'One Newark' Plan Bad for City Schools, Councilman Says

The following was submitted by South Ward Councilman Ras Baraka with regards to the One Newark Newark Public Schools reorganization plan:

The “One Newark” and School Portfolio plans announced by Newark’s State-appointed District Superintendent, Cami Anderson, reflect Governor Chris Christie’s dogmatic and unproven ideas about education reform in urban schools; so-called reforms that are experiments rather than proven common sense improvement strategies.

As a long-time educator in the Newark Public Schools, I am painfully aware that we need major changes in many schools.

But all change must be based on models of proven success in urban schools. In its present form, the One Newark plans do not reflect the kind of data-informed and empirically-driven strategies we need. For this reason, the plans will only hamper our efforts to improve the education of our children and damage both traditional public schools and public charter schools.

The state is about to impose two extremely disruptive changes in our schools: universal enrollment and a reorganization that impacts over 28 of the district’s 75 schools, including school closings and the sale of school buildings.

The plans were developed behind closed doors without meaningful community input. Who was there at the table? Who participated? Do we even know these people? Who do they represent? Superintendent Anderson’s claim of community and school board involvement is at best an extreme exaggeration and at worst an outright distortion. It is reported that she met with a few ministers, but that is woefully if not disingenuously short of genuine inclusion since there was no opportunity for the public to comment or question.

Universal Enrollment: Let’s Get It Right

Last week, Superintendent Anderson announced “One Newark Enrolls,” an initiative to restructure and combine the enrollment processes for traditional public and charter schools. She said that her universal enrollment plan would be implemented immediately.

Ms. Anderson has finally acknowledged what I have been warning for years: State imposed policies are creating a two-tier system in which students with the most difficulties are concentrated in the traditional public schools while some charter schools are not taking their fair share of those who need significant help. This includes those with difficulty in speaking English, facing family problems, living in extreme poverty, or having learning disabilities. This two-tier structure will inevitably lead to the collapse of our traditional public schools.

Ms. Anderson proposes to fix this problem by having the school district take over the assignment of students to charter schools. This concept sounds noble and purports to be a step toward school equity, but what is the real story? Is it really fair and legal? What evidence is there that Superintendent Anderson’s administration has demonstrated the capacity to manage a complex process of universal enrollment? Why did the majority of charter schools sign on, despite the fact that their charters call for enrollment by lottery? Since many charter schools are not yet prepared to service increased numbers of special needs students, were they coerced to sign on?

Will Universal Enrollment really create equity?

The state appointed superintendent claims that her plan will assure all students access to an excellent school, but the reality is that there are failing charter schools and failing public schools. Universal enrollment will by necessity assign many students to underperforming schools. And with the proposed closing of more public schools, the remaining schools could end up both underperforming and overcrowded.

As presently conceived, “One Newark Enrolls” will be disruptive for all schools, public and charter. I have heard from charter school parents who are concerned that their schools lack the resources to provide government-mandated services to an increased population of special needs students. Before implementing universal enrollment, it is critical to prepare charter schools to receive students with learning difficulties.

I share the concerns of charter schools that are serious in their missions and want the time to prepare to serve a new population of students.

There is also the very real concern that Ms. Anderson’s proposal might be illegal. It may violate New Jersey’s charter school law requiring a lottery in the assignment of students. I would support either a form of universal enrollment that is found to be legal or a change in state law to give school districts the authority to make charter school assignments. But why implement a plan while its legality is in question?

Despite these concerns, state-appointed Superintendent Anderson, Education Commissioner Chris Cerf and Governor Christie are intent on racing ahead. For the sake of the students, I urge them to slow down, move judiciously and prudently, and get the universal enrollment process right.

Regarding Reorganization, School Closings and Sale of School Buildings

Despite legitimate community concerns about the universal enrollment plan’s disruptive and unpredictable impact on both public and charter schools, Governor Christie and Ms. Anderson are also about to implement a poorly conceived reorganization plan that will further disrupt our schools.

Their plan affects more than one out of three existing schools, proposing to close, renew, redesign, relocate, co-locate them and to sell Newark-owned properties to charter schools. For the third year in a row, affected school communities were not consulted, and communication from the district was inadequate. Like the universal enrollment plan, the reorganization plan was developed in secrecy, and the people of Newark were not informed of its details until it was unavoidable. For example, parents in affected schools received less than one day’s notice for parent meetings to announce the closing of their schools.

Dr. Anne Galletta of Cleveland State University, a psychologist and authority on school closures, writes that closures can have serious negative effects on students. She says that closures disrupt productive relationships between educators and students and place students at increased risk of failure.  For the most vulnerable students, challenged by poverty, unable to speak English, or suffering disability, that level of risk is increased exponentially.

California requires that before schools can be closed, a district must prove the need by conducting and publicizing a detailed analysis of the financial and educational need and its impact on students. California requires that affected communities be consulted and given the opportunity to be heard. We need the same in New Jersey. The NJ Joint Committee on the Public Schools, chaired by state Sen. Ron Rice is working to develop legislation regulating school closings in New Jersey.

Reorganization should be based on models proven successful for urban schools.

I know that our public schools and charter schools can succeed under the right leadership.  I know this because as Principal of Central High School I saw what teachers, administrators, students and families can accomplish if they are engaged and empowered to act. There are many models of success for urban schools that do not involve destroying then rebuilding a system.

One of the more notorious observations made 40-plus years ago about the U.S. involvement in Vietnam was that of a commander who said “we had to destroy the village to save it.” This not a mistake we want to make with the education of our children.

One model of success is reflected in how my staff and I led Central High School to an increase in the graduation rate from 50 percent to 80 percent. Here are just a few examples of how that was achieved:

·   We created a school culture that set high expectations for students and staff alike, connected the school with the lives of students, established inclusiveness and interdependence as essential to the success of each individual, and provided the resources necessary to make this culture shift

·   We used information about student and teacher needs to drive the strategies and programs implemented.  This information was both achievement data, as well as "data" about community needs and observations of teachers in the classrooms.  

·   We prioritized a focus on the social-emotional needs of students and the connection of those needs to student learning.

·   We increased the availability of challenging and interesting courses for students and gave teachers the opportunity to create classes based on their knowledge of the students.  This included increased electives, AP courses, and classes in career programs that lead to certifications.  And it was done in partnership with local universities to ensure students exposure to college campuses and college level work and provide opportunities for admissions and scholarships to NJIT.

·   We provided training for teachers on culturally responsive educational practices.

·   We worked with 6 schools that sent students to Central to identify the needs of entering 9th graders and create a bridge program that helped these students transition to high school.

·   We supported and included the PTA in the planning and strategies for reform at the school.

·   We developed an extended day program that included both additional academic classes and interventions for students who needed them, as well as enrichment activities like yoga, drama and dance, and art.

·   We established a school-wide focus on literacy across content areas and provided instruction for all teachers on literacy practices that can be used in all content areas.

At no point has the state appointed superintendent asked the committed staff and leadership at Central High School what we did to turn the school around. Nor has she seriously tried to improve education in existing facilities using the wealth of dedicated and experienced teachers in the Newark Public Schools.

Instead Ms. Anderson is proposing that historic Weequahic High School be converted into two single-sex academies phasing out regular students; that Shabazz High School become athletic academies and that Newark Evening High School be closed, causing our city to lose a desperately needed full-credit evening school for adults.  And that’s only a small part of the dismantling and closing of our schools.

Newark has the capacity, the talent, the desire, and the need to run our own city. No state-imposed school plan, no matter how well intentioned, will work here.  We need Newark-driven solutions to Newark’s problems based on sound education strategies that have proven successful here and in other cities. We do not need dogmatic, unproven ideas about education, however trendy, guiding the administration of our schools.