A deal is reportedly in place that will give Mayor Michael Bloomberg authority over the city's public schools, and responsibility for them. A teacher's contract should soon follow. Indeed, things are suddenly moving so fast that, by the time you read this, both may already have happened.
Under the plan, the mayor will be able to select the chancellor, and will choose eight members of the Board of Education, whose membership will be expanded to 13. The five remaining members will be parents appointed by the borough presidents.
If the mayor is getting something that he long has sought, the teachers have been seeking a contract for even longer, some 19 months. Teachers have been working without a contract since November 2000 and without a raise since December 1999.
Indeed, the United Federation of Teachers, or UFT, called for a strike vote at the end of May, to express the union's frustration with the ups and downs of the negotiations.
Last year, the union found itself at an angry impasse with Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who rejected its demands for raises that would make city teachers' salaries competitive with surrounding suburbs and who instead asked teachers to accept a merit-pay agreement.
When Michael Bloomberg became mayor, negotiations quickly began again. A state fact-finding panel offered recommendations that both sides agreed were reasonable. The state budget earmarked some funding for teachers' salaries. But just when a contract seemed within reach, progress stalled.
Publicly, Mayor Bloomberg said that negotiating a change in school governance was a higher priority than the teachers' contract. Teachers started to worry that the mayor was holding their contract hostage to the governance deal. Whether to appease her membership or to pressure the mayor or both, UFT president Randi Weingarten then took steps toward authorizing a strike.
Most observers thought a strike was never a likely outcome. Teachers' strikes are illegal in New York. The Taylor Law, which gives public employees the right to unionize also prevents them from striking and authorizes penalties for employees who break the law (for example, it requires employers to withhold two days' pay for each strike day. The teachers union has had only five strikes in its history, four of them in the 1960s when the union's status as a bargaining agent for educators was being established. Ten years ago, the membership, by a large majority, gave the leadership authorization to call a strike, but a contract agreement was reached over the summer before a walkout was called.
But, whether a strike was actually ever going to happen, there surely was a lot of noise about it. At a rally in front of City Hall on June 4th, organized by the UFT, the
Alliance for Quality Education, and the Hip Hop Summit Action Network, tens of thousands of people, including many students, braved crowds, barricades, and police-blocked streets to protest Mayor Bloomberg's proposed education budget cuts. Teachers carried signs that read "Don't Force Me To Strike."
Celebrity speakers at the rally included Russell Simmons, LL Cool J, Erykah Badu, Sean "P. Diddy" Combs, Chuck D., the Lost Boyz, Wyclef Jean, and Cynthia Nixon (via videotape). The rally culminated a month's worth of smaller demonstrations and civil disobedience at City Hall by parents, teachers, advocates, and students opposed to the budget cuts.
The three organizing groups pledged that this was not a one-time alliance, but that they would continue to work together for a quality education for the city's students. Alliance for Quality Education executive director Regina Eaton said, "These young artists recognize their connection with New York youth and are willing to use it and their access to the media to work to improve education."
Last month, the UFT quietly presented Governor George Pataki with the John Dewey Award to Friends of Education, its highest honor, granted in years past to Eleanor Roosevelt, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and Thurgood Marshall, and last year awarded to President Bill Clinton. A number of teachers and advocates have registered disappointment at the UFT's choice.
In presenting the award, Randi Weingarten said that Governor Pataki "stepped into the breach to provide funds to help solve our contract dispute. . .." She also praised him for his support for teachers' pensions.
Outraged teachers and advocates remember the governor instead for his insufficient education budgets; for his insistence, in the Center for Fiscal Equity school-funding case, that New York students were entitled to no more than a 8th-grade education, and for his appeal of the court decision in that case, which holds that New York's school-funding system violates students' constitutional rights.
No organized protest was mounted against the award.
Jessica Wolff is a public school parent and Director of Policy Development at the Campaign for Fiscal Equity, a not-for-profit coalition working to reform New York State's education finance system to ensure adequate resources and the opportunity for a sound basic education for all students in New York City. The views expressed are her own.
Everybody in New York seems to be talking about mayoral control of the schools these days, as if it were one of the most pressing issues in public education. In truth, it appears to be little more than a popular fad, with scarce evidence that putting the mayor directly in charge of the public school system will make much of a difference.
Those who are advocating for mayoral control berate school boards, teachers and administrators for failing to do what no society has ever done -- educate all the children. And they expect educators to accomplish this task in a 19th century setting -- the same school year, the same funding strategies, even some of the same physical facilities as a century ago -- as well as a low status profession that does not attract the best and the brightest because of horrible working conditions and unending criticism.
Mayoral control does not address these issues. My own research into school systems that have mayoral control, including Chicago, Cleveland, Washington D.C., and Boston, confirms that it offers little to no benefit to children and schools.
There is no more notable take-over of a school district than the one that occurred in Chicago in 1995. But this move was not dictated primarily by educational concerns. When school opened in September 1995, the Chicago system was literally bankrupt. It had no money in the bank to meet payroll. Frequent pleas to the state legislature for assistance were met with a demand for mayoral control. Indeed, if the Chicago public schools expected assistance from the state legislature, they had to turn control of the system over to the mayor. The Chicago business community echoed the refrain. After some haggling, the mayor gained control, and the infamous reform of the Chicago public schools was launched.
Depending on the data examined and the starting point for the review, some would say Chicago has made progress. To be fair, the fiscal viability of the schools has improved. However, on just about every other indicator, the city's school system remains at the bottom of the barrel.
There have been other important seizures of school systems: Newark, Jersey City, Washington, D.C., Philadelphia, Cleveland, Detroit, and Boston. The key assumption in each has been that accountability is synonymous with a change in governance and putting elected politicians in charge. But no elected politician has been run out of office because the public schools he or she controls have continued to languish and failed to improve achievement.
In nearly every one of the 19 school districts seized since 1988, a lack of funding has impeded progress. Money alone is not the silver bullet for educational improvement, but it is essential. Mayors in the seized school districts should have used their control to fill schools with high quality, well-paid teachers and counselors. None of the districts controlled by mayors can claim that teachers have become better qualified or better paid as a result of the shift.
In fact, none of these districts has solved the overall problem of funding. The rumble in Philadelphia's education jungle is a case in point. Inadequate funding of the public schools by city hall and the state legislature was at the center of the battle. Superintendent David Hornbeck was forced to resign. But his replacement, a corporate executive installed by the mayor, soon denounced the inadequate support for the system.
In New York City, Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who is clamoring for control of the schools, has actually cut the school operating budget by seven percent and the budget for new construction, equipment and renovations by 20 percent. If school systems do not get more resources with mayoral control what do they get?
Raising achievement occurs in the classroom, in the one-on-one intimate relationship between student and teacher. But administration does play a role. And so, a review of the Board of Education, its membership, function, responsibilities and structure should take place in this time of great debate about public education.
The history of the Board of Education in New York City dates back to the 19th century. Since then, a number of structures -large and small, appointed and elected -- have been tried and failed. The current structure of a board appointed by the borough presidents and mayor was established in the mid 1970s.
We should retain a Board of Education appointed by these officials. But the new board should be more professional, with members carefully screened to insure that they can craft educational policy and be outspoken and effective advocates for public education
From the changes to the board in the wake of the Boss Tweed scandals of the 19th century to the decentralization movement of 1969 and the retreat from that in 1996, school governance has always been reformed in a political context. Consequently, the current structure is a product of backroom politics and deals. Now the time has arrived to reform the board with a view toward what is best for children and for schools.
The people serving on the board, their qualifications and independence should be reviewed. Developing educational policy for a complex, multi-site and multi-billion dollar public education system should be considered an undertaking worthy of eminent and intelligent people. This is not the case today when many members of the part-time board have neither the time nor the expertise to craft policies for our city's schools.
The members of the Board of Education must be able to set the standard for what public education ought to be in the City of New York. They should stimulate and maintain meaningful public involvement by parents, community groups, faith-based organizations, businesses, and colleges. The board would forge alliances to help teachers and administrators improve the performance of students and schools. As part of its duties, the board would hold an annual summit, reporting on the state of education in the city.
Today's board functions all too often as a setting for resolving political disputes. The new board should serve as a professional center of educational excellence, advocacy and pedagogical, moral and intellectual leadership. The members should be respected for their educational acumen and achievements rather than for their political alliances.
To accomplish this, there must be criteria for board membership. Ideally, some of the professional educational policy makers on the Board of Education would be parents with children in the public school system. In addition, they should have at least a master's degree or equivalent experience; have experience in a large organization or as a distinguished activist; be professionally accomplished in their chosen field; and be strong advocates for public education.
A seven-member panel would screen candidates for board membership to ensure that they meet these standards. Mayoral appointees would have to be ratified by the full City Council, and borough presidents' appointments by the council members from their borough. No such process for reviewing appointee exists today. Board members would serve for a maximum of two years, instead of the current four-tear term.
There is no need for another placebo. Education is desperate for champions in City Hall, in the City Council, and in Albany who are willing to attend to the most pressing needs of school districts.
Irving Hamer, Jr. is a member of the New York City Board of Education, appointed by Manhattan Borough President C. Virginia Fields in 1998. He is a professor at Teachers College, Columbia University.
Elect The Board Of Education, by Jill Levy
The State Legislature created the School Construction Authority in 1988 to design and build schools. The Board of EducationĂŞs Division of School Facilities had had this responsibility and, according to many accounts, botched it. "The board needed 8 to 10 years to build a school, and organized crime dominated its construction projects," E.V. Kontorovich wrote in "City Journal." The board still has the job of planning schools.
Now, some say, the solution has become the problem. "The most consistent and effective arguments made against increased funding for school facilities are concern with poor management overall and a lack of accountability at the School Construction Authority," the New York City Partnership concluded in 1999. "There are strong reservations to providing more dollars to an entity that, in the perspective of many, has done an inadequate job with its existing funds."
And this was before the news of the multibillion cost overruns broke last year. "Costs of school construction exceed those for luxury buildings in mid-Manhattan," Mayor Bloomberg told a City Council committee. It costs almost $79,000 to create space for one student in a New York City public school, the New York Post reported, three times what it costs in New Jersey. Looking at it another way, a new school in New York costs about $425 to $450 a square foot, compared to between $180 and $210 in Chicago.
As expensive as it is, the construction and repair of schools are often done badly. A Brooklyn teenager died in 1998 when she was struck by a brick that fell from the roof of Brooklyn's PS 131. At new PS 24 in Sunset Park tiles seemed about to fall from the school's facade almost as soon as it was completed; construction crews rushed in to ring the school with scaffolding. Now, the facade is intact and the school scaffolding-free, but the problems boosted construction costs $12 million over budget.
Committees and experts have scrambled to find the reason for the high costs and bad work. The price of land in the city is partly to blame. By stressing that the city needed schools -- and needed them fast -- officials may have inadvertently sent a message to contractors that speed, not keeping costs down, was key. The construction boom since 1999 created a shortage of contractors and workers, pushing costs upward. Community opposition to a school in its midst can create delays and force the city to alter a schoolĂŞs design or location, further raising costs.
Last December, Chancellor Levy appointed a commission, headed by developer Peter M. Lehrer, to investigate the reasons for the high costs and recommend changes. In its findings released May 2, the commission, like many other critics, targeted the School Construction Authority, noting that the establishment of the authority created "a system with too little accountability and which has proved itself incapable of controlling the forever-escalating school construction costs." With two agencies involved in construction, the commission said, it is often difficult if not impossible to determine who is responsible for what.
Those comments echo statements previously made by Mayor Bloomberg who has said, "There is no accountability in the way schools are constructed or maintained." He has called for creating "clear lines of management" to handle school construction.
The Lehrer Commission would put control in the hands of the mayor, giving him the authority to appoint all three trustees of the School Construction Authority (the mayor now only appoints one).
The commission noted that the Board of Education has literally thousands of pages of design standards and rules that architects and contractors must comply with. At least some of these standards are intended to make schools last for generations, but the Lehrer Commission wondered whether spending more on construction now to avoid maintainance later is "always the wise choice."
In its report, the commission called for an array of measures that would streamline school construction rules, and thereby attract more contractors to bid on school projects, further lowering costs. The commission urged the city to build simpler schools with more standardized parts, such as doorknobs and clocks, and pointed to Chicago, which uses a small number of prototype designs for new schools. Overall, its recommendations, the report said, could lower costs for new schools to about $300 a square foot.
While the commission thought its design recommendation could create attractive schools serving children's need, education historian Diane Ravitch expressed doubts. "Standardization could mean those horrible boxes we got in the 1950s and 1960s," she told the New York Times.
Chancellor Levy, though, said he would throw the book of construction rules in the trash and replace them with updated standards.
Some earlier critics suggested the city government should not be in the construction business. The Manhattan Institute sees many problems at the School Construction Authority as endemic to bureaucracies: lack of accountability, apathetic workers, little incentive to excel. So, it calls for the Board of Education to adopt a "turnkey" model of public contracting. "In a turnkey system," explains Christopher Atamian, "the board hires a private-sector developer to build a school, with all the efficiencies private developers enjoy. When the job is done, the developer hands over the front door key to the Board of Ed. If the board likes what it sees, it can reward the developer with new contracts -1?2 a healthy incentive to work efficiently and for a fair price."
The Cypress Hills Local Development Corporation in Brooklyn has gotten money from private groups to begin to create a 400 seat school for students in kindergarten through 8th grade. The group, the first local development corporation to take on such a project, wants to buy an industrial building and refurbish it for the Cypress Hills Community School.
Others think the board should lease space, as opposed to building new schools, in order to bring new classrooms into the system quickly.
Meanwhile, despite the tight budget, the mayor has said he would like to put a school in the Tweed Courthouse, although some wonder whether a lavishly restored 19th century building next to City Hall is really the best place for dozens of raucous youngsters.
Bloomberg also sees his plans for Governors Island, which include building a flagship campus for the City University on the site of the former Coast Guard station, as having the potential to ease the school crowding crisis at lower grades. The space that will be freed, he has said, would be the equivalent of at least a dozen high schools.
Aside from building, the other way to ease overcrowding is to make better use of what already exists. Schools could be occupied 12 months a year. Under such a plan, students would attend schools about 180 days a year as they do now but would have vacations at different times. So in one school, students could be divided into four groups with each attending schools for 45 days and then having 15 days off. This, one study estimates, would allow a building built for 750 students to serve 1,000. And, some say, it would also produce educational benefits since students would not forget as much over several shorter vacations as they now do over the long summer break. Parents and teachers, however, have resisted the idea.
The Educational Priorities Panel urges that some fifth grades be shifted from elementary schools to middle schools, since many middle schools tend to be less crowded. And the Lehrer Commission thinks too much space in new schools goes for kitchens, boilers, basements and so on. In response Levy said he would require that at least 60 percent of all space in new schools go for education purposes.
Few of these solutions will have produced much classroom space by next September or probably even the next. And so, when schools open in September, some Midwood students will still be setting their alarms for 5:30 a.m. and some students at PS 11 will learn reading, writing and arithmetic in a place originally intended for washing.