Interference

According to LJI, the State Fire Marshall made a surprise visit to MLK Charter in order to nitpick enough to order it closed in advance of President Obama's visit.

For Immediate Release
October 15, 2009

On Tuesday afternoon, October 13th, the Louisiana Fire Marshal made an unexpected, surprise visit to, and inspection of Dr. Martin Luther King Charter School for Science and Technology, ordering the closure of the high school campus for 30 days citing alleged fire code violations.

This news is significant because the school was the site today of President Barak Obama's first stop on his visit to New Orleans, and because of the nature of the purported violations.

King Charter School Principal Doris Hicks said couldn't she believe such a thing could happen on the eve of a visit to the school by the President of the United States.

"We expanded our campus two years ago and have been safely operating the high school in trailers since then without any problems. Suddenly (they say) we're endangering our children?" Dr. Hicks said. “Nothing is more important to us than the safety of our students. "

The Louisiana Fire Marshal reports directly to Louisiana's republican Gov. Bobby Jindal.

The alleged code violations included having enough fire extinguishers, but purportedly the wrong size, and failing to have sufficient ingress/egress to an empty building.

Dr. Austin Allen, a pro bono architect for the school and professor at the University of Colorado at Denver, indicated the cited problems were in no way life threatening. "We were able to resolve most of the issues within 24 hours; I can't understand why the fire marshal set this 30 day penalty," Dr. Allen said.

King Charter School can only hope this incident actually exposes the extreme school facility crisis being experienced in districts throughout Louisiana.

Louisiana Justice Institute Managing Director and King School attorney Tracie Washington expressed frustration with the situation.

"I can only hope Louisiana's Fire Marshal and Governor Jindal will care about all the children in Louisiana, not just those being visited by President Obama. Interestingly, neither offered assistance to King School in mitigating any safety issues for our students, which certainly raises questions their motives, “ Ms. Washington said.

The Presidential visit to King Charter School was a complete success, despite this Fire Marshal interruption.

Really? A closure for wrong-sized fire extinguishers just a day or two before the President's visit?

That's just bad form.

Reconsidering Public Education in New Orleans

It's been many many months since I've talked about the state of public schools, which had previously been one of my more consistent beats.

I was pretty demoralized by the way the School Facilities Master Plan went down and the results of the Orleans Parish School Board elections only compounded my misery.

I've been trying to rethink how to approach the issue of public education given that some of the things I had been trying to fight against or force compromise on have become established reality.

One of the things I'd been emphasizing was the disorganized and reckless charterization and privatization. I was worried that the RSD had no real game plan for the eventual restoration of local control over schools. The implications of having such a balkanized administrative model over the short term were alarming; the potential for waste is important enough, but inattentiveness to general admission traditional public schools was scariest.

Although this is anecdotal based off of different things I've heard and read, I have noticed that, lately, there does appear to be increased concern in regard to poor performance at RSD schools. But one thing I think is disingenuous about the RSD is that poor performing traditional schools are almost set up to fail. Poor test scores provide the impetus to bring in charter operators to take over. This is happening at Frederick Douglass High School, for instance. Though the building was in sound condition, it had been slated for closure as recently as this fall; the award winning writing program, Students at the Center, was made unwelcome. In this kind of environment, how can a successful program be implemented? It can't.

But low and behold, Frederick Douglass High School has been saved because a charter operator, KIPP, is now interested in the facility.

Now you may find this kind of approach - helping schools into academic bankruptcy via systemic confusion or neglect - to be pretty disingenuous. And so do I.

Still, Paul Vallas has pretty successfully implemented what he set out to implement - the largest experiment in charterization in the nation's history. Whether that translates into higher achievement for students is another matter entirely. So is whether or not this model is economically or physically sustainable in the medium or long term, given that Mr. Vallas has made me look smart for predicting that he'd stretch his own budget to the max by spending one time revenue on recurring costs.

I advocated for a model resembling something closer to pilot schools in Boston, which allow for the academic exploration and experimentation that was the impetus for progressive embrace of the charter concept in the first place but without the same risks associated with unadulterated private charter boards. The pilot model allows for successes in one school to be replicated in others. Charters organizations, on the other hand, become like mini corporations, and successes are too easily treated as trade secrets. It's the difference between a true public education system and a for-profit education industry.

On the national level, people that have been alarmed by the ramrod approach of some charter proponents do not necessarily have an ally in the Obama administration, depending on whether early stances on issues like merit pay for teachers (which sounds better in theory than it might be in practice) foreshadow other policies.

Given the 'success' of Vallas' charterization plan and the larger momentum of the privatization movement on the national level, local advocates of true public education need to think through where they're at on certain issues and reorient in order to make the best of the new calculus.

One thing I'd like to see is a real shake up at UTNO. I don't know if that means management changes there, since I'm not particularly familiar with who's in charge. But it does mean that there needs to be a focus on organizing the younger TeachNola and TFA teachers. Things like merit pay appear to be on their way. UTNO would be wise to be ready to make sure that the measures used to determine achievement are fair to teachers. Beyond that, there needs to be a plan that grants good teachers legitimate stable job security without entrenching bad teachers. Given that UTNO's relevance has cratered, now is as good a time as any to reorient, as painful as it might be to do so.

On the issue of charters, I think at this point it's hard to just dig in and fight against the charters. It's not that it's an unstoppable freight train, it's that the train has already passed our station. What I think we need to do moving forward is force the RSD, OPSB, and the various charter operators to come up with a road map to local administration where charters cede some degree of control to a centralized body responsible for forceful oversight. In other words, whereas I'd been advocating that we move from traditional public schools directly to something resembling pilot schools, perhaps it's useful to think of the current balkanized charter landscape as the middle step in between the overly centralized OPSB of the past and a pragmatic pilot model that restores the voters of Orleans Parish to their rightful role as overseers of their own schools.

To that end, I found some of what was in this article to be extremely heartening given my low opinion of the new OPSB and the sober reconsideration I've been giving to some of these issues.

Later this week, several groups, including the Committee for a Better New Orleans/Metropolitan Area Committee, the Children's Defense Fund and the Urban League, are expected to announce a new coalition that will explore the future of public education in the city, including the question of long-term governance.

"Everything related to public education will be put on the table, " said Keith Twitchell, president of CBNO/MAC. He declined to release more details until the formal announcement, which is expected Thursday.

--

School Board President Woody Koppel said the board does not intend to "sit idly by" and wait for someone else to determine its fate.

"I believe we need an opportunity, as a community, to openly govern our schools, " he said. "I think that people want to have schools that are run by people who live near them."

It's going to be messy, but hopefully hitting rock bottom this past fall will force us to figure out where the path upward is.

--

I've also been sitting on some really dynamite stuff in regard to how the federal stimulus package touches New Orleans schools but it's all still raw information. I've been really busy but hopefully by next week I'll have something to publish for everyone about that.

Retroactive Immunity for Reckless Charterization

This is why the pilot schools model is better than what was force fed to this city like it was the end all be all of education reform policy.

Key words: oversight, accountability

Isn't that exactly why the educational reform movement got started in the first place?


Bonus: The local chapter of the teacher's union is toothless and pathetic. Seems to me that they've got to secure a date for the restoration of collective bargaining rights, even if they have to compromise on the length of the wait.

**To Suggest

...That the charters of New Orleans are anything close to "proven" is beyond ludicrous. In the hours since Senator McCain has said this, I've spoken to New Orleans educational sources and there was laughter down the line. Senator McCain is way way off base on this one.

**

Transparent Bias by Times-Picayune Editors [Updated]

I was looking forward to see how Darran Simon's recap of yesterday's contentious hearing at City Hall in today's paper.

I found it, eventually.

Hidden all the way at the bottom of page B-1.

School-closing plan fuels council anxiety

I don't think I'm just too close to the story when I say that the upcoming vote on the facilities master plan represents the most important event involving public schools since Katrina, or at least since the decision to create the Recovery School District itself. The plan will determine the capacity of New Orleans' public school system for decades. Nobody disputes that. Nobody disputes that funding does not exist for anything beyond the first phase ending in 2013. Nobody disputes that 'landbanked' schools will likely mean demolition and/or resale. Nobody disputes that 'landbanking' is certainly synonymous with closure, even if planners allude to maybe possibly some of the closed schools one day perhaps being considered to be brought back as schools through third party operators.

Those are facts, those are the stakes. Read the article and see for yourself.

Yet, the Times-Picayune determined that this was not a top story today. In fact, the Times-Picayune made the decision that this wasn't even the top education story today. On the front cover of this morning's paper was another story about the RSD, this one about the possibility that four more schools may be turned over to charter operators. Now I'm not arguing that this doesn't merit coverage, as there are certainly people critical of the operator selection process and the ubiquitous involvement of Steven Bingler's sister-in-law's New Schools New Orleans in anything involving charter schools. But is this story nearly as important as the poorly-conceived master plan for school closure?

ABSOLUTELY NOT. It's not even close.

But let's argue for a moment that both stories are important and deserve front cover attention. The T-P could have included both stories, the one about charterization and the other about school closures, but then they would have had to bounce this life-changer that was included amongst the day's top stories instead:

Groom gets feds to snap to attention

That breaking news headline is in regard to some asshole who wore a Navy uniform to his wedding even though he'd never served. Something to note in the third hour of your midday talk radio program? MAYBE. Something for the front page of a major metropolitan newspaper on a day where the city's public school system teeters on the brink of catastrophic planning? HELL NO.

Really bad, Times-Picayune. Really bad.

--

I'd also like to challenge an assertion by Paul Vallas included at the bottom of the closure article:

Vallas pointed out that only one existing occupied building -- Audubon extension -- is scheduled to be closed in phase one.

That's simply false. Even if Mr. Vallas is trying to make the point that all of the currently-occupied schools to be lanbanked under Phase 1 won't close until the end of the phase, he's still making a false claim. Phase I of the master plan runs from 2008-2013.

Let me count them all for you.

(AND REMEMBER, THESE SCHOOLS ARE CURRENTLY OCCUPIED)

Elementary Schools - from page 90 of the official master plan.

McDonogh 07 - 2012
NO Free School - 2012
Arthur Ashe - 2012
Audobon Extension - 2012
McDonogh 28 - 2012
Dibert - 2012

High Schools - from page 94

Rabouin - 2012
McMain - 2012
Douglass- 2011

Vallas is right if he really meant that Audubon extension will be the first to be closed within phase 1 in 2010, but the currently operating Frederick Douglass High School will close soon after, in 2011. The reality is, however, that FDHS could close after this school year if doing so strikes the fancy of the school district. They are under no legal obligation to keep the school in operation and in fact, had not decided to keep the building open for this year until last May or June.


UPDATE:

But perhaps nothing reflects the editorial bias of the Times-Picayune better than their absolutely ridiculous endorsements for this Saturday's Orleans Parish School Board Race. They pick the conservative establishment choice in every instance such a choice is available. Woody Koppel over Percy Marchand? You've got to be kidding me. Brett Bonin over either Amy LaFont or Davin Boldissar? A bad joke. Seth Bloom over Avis Brock? Totally ill-informed.

The Times-Picayune pretty much endorses the most conservative Board possible, the whitest Board possible, the most anti-union Board possible, the most pro-master plan Board possible.

Percy Marchand in District 6 and Amy Lafont or Davin Boldissar in District 3 are the only OPSB candidates that have taken the time to inform themselves about the consequences of this master plan document and have been brave enough to speak out forcefully with their concerns. Woody Koppel and Brett Bonin are opportunistic insiders looking to climb the ladder. It is imperative that they be defeated.

Times-Picayune editorial board: You're hurting the recovery of this city.

Absolutely infuriating!

Attempting to Pivot to an Alternative Vision

Regular readers know that I do not believe that the recently released facilities master plan for New Orleans public schools reflects the public's long term interest. In fact, I think it is poorly conceived. I think it should be roundly rejected.

Yet, I understand that it is not enough to merely oppose. This city been victimized by the failures of the public school system for decades. More importantly, the children of this city have been victimized by the failures of the city to truly address education. A lot of parents might look at the benefits of the master plan for their school or for the charter movement in general. Responsible parents look out for their kids and charter schools appeal to responsible parents. A lot of responsible parents, because they're looking out for their kids, might not be as concerned with the overall impact of the master plan on the entire district. The very nature of the charter system in New Orleans not only pits schools against one another in competition for access to resources but it pits parents against each other in competition for access to schools.

But why do charter schools appeal to responsible parents?

Is it that certain charters can admit students selectively? Is it that charters are getting brand new buildings, books, and teachers? Is it that charters can experiment with unique curriculum and teaching methods?

I would offer that the advantage of charter schools is that they have the autonomy to try new things, that principals are given the trust and flexibility to implement high academic standards and the systems necessary to achieve them.

The disadvantages are many: the dismemberment of union protection for teachers, the utter lack of accountability to any citizen-controlled (theoretically, especially if we take advantage of our right to vote) agency like the school board, the ample room for corporate operators to profit, the selfish competition for funding from the government and from endowments.

Isn't there a model that provides principals with the latitude to manage their schools without totally eliminating oversight and accountability to the public?

Yes there is.

Look at Boston's Pilot Schools Program.

A Pilot-esque program in New Orleans would demand a reunified school district. Rather than having multiple school systems that operate in isolation, their successes protected as 'trade secrets' and their failures prevented from coming to light, we would have a more democratized system. Successful educational initiative at one school would be celebrated and replicated. Failed models would be investigated and learned from.


How does this fit into the master plan?

The master plan, in its current form, not only reduces the overall capacity of the public education system by demolishing over 50 schools by 2013, it has no funding for any additional expansion. It takes schools away from struggling neighborhoods, further punishing already-victimized communities. Without any funding in place beyond 2013, the school district is already floating the notion that any future expansion of our system's capacity would have to be done through "third party operators," who might be for-profit, non-profit charters, or explicitly private schools.

This doesn't represent the citizens taking charge of public education, it represents the government giving it away.

Outsourcing a critical public service, a right of birth, has never worked in America. When we outsource the protection of this country to people like Blackwater, we fail to protect this country. When we outsource public health to insurance companies, we fail to provide health care to our neighbors. When we outsource public education to 'third party operators,' some of our children get left out. Education is a right. The government should guarantee that everyone has access to it. Charter schools, private schools, for-profit operators leave out our most vulnerable children. It isn't fair.

--

One consistently provided rationale for the widespread school closures and the small number of large high schools put forth by Parsons-Concordia is that the district needs to reduce its long-term maintenance costs.

Are you kidding? Maintenance?

Neighborhoods being stripped of their schools because there isn't enough money for maintenance?!? Well, where's the money for phases 2-5 of the master plan?!?

Parsons-Concordia would have you believe that it will be easier, more beneficial, and more cost-effective to have the city scrambling to find the tens of millions of dollars it would take to build new schools or to sell out to for-profit operators in 2013 than it would be to fully-fund a regular maintenance budget?

Maybe that's a little Paul Vallas sneaking in there since he cut Philadelphia's school maintenance budget every year he was there.

A responsible and equitable school facilities master plan would not punish struggling neighborhoods by taking their schools away because a responsible and equitable school facilities master plan would recognize that you can't put a suburban campus in an urban school district and expect the same results. We can have good neighborhood schools in urban neighborhoods.

At the elementary schools level, the facilities master plan actually aspires to this in it's current form. The elementary school element recognizes the research supporting neighborhood schools and though too many neighborhoods are stripped of their school under the Concord-Parsons plan in its current form, there is a basic framework there that does not to be totally thrown into the fireplace.

At the high school level, on the other hand, I don't know if we could have been given a bigger slap in the face. The whole treatment of high schools needs to be reworked and that cannot be done in a thirty, sixty, or even ninety day public comment period. The master plan largely eliminates neighborhood high schools. It requires enormous land tracts that we have to spend precious resources to acquire when we already have beautiful buildings that did not flood being land-banked for future sale. Schools do not need to have an on-site football stadium to provide a world-class education. Not all of our high schools need to spend our limited resources on football stadiums when the students at Carver High School are going to be learning in FEMA trailers until 2013. There is something to be said for some small learning environments - for some neighborhood-oriented high schools that respond to the available community assets and provide those assets for communities struggling to reestablish themselves.

There is nothing wrong with a school's football team having to walk two or three blocks to a community park for practice. There is something wrong with kids having to take the bus 45 minutes to even make it in the morning because they've been assigned to go to the new school at English Turn. There is nothing wrong with tearing down badly damaged schools to build brand new. There is something wrong with concentrating all of those scarce resources into an experimental pipe dream that values stoking the architectural wonderment of planning community peers at the expense of overall educational capacity.

An alternative master plan that helped struggling communities get back on their feet by reopening schools, respected the research on the benefits of the neighborhood schools model, and committed to public maintenance of a basic public right would be able to keep the progressive democratization benefits of some charter programs while eliminating the conservative balkanization of our nonexistent charter accountability systems. Using the pilot schools model from Boston as a guide to unify our schools under democratic control, we could craft a master plan that quickly gets our children out of FEMA trailers and back into real classrooms, doubles other public facilities (such as parks) as educational assets, ensures that struggling communities are the first to receive new facilities, and responsibly distributes our limited one-time funds while demanding the long-term budget streams necessary to guarantee district-wide facilities maintenance, teacher salaries and health benefits, textbooks, technologies, and so on and so forth.

Okay so maybe this rambles a little bit and doesn't quite completely draw the big picture. Maybe it doesn't collect enough supporting evidence. That's okay. I did this over the course only a few hours. The point is that if you have grave questions about the master plan in its current form and care about delaying any binding decision until the new OPSB we elect takes office, we need to do more than convince our neighbors that the vision articulated in the facilities master plan sells them short. We'll need to put forth an alternative. Getting there can be a collaborative effort.

I know that everyone is consumed with hurricane evacuation preparations but let us remember that there is a critical public comment opportunity at City Council next week. Though I believe it should be postponed, I'm not convinced it will be.

Open Enrollment and Genetic Condition

I think it's an oxymoron.

This is a bad story. I don't like it one bit.

This was all put together and brought to my attention by an anonymous tipster. I'm copying and pasting their words but I'll be embedding some links and highlighting some text.

This is interesting given the recent Washington Post article on charters. The first link is to a story that appeared today on Audubon Charter School. This is the school where New York Times reporter Adam Nossiter's son attends and his wife, Sharon, is secretary of the board—French and Montessori Inc. FAME). It mentions that they raised $26,000 to send the fifth grade class to France for a field trip. A picture showed 16 students, three of whom were black. In other words, in school system that is 90% black, 82% of the Audubon students are white. Audubon is "open enrollment lottery" k-3 and then in the third grade students take an admission test to advance to 4^th grade. So why so few black students?

Link three [THIS IS A PDF] is the admission requirements for the lottery. A few weeks ago there was some controversy over Audubon giving first preference to French nationals, but the Times-Picayune and school officials concealed much more than that. Not only is preference given to French Nationals, but siblings of current students are also given preference—a practice that the Justice Department has forced other schools to stop because of racial discrimination. Moreover, to qualify for the "tier one" lottery, students have to have attended a private French Language academy or a private Montessori school. To prevent low-income students who might have found a free French or Montessori school from getting in the lottery, Audubon actually lists only ""approved/accredited" schools on the last page—all expensive private schools. This may be the only "open enrollment" public school in the U.S. that makes genetics or a private school education a condition of admission. You can bet that no one in the "second tier" ever gets in.

The second link [ALSO PDF] has a photo of the kids on the tour which gives you a sense of the ethnic composition. Note also that the school passed itself off as Katrina victims and got the Eagle Scouts and Americorp to expand the current playground. All this while the school raises $26,000 for a vacation in France and schools like Carver Elementary, an RSD school, are housed in trailers and have no playground so children have no recess.

"This may be the only 'open enrollment' public school in the U.S. that makes genetics or private school education a condition of admission."

Is this the school reform we've been hoping for?

Why are we entrenching additional educational inequality in New Orleans?

Update: See also Ray's place for questionable spending at Langston Hughes Charter