, NJEA, and Education Law Center -- the anti-accountability troika of N.J. -- will continue to argue that PARCC should not be a graduation requirement because, unlike our old ASK and HSPA tests, these new tests are aligned with N.J.’s school content standards and too many students fail to meet proficiency benchmarks in language arts and math. Even in lofty Princeton, last year 20 percent of eighth-graders didn’t meet the cut in language arts and 28 percent didn’t make the cut in math.

There are good arguments for multiple pathways to graduation. (N.J. will maintain portfolio options as well as alternative testing for kids with disabilities). Only one other state, New Mexico, includes a test as a graduation requirement.  However, undermining the ability of the State to measure proficiency rates and unveil weaknesses of public schools just hurts kids and families who seek clear-eyed data on school quality.

Opt-out fever has subsided. Put away the Tylenol. Instead, let's agree that all of us -- especially those of us who can't buy their way into districts like Princeton -- need clear information about student outcomes. Regardless of whether proficiency in math and language arts should be a requirement for a high school diploma, we're all better served by shedding pretense, confronting real-life student readiness for life after high school, and collaborating on ways to truly save our schools.

Wednesday, April 12, 2017

Disunity in Newark As Voters Prepare to Select School Board Members

In less than two weeks Newark voters will elect three new members of their Board of Education and the stakes have never been higher. After twenty-two years of state control, city representatives will once again oversee every aspect of New Jersey’s largest and most politically-convoluted school district. As if this set of circumstances weren’t challenging enough, the education community’s spanking-new solidarity is in danger of fracture.

For many decades Newark board members have been beholden to powerful politicos --  the Mayor and Ward leaders --- who typically endorse slates of three candidates. For example, in both 2014 and 2015 Mayor Ras Baraka, who won his own election by warping his campaign into a referendum on then-Superintendent Cami Anderson, ran a slate called “Children First.” But last year a new powerhouse rode into town, a pro-charter organization called PC2E, which magically finagled a “Unity Slate” -- one candidate chosen by Mayor Ras Baraka, one chosen by charter advocates, and one chosen by Councilman Anibal Ramos of the North Ward.

PC2E’s 2016 strategy was to buy time in order to avoid a political war with Mayor Baraka, who favors a charter school moratorium and called the parent-hailed expansion of KIPP and Uncommon “highly irresponsible.”  The slate was comprised of Kim Gaddy, (PC2E’s choice),  Tave Padilla (Councilman Ramos’ choice), and Leah Owens, a decidedly anti-choice candidate chosen by Baraka who is one of the founders of  the Newark Education Workers Caucus, the militant arm of the Newark Teachers Union, and works for New Jersey Communities United, which opposes school choice.

The Unity Slate swept the election.

In fact, this strategy did seem to produce unity, a sharp contrast with the  typical divisiveness of Newark elections. PC2E’s success last year also seemed to signify a new acceptance by Mayor Baraka and the Newark Teachers Union that public charter schools, which currently educate thirty-one percent of Newark schoolchildren, are permanent fixtures in the city’s educational landscape.

But this year was supposed to be different. PC2E (as it told its funders) planned to run a slate of three pro-choice candidates in order to secure a majority on the nine-member Board which will need to find consensus on the mighty challenges confronting the district. These include choosing a new superintendent to replace state-appointed Chris Cerf, managing the district’s fiscal distress (last year’s budget included a $72 million deficit), dealing with unpopular albeit necessary school closures as student enrollment continues to drop due to parental preference for independently-operated public charter schools, and addressing unacceptably low student achievement in parts of the traditional sector. (Example: at Weequahic High School two percent of students achieved college readiness scores in math on last year’s ACT test.)

However, while there is, once again, a (very) well-funded  2017 Unity Slate, the acceptance by political leaders of Newark’s changing educational landscape appears to have been ephemeral. According to inside sources who wish to remain anonymous, PC2E produced a menu of four prospective pro-reform candidates to Baraka: Oscar James, Charles Love, Rashon Hasan, and Randolph Higgins. All are eminently qualified. Oscar James is Director of Operations for PC2E with a political science degree from Villanova and a former South Ward Councilman. Charles Love works with a nonprofit organization that serves at-risk teens in Essex, Passaic and Hudson counties and is studying for his doctorate in Organizational Behavior. Rashon Hasan is the first college graduate in his family  (he also has an MBA) and formerly served on the Newark Board of Education.

But Baraka vetoed all four because they were not adequately deferential  So much for unity. So much for PC2E running an all-pro-reform slate. So much for PC2E’s raison d’etre.

And then Charles Love, a fourth-generation Newarker who used to be the Family Engagement Coordinator for PC2E, decided to run as an independent. His motto is,  appropriately,  “it’s time to take back power from politicians and give it back to the people.”

Last week Central Ward Councilwoman Gayle Chaneyfield Jenkins announced she wasn’t backing the Unity Slate as she did last year but instead was endorsing Charles Love. (She also endorsed another candidate, former Newark Public Schools Acting Superintendent Deborah Terrell.) Love has also received official endorsements from former Newark board president Leonard Anton Wheeler, New Jersey State Democratic Committee Chair Chris James, and South Ward Senior District Leader Hope Jackson. LaVar Young,  head of the New Jersey Black Alliance for Educational Options, endorsed last year’s Unity Slate but declined to do so this year because he doesn’t “think the candidates had enough experience to run a $1 billion school system.” (Two of the three members of the Unity Slate didn’t get past high school.)

Another force in Newark education politics is the grassroots parent group called Hands Off Our Future Collective. It has made no official endorsements. However, on its Facebook page there is this exchange:
“Voters should vote as the mayor has indicated they voted for the Mayor...#GoBaraka #MayorBaraka #RasBaraka
#FollowTheLeader "
“That's the damn problem, you guys wants puppets. Did you just say VOTERS should VOTE as the Mayor as indicated? I have a question: who the hell is the Mayor to tell VOTERS how to VOTE?”
That, indeed, is the question that will confront voters at the polls on April 25th as they select three new Board of Education members.  PC2E’s future may ride in the balance.

Friday, April 7, 2017

KIPP NJ Students Teach Us How To "Be The Change"

Last Wednesday KIPP New Jersey hosted the 10th annual “Be the Change” celebration, its primary fundraising initiative. By the end of the evening KIPP NJ, which manages the much sought-after public charter school group with facilities in Newark and Camden, had raised over $1.8 million, all of which will be directly funneled into classrooms. Luminaries included Shavar Jeffries, president of Democrats for Education Reform;  Richard Barth, CEO of the KIPP Foundation,; Ays Necioglu, Vice President of SEO Scholars; and Dr. Daniel Porterfield; President of Franklin & Marshall College,

In addition, “Be the Change” inaugurated its first panel discussion, which this year focused on the “degree gap” -- the disparity between the percentages of students of color and white students who earn college degrees. Panelists considered initiatives to improve college access and inculcate persistence and “grit" in order to allay impediments to degree completion.

Here’s Ryan Hill, KIPP New Jersey founder and CEO:
This event, and our overall mission here at KIPP New Jersey, is all about making a difference. Since day one when we opened the doors to our first school here in Newark’s South Ward, it’s been our kids who have been our source of inspiration. Once each year, we come together to celebrate their accomplishments as well as recognize the efforts of our schools’ amazing supporters. It’s incredible to see the diverse range of individuals, families and organizations that stand behind our kids, each of which play an important role in their future. We’re incredibly grateful for their support as each day, we get one step closer our nation knowing Newark and Camden, New Jersey, as cities of world-class public education.
KIPP currently serves 3,700 students in Newark and 850 in Camden. Last year the NJ DOE approved KIPP’s proposal to expand in Newark. Once all of the approved expansions in Newark are completed (Uncommon Schools is expanding as well) , an additional 8.500 seats will be available to families seeking alternative public schools -- not nearly enough to satisfy demand but a step forward.

Predictably, Education Law Center, which once represented poor urban children of color but now appears to serve as the legal arm of NJEA,  has filed a complaint with the DOE. Newark Mayor Ras Baraka called the expansion approvals a "huge step backwards." NJEA has demanded a moratorium on all charter approvals and expansions. These special interest groups don't want to be the change. They want to stop the change.

However, Haneef Auguste, a KIPP parent, spoke truth to power in NJ Spotlight last month:
I intentionally chose the KIPP New Jersey schools for my family (one boy and three girls), because we were desperate to find an alternative to Newark Public Schools that my family could afford. I’m not sure if these parents that oppose choice understand firsthand, as I do, what it feels like to know you would give your life to ensure your child has a bright future and a shot at the rapidly shrinking window into the American dream...
I, for one, will not flush my child’s future down the drain because of people philosophically opposed to my choice. What for them is philosophical, from their leafy perch in the ‘burbs, for me and my children is a decision of heart-wrenching consequence: to have a future or not.  
Mr. Auguste is a role model for progressive, child-centered choice. He is "the change." Now more of Newark's schoolchildren will be the beneficiaries of that bold vision.

Wednesday, April 5, 2017

Newark Mom on LIFO Lawsuit: "I'm Just a Parent Who Wants To Make A Change"

Earlier this month, a short animated video was released to the public explaining New Jersey’s quality-blind “last in, first out” (LIFO) teacher layoff statute.  As one of ten remaining states in the country that mandates LIFO, the law requires school districts to lay off teachers based only on the date when they started teaching in the district, with the newest teachers losing their jobs first.

By forbidding administrators from considering classroom effectiveness, this law runs counter to the overwhelming research consistently showing that teacher quality is the most important in-school factor affecting student learning.

In November, six Newark parents filed a lawsuit in Mercer County Superior Court called H.G. v. Harrington that asserts that New Jersey’s LIFO law violates students’ constitutional right to a thorough and efficient education. 

After viewing the video, I reached out to one of the parents, Wendy S., one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit. Here are my questions and her answers.

Why did you join this lawsuit? What motivated you to join this effort?

Having gone to school myself in the Newark Public Schools, I remember a lot of teachers who seemed like they were just waiting to retire. Throughout the years I would hear things about seniority, and I noticed myself that good, newer teachers wouldn’t always stick around. So when I found out about the LIFO law– that the last ones in are the first ones out – that never sat well with me. I saw firsthand that our schools employed teachers who had the potential to be great for our kids but would be laid off first..

What has your experience been like so far as a parent of kids in the Newark Public Schools?

I know that Newark has been working a lot on teacher assessments and grading the teachers – I think that’s great. I’m against teacher layoffs, but if they have to happen, I think these assessments should be the precursor. It shouldn’t be based on how many years – it’s the quality of your work, not the quantity of years that you’ve been here. And with the risk of budget woes, all these good effective teachers are at risk. I have two children currently in elementary school – I want the best teachers out there for them, not necessarily the ones who’ve been here the longest.

What has it been like to be part of the plaintiff group in this lawsuit? 

It’s good. It gives a voice to what’s been going on. There’s an urban myth out there that makes it seem like Newark parents aren’t involved or aren’t aware of what’s going on compared to other parents in the suburbs or other districts – and that’s just not true. Once you’re out there you see that parents do care and parents want what’s best for their kids. It’s amazing how many parents go through different things and are still willing to do what it takes to make a change.

Lawsuits like yours have been called “anti-teacher” or a “corporate conspiracy” by some critics. What are your thoughts when you hear that? 

I have had some people ask me why I’m doing this and I have to explain to them what it’s about. It’s mind-boggling – these conspiracies – I’m for the highest quality education. That’s my main concern. I just explain to people what it’s really about and then they see it differently. People will ask me what my motives are, who’s “behind the lawsuit,” who’s really influencing us. And I say no one, it’s just parents who want to make a change. I feel that this is something that is overall good for all of Newark and all kids in school.

When people automatically assume that I’m anti-teacher and that we’re attacking unions and what teachers have worked so hard for, I tell them that’s just not what we are about. I respond and say, “Listen, at the end of the day we need to have high-quality teachers teaching our kids.” It’s not about somebody’s pension or how long you’ve been teaching. If you’ve been teaching for 20 years and you’re good at what you’re doing, I don’t see a problem, we should keep that teacher too. If you’re doing what you’re supposed to do and you’re effective and you’re good – you should be rewarded, not penalized.

One example I give them is that one bad apple makes it bad for everybody. In any profession if somebody’s not effective, they’re not doing their job, they’re not putting out results, it makes everybody look bad. And then everybody is put in the same boat when people say that Newark teachers are bad. And then good teachers who are newer are at risk of leaving. Then what?

This lawsuit is pretty historic – nothing like this has ever been done in New Jersey. Do you consider yourself a trailblazer? 

It’s just mind-boggling. I ponder why this hasn’t been done before. We know it’s a problem. So, I guess we are trailblazing. But it makes you wonder what politicians were really thinking about when they wrote this law  - do they care about the kids?

Do you have any words of encouragement for parents who are concerned about their kids’ education?

Be involved. Find out about policies and procedures. Don’t be afraid to ask questions. Don’t be afraid to challenge people. In my case, since it was about my kids and the quality of the education they’re getting, I feel like I have a right to know about the policies that impact this. Every school has a parent engagement meeting and so I would encourage other parents to get involved in that. Don’t feel intimidated. If you don’t like what you’re hearing, or you’re doubtful, look into it. See how you can make a change.

Tuesday, April 4, 2017

NJEA as a Fish?

This image above is from NJEA's facebook page. Predatory, anyone? Not sure what to make of it:  NJEA  eviscerating charter schools through a moratorium? NJEA swallowing Senate President Steve Sweeney whole? Pension costs devouring N.J.'s budget? A fantastical depiction of "fully funding" the school aid formula (farcically promised by NJEA's anointed next governor Phil Murphy) which would gobble up all other state allocations? A piscine display of general prowess?

Suggestions are welcome.

Thursday, March 30, 2017

Paulo Freire Charter School Closed By State, Even Though "Our Students Are Outperforming Their Peers"

Earlier this month the New Jersey Department of Education announced the closing of three charter schools in Newark: Newark Prep, Merit Prep, and Paulo Freire Charter School. The reason given was "poor performance." The closings were announced a day after the deadline for for Newark's universal enrollment system.
In response, leaders of Paulo Freire sent a letter this week to parents. Below is the complete letter.

March 24, 2017

Dear Paulo Freire Parents and Guardians:

In the interest of transparency, and to uphold the core values that we share as a thriving educational community, we wanted to communicate to each of you directly as school leaders. The last few weeks have been tough on all of us, as we attempt to understand the state’s decision to close the Paulo Freire Charter School.

In all fairness to our students, families, and staff, it was important that we conduct a thorough investigation and fully reflect on this situation.  After careful review by the Board of Trustees, administration, and our outside counsel, we firmly believe that the decision by the state to close our school was based on an arbitrary and biased assessment done by the Office of Charter Schools.  To be clear, we have come to believe that the Commissioner's decision to close our school was based on misrepresented and inaccurate information.

Specifically, the report which served as a basis for the Commissioner decision, violated state probationary site visit protocols, and the report was substantially anecdotal with very little quantitative data supporting the claims that were made.  For example, we noticed that statements such as,  “Some interviewed students reported that academic expectations vary greatly across classrooms,” were made with no reference to percentages, number of persons/incidents, or documentation that supports such a claim.
In addition, the New Jersey Department of Education (NJDOE) stated that our school was being closed due to underperformance. However, this statement is false and serves no purpose other than to disrupt and publically hurt the hard work of our parents, students, and staff. For example, the State has claimed that our school had 18 students who did not graduate on time, but this statement is misleading and inaccurate. The state also used this data to adjust our graduation rate; however, the adjusted graduation rate for our school is still higher than that of Newark’s comprehensive high schools. Moreover, our PSAT and SAT data is also higher than Newark’s comprehensive high schools, and other independent charter schools in the city. This data actually supports that our students are outperforming their peers.
Adjusted Graduation Rate
*Newark’s remaining independent charter high schools
District Name
Newark Public Schools (excluding magnets high schools)
Paulo Freire Charter School
People’s Prep Charter School*
Marion P. Thomas Charter High School*

Composite SAT Score
*Newark’s remaining independent charter high schools
District Name
Newark Public Schools (excluding magnets high schools)
Paulo Freire Charter School
People’s Prep Charter School*
Marion P. Thomas Charter High School*

PSAT/SAT Participation Rates
*Newark’s remaining independent charter high schools
District Name
SAT (12th Grade)
Newark Public Schools
(excluding magnets high schools)
Paulo Freire Charter School
People’s Prep Charter School*
Marion P. Thomas Charter High School*

    Class of 2016 College Acceptance Rates
Competitive/Highly Competitive
College Acceptance Rate*
4-Year College
Acceptance Rate
4-Year College Matriculation Rate
*Selectivity is based upon Barron's Ranking of Colleges/ Universities
$3.9 million in scholarships and grants

As a community of educators, parents, and staff, we should be very proud of the strides that we have made since the Paulo Freire Charter School opened its doors. Through all of our work, we have targeted the most at-risk students of our City, and provided them a specially designed environment of support and learning.  The results have been seen in our homes, neighborhoods, and in our classrooms.  Just last month, students who would have never dreamed of attending college, were stopping us in the halls celebrating their college acceptances and scholarship awards. Together, we have made a difference, and have made a lasting impact on our city. Nothing that state chooses to do, will ever take that away from us!

As we look to the end of the school year, these are the memories we choose to focus on, and we choose not to be defensive about judgments or a system made by people who have never walked in our halls.

While we firmly believe that we have been treated unjustly, unfortunately, there is very little we can realistically do to address this situation. The appeal process has not garnered positive results in the past, and the cost would simply bankrupt our school and cause us to sacrifice our academic program. Even if we were to win, which is very unlikely based on historic outcomes of other schools, it would leave us financially weakened moving forward. For this reason, while it breaks our heart, we have decided that the best course of action will be to invest our time in ensuring the best and most seamless transition for your children and our staff.

As you know, our purpose for founding the Paulo Freire Charter School was to provide a secondary college preparatory option for all students, especially those who did not test into the magnet high schools and who did not attend a K-12 charter. Based on our college acceptance/matriculation rates and our scholarship award totals, we know that we have proven that Demography is Not Destiny within the City of Newark. We also know that we have indeed accomplished our goal of providing a secondary college preparatory option for students, who may have otherwise not been afforded the opportunity. As a result, we are quite saddened by the Commissioner’s decision to close our school because this decision will once again leave our demographic of Newark’s students underserved.

But as we look to the future, we are united as a school and as a community. Each of us – parent, teacher, or student – have been change agents to fight against systems of oppression, bias, and inequity. These are the tenants that unite us and will continue to unite us all in the years to come.

Our founders were born and raised in our great city, and during these last few days, I have often thought of them and the children we serve as inspiration.  We are thankful for their commitment, and for your passion for our school – and we promise as we look to these final months we will not let you down.

Civically Yours,
 Shavon Chambers,  M.S.W. Ed.D.
Paulo Freire Charter School

Tauheedah F. Baker, M.Ed. MPA,
Executive Director/Chief School Administrator
Paulo Freire Charter School

Here's What's Wrong With NJEA's Strategy To Unseat Senate President Steve Sweeney

The Philadelphia Inquirer reported this week that the New Jersey Education Association just launched a full-scale attack against long-time Democratic leader and Senate President Steve Sweeney. The union’s new web page lists a variety of betrayals that include “he cut our take home pay,” “he failed to secure our pensions,” “he took away bargaining rights,” and “he refuses to enforce the School Funding Reform Act.”

In what the Inquirer calls “a risky move,” NJEA President Wendell Steinhauer said the union’s endgame was “backing a primary challenger or a Republican in a general election, or supporting a challenger in a Senate leadership fight.”

Fair enough, although the last time NJEA tried to do the same thing in 1991 it failed. What are the odds of it working this time? Politics and truth are rarely close companions so let's look at NJEA's platform for removing Sweeney from office or, their second choice, deposing him from his post as leader of the State Senate.

We'll start with this: Every single item listed in the list of “broken promises” is blatantly false or mathematically impossible. Let's review.

Is Sweeney personally responsible for cutting teachers’ take home pay? 

In 2011 a bipartisan bill (also known as Chapter 78), sponsored by five senators including Sweeney, ushered in a reform of public workers’ contributions to benefits premiums for pensions and healthcare. Previously teachers had paid 1.5% of their salaries -- a mere pittance -- for platinum healthcare coverage. The reform bill required a tiered system of increased contributions based on salaries -- the higher your salary, the higher your contributions -- which, in this era of 2% caps on school district budget increases, saved districts’ buttocks. Technically Chapter 78 expired last summer but there’s no going back to 1.5% without massive teacher lay-offs because higher contributions are baked into district budgets.

Did Sweeney fail to secure pensions?

Actually pensions are insecure (a more accurate word is unsalvageable) because for the last twenty-five years or so, well before Sweeney’s tenure as Senate President,  governors have used accounting tricks to create the pretense of fully funding pensions. This week Moody’s downgraded N.J.’s rating again because our pension liability is $50 billion. For context, the entire state budget is $35 billion. According to whom you ask, the system will go broke in 8-12 years. No matter how you finagle the numbers, there is simply no scenario in which the state ponies up enough money to salvage future teachers’ pensions without additional reform and sacrifices.

Did Sweeney take away bargaining rights? 

No, Chapter 78 took healthcare premium contributions negotiations away from districts and created a statewide system. However, the bill has expired and local bargaining units are free to negotiate with local school boards for this item. If a local unit prevailed, the only way a board could accommodate this giveback would be laying off teachers, raising class sizes, cutting programs, and hurting kids. That scenario may work for NJEA central office staffers. It wouldn’t work for the teachers I know.

Does Sweeney personally refuse to fully fund the school aid formula?

No, reality refuses to fully fund the school aid formula, also known as School Funding Reform Act. (SFRA). No matter what an aspiring gubernatorial candidate tells you -- including NJEA’s favored son Phil Murphy -- full funding is mathematically impossible. SFRA is dead. It’s Monty Python’s Norwegian Blue, not pining for the Fjords but passed on, no more, ceased to be, expired and gone to meet his maker, stiff, bereft of life, resting in peace, shuffled off its mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleeding choir invisibile. If NJEA hadn’t nailed it to its perch it would be pushing up daisies.

SFRA is an ex-school funding formula. Here’s why. Remember that the entire state budget is $35 million. School aid comprises $13.3 million. Phil Murphy is promising NJEA members that he will find an extra $5.6 billion a year, effectively increasing the state’s contribution to districts by almost 40%. And that’s not including the hypothetical reversal of Chapter 78. And fully funding pensions. Where is that money coming from? He doesn’t say because it doesn’t exist.

Now, in all fairness, NJEA has lots of money to undermine Sweeney. But do leaders really think that their members will be well-served by severing any amity between themselves and the Senator, himself a member of the iron workers’ union,  based on a strategy of falsehoods? After all, Sweeney is highly-regarded throughout the state. He’s never lost an election. He  has plenty of campaign contributions,  Heck, he’s even been endorsed by Phil Murphy, not to mention U.S. Senator Cory Booker.

Here’s Carl Golden, courtesy of the Inquirer:
“If there’s one vote that incumbent legislators make that's more jealously guarded than anything else, it’s the ability to pick their own leaders,” said Carl Golden, who was press secretary for two Republican governors. “That's been proven time after time after time.” 
“Are the Democrats going to say, ‘Well, we don’t pick our leaders, the NJEA does?’ 
"The optics of that are not particularly complimentary."

Tuesday, March 28, 2017

This is Why A Rich Town Like Princeton Needs a Charter School

(This is a guest post by Princeton Resident Liz Winslow)

The following are remarks I’ve prepared for a Princeton Board of Education budget meeting this evening, but might not get to deliver, being pressed for time. But I want people to know our story. My son’s story. In case I never got a shot at the podium during public comment.

I’m Liz Winslow, and my disabled sons are Tristan Schartman, age 10, and Aaron Schartman, age 4. Many people in this room know me — or of me — as a strong supporter of Princeton Charter School (PCS). That doesn’t mean I’m anti-Princeton Public Schools (PPS); in fact, Aaron is in the handicapped pre-K at Riverside Elementary School and is doing wonderfully with Lynn Spirko and her staff. However, not being anti-PPS is not mutually exclusive with being pro what works for my kids, and PPS did not work Tristan. It’s hard to tell a multi-year journey in a few sentences, but in the three years Tristan was at Littlebrook, teachers consistently sent him, starting at age 5, to the principal’s office several times a week as a “discipline” problem. During this time he exhibited echolalia, lack of eye contact, grunting, tics, and behavioral challenges. By the end of first grade, Tristan, who at this point was also weakening physically, had zero self-concept, as he was apparently regarded as “the bad kid.” By the end of second grade, his teacher told us he’d need a full time para to continue in a mainstream class, a process we had no idea how to even begin (to be fair, this particular teacher tried to work very collaboratively with us in second grade). And that is when we made the decision that if he didn’t get in at Charter, we’d have to move.

Think about this. Do you know what it’s like to have a little five year old boy, bullied, at one time sent home from afterschool needing stitches in his face, think he’s “the bad kid?” Or picking him up at age six, and seeing four kids holding him down, stealing his shoes, while playground aides looked at the sky? He was bullied. He had no friends. He lacked the capacity to function in school, and we were told simply that we needed to do something about that. Can you imagine what this did to him, and to our family?

Well right after getting into Princeton Charter, we then took this “bad kid” to a renowned psychiatrist, a great psychologist, and a MacArthur fellow in neuropsych when he was age 8. The above-mentioned collaborative second grade teacher kindly filled out extensive forms for the neuropsych. All three said, “autism — and look at his symptoms — how could the school have missed this?” Now, is there plenty of blame to go around, for everyone from his preschool to the original psychiatrist we took him to at age five, to us missing signs that now we understand? Sure. But missing autism, and treating an autistic child punitively for his oddities as a discipline problem? That’s not just a pretty big miss, as one teacher has since said to me, on the part of a school. That’s outright failure. FAILURE. By what is supposed to be one of the best districts in the nation. His teachers weren’t bad people, and I don’t think they didn’t care. But their training clearly was inadequate, and that is an administration-level problem.

During Tristan’s first month at PCS, he didn’t want to interact with teachers, as he’d gotten so used to being punished. But after a few weeks, when he was welcomed as he was — and with the right therapies both in and out of school — he bloomed. PCS has embraced working with our son, and has notified us promptly and candidly when they’ve seen additional issues. The bullying is over; PCS went out of its way to foster friendships between him and other children. My son just had his first real birthday party attended by several kids that wasn’t a weak attempt to invite the whole class, or just the sons of my own friends. I cannot tell you what that means to him, and us. And that is because of PCS. And despite PPS.

It is very much worth noting that 80% of the budget increase has nothing whatsoever to do with the Charter School. But that falls on deaf ears to those who’ve never had an experience like ours at PPS. We know kids at PCS who are there for a number of reasons — including PPS’s flouting every day of New Jersey state law to provide a gifted and talented program. When 20% of all kindergartners succeed or try to vote with their feet for PCS — and that’s to say nothing of the kids who go to private school — a lot of introspection and reflection is in order at PPS to find out what is driving a large minority of Princeton’s kids to want to leave its schools. Instead, groups such as Keep PPS Strong, SOS-NJ, the teacher’s union, and the Board of Ed’s own president have called PCS racist, segregationist, guilty of vandalism, and elitist. It is none of those things. It fills a need that PPS does not for a substantial portion of its students.

It is also worth noting that per the local paper “Town Topics,” the pro-rata cost of the average tax increase in town related to the PCS expansion is about $47 per household. Not per person — per household. That’s the cost of two pizzas plus tip. Is this *really* what we’re fighting over in a town with such unbelievably blessed resources, to give kids the best chance they can have?

When people say, “Why should my taxes go to a school that my kids don’t need?” — could I not be saying the same about sports programs that Tristan, who also receives physical therapy, another need Littlebrook missed — will never participate in? Could I not just say that about Littlebrook as a whole — despite a budget outsized by any measure versus comparable districts, why is my money going to a school that fails to recognize as common a condition as autism? Why indeed?

I’ll close by re-iterating that I’m not anti-PPS; I’m pro what works for my child. PPS is working now for Aaron, and the jury is out where we’ll send him for kindergarten, depending on his abilities; right now, sadly, we are frequent flyers to CHOP as they try to suss out what looks like a fundamental genetic issue in our sons. And that is what’s getting lost in the weeds of massaged per student costs, and contests over which district had the fancier fundraising gala, and bogus charges of racism. If you want to make PCS a memory, find out why students leave PPS and fix those problems. In the interim, it is simply a shameful tyranny of the majority to demonize parents and children who are seeking school success for their kids when their zoned option failed them. Work with them, not against them, until such a point that PPS can have all of its zoned students succeed in its own schools. Thank you.