 |
| BY
WILLIAM
SCARBOROUGH |
Most
residents of New York City are aware of the tremendous changes that are
taking place within the New York City educational system. Newspaper
headlines chronicle the historic vote in the state legislature last year
that gave the mayor unprecedented control over the city’s schools.
Equally well chronicled were the sweeping changes the mayor and his
chancellor Joel Klein subsequently proposed for the system. Other news
stories tell of the hearings held around the City by the Joint Task Force
on School Governance, which was charged with making recommendations to the
legislature as to what should replace Community School Boards (CSBs). The
same school governance law that gave control of the schools to the mayor
phased out school boards as of June 2003. Many legislators feel that the
elimination of the school boards would diminish the ability of parents and
others to have input into the system. Thus the Joint Task Force on School
Governance was formed to recommend a replacement for the CSBs that would
retain parental input.
These fast moving events have left many
people confused, and unclear as to whether these changes are good or bad.
Many people know that change has taken place, but are unclear as to
exactly what those changes entail. Let me try to summarize some of the
major changes, and offer my suggestions as to what also needs to be done;
• The Bloomberg/Klein plan seeks to create
a streamlined, highly centralized system with large centrally directed
school districts and a standardized curriculum for all but a relatively
small number of “exempted” schools.
• The 32 community school districts, five
high school districts and other special districts would be consolidated
into 10 “super districts” responsible for education from kindergarten
through high school. Each district headed by a regional superintendent
(ex. Districts 25, 26, 28 and 29 would be consolidated into a regional
district).
• The standardized curriculum for reading,
writing and math must be implemented by September 2003 for all but 200
exempted schools.
• Parents outreach encouraged through the
creation of a parent coordination position with one coordinator in each
school responsible for engaging parents and addressing their concerns.
Parent support offices established in each regional district. Parent
outreach would be one criterion on which principals are evaluated.
• Parent Engagement Boards would replace
CSBs. All members must be parents with students in the district, only
parents of district students could vote in the election.
Many parts of the mayor’s plan are bold
and innovative and certainly depart for “business as usual.” However,
many people, myself included, are very concerned about the consolidation
of school districts, eliminating district superintendents and district
identity. Section 2590 of the New York State education law mandates the
existence of school districts (between 30 and 37 districts), and further
states that each district must be headed by a superintendent. I believe
the mayor’s plan violates section 2590 and creates unwieldy regional
entities.
The Joint Task Force on School Governance
put forth as its major recommendation, creation of Community District
Education Councils to replace local school boards. These boards would have
11 members, eight of whom must be parents with children attending school
in the district. One of the eight must have a child in special education.
Two members would be from business, civic or community groups in the
district, and would be appointed by the borough president, and one member
would have to be a high school senior, also appointed by the borough
president.
Despite widespread belief that the mayor’s
proposal is established as the plan for the future of the school system,
we in the state legislature must ultimately vote on elements of these
plans and those votes will take place later this session.
With that in mind I have proposed the
following:
• I recommend that we in the legislature
reject the chancellor’s recommendations for strengthening parent
involvement through parent coordinators, parent training academies and
making parent outreach efforts part of the principal’s evaluation.
• I recommend that the replacement for
CSBs should include a majority of parents, but other interested parties
should be also represented on the boards. Parents are not the only ones
with a stake in our schools All persons interested in running for the
board should be required to complete a five week course on curriculum,
budget and other relevant issues prior to running for election.
• I further propose that all parents who
complete designated training and reach certain participation goals
throughout their child’s schooling should be offered a guaranteed
reduction on tuition to city and state universities, when their child
reaches college age. This would require further refinement, but research
has consistently shown that parental involvement is a strong indicator of
the pupil’s success. The cost of the reduction would likely be made up
by less need for remediation and other catch up courses.
These
are the recommendations I have made to the leaders and members of the
state legislature. I am hopeful that we can act with expedition and with
wisdom in seeking to craft a system that succeeds in providing a quality
education for all of our students.
|
