In the new contract, the UFT has enabled the creation of up to 200 PROSE schools in the event that 65% of school staffs approve. Teachers in these schools will still pay union dues, but they will find greater flexibility, for better or for worse, in the terms of their contract. Supposedly, educators will be in the "driver's seat." For some, these PROSE schools seem like charters under another name.
In a UFT article entitled, "Part of a Movement", the author points out that the UFT's Albert Shanker was one of the first educational leaders to champion the concept of charter schools. The article fails to mention, however, that Shanker completely changed his views on charters from 1988 to 1993. He became completely disillusioned. He realized that charters would promote the privatization of public education. Somehow, in all AFT discussions of charters citing Shanker, this fact seems somehow forgotten.
Despite Mulgrew's miswording of his war against educational deformers, the UFT has stated upon occasion that it wishes to be a "vital part of a national movement for educational reform." Through its charter schools, the UFT aims to provide "equal access" to its sites and "high standards" in an accountability-based system that promote "good citizenship" (see citation above). Former UFT and current AFT president, Randi Weingarten, made it clear that she wanted the UFT charter to prove that unionized teachers can successfully promote school reform.
In this spirit, in September 2005, the UFT opened its first K-5 charter school in East NY, Brooklyn. The following year, it established a nearby 6-12 campus. The UFT received $1 million from the infamous Broad Foundation, at $250,000 per year for four years to fund its charter schools. Unfortunately, the UFT Charter School has suffered some hard times. The performance of its school has been uneven. It is worst at the middle-school level. Their school is rated among the worst in the City. It has been given shorter periods of charter renewal. The school was almost closed in 2013, but kept open, in part, to prevent a "donut hole" between the elementary and high-school levels.
I have heard several possible explanations for the charter school's lack of performance. The school has had five principals in seven years. Commentators note that the performance of these principals has been uneven. School personnel have also claimed that other charter schools rob the UFTCS of its students. The UFT Charter School has since moved its elementary and middle into the same building, allaying some fears that its middle school students would continue to be housed with high-school students at an alternate site. Even the UFT itself seems to have distanced itself from the lack of success at its original charter school (Chalkbeat).
Mulgrew moved on to work out a deal with Steve Barr of Green Dot Schools (now known as the Future Is Now Schools, operating without Barr). Oddly enough, Barr started the parent-trigger laws, so harmful to public education in California. He attempted a secret seizure of a well-performing Venice high school and his Locke in L.A. gained fame for its bathroom crisis. He is known for hostile takeovers and firing up to 70% of a school's staff. Green Dot runs 18 L.A. charters.
In 2009, the UFT officially partnered with Green Dot and opened a second charter school in the Bronx. If you are a NYC-school teacher, the UFT might have recently sent you a recruitment letter. According to their "thin contract," teachers can earn 14% more in exchange for a "professional day" or extended hours. The student-teacher ratio is also reduced to 20:1, with a class-size cap of 30. Teachers cannot work with more than 130 students in total (vs. the standard 165 or so in City public high schools). In their takeovers, often the principal and at least one-half of his or her staff are replaced. The Bronx charter school is doing very well. I can't help wondering if there is selective enrollment and/or student attrition.
The more I have thought about the UFT, the more I feel that in order for their schools to succeed, the single most important factor is not whether teachers are empowered or not, as intended at PROSE schools. Many of the schools that entertain the greatest success will be the schools that ultimately do the most to harm to society. They will banish low-performing students through attrition and fail to accept many students with the greatest needs. And, they may over stress test prep.
Working with its own charters, the UFT has been forced into some awkward positions. In its quest to gain desired space for its charter, the UFT has ironically found itself on the wrong side in a conflict over co-location with JHS 292: "You used to curse the bold crewmen who stripped our earth of its ore. Now, you've changed and you've gone over to them. And you've learned to love what you hated before."
I would hope the UFT would stand by the fact that its teachers are already succeeding in many public schools. I would hope it would not take millions of dollars to realize that the power of master teachers may be minimal when working with students with the greatest needs, if wraparound services and significantly smaller class sizes are not provided. Reforming schools must go hand in hand with reforming society and addressing the underlying social and economic needs of the neediest. True success can only be achieved when segregation and attrition are not part of the formula. Teacher empowerment will mean little if society is suffering. Teacher empowerment then becomes "blame the teachers."
No comments:
Post a Comment