Testimony of Michael Mulgrew before NYC Council Education Committee
Jun 8, 2009 9:48 AM
Good afternoon. My name is Michael Mulgrew and I am the Chief Operating Officer and Vice President for Career and Technical Education for the United Federation of Teachers (UFT). On behalf of my members, I want to thank you, Chairman Robert Jackson, and the distinguished members of your committee for this opportunity to share our views on the school governance law that allows for mayoral control of New York City’s public schools.
For many months now, all of us who have a stake in our city’s public education – and frankly, who among us does not – have publicly and privately debated school governance as the law’s sunset approaches. This policy decision impacts the lives of over 1 million school children, their families and teachers, and it has spurred supporters and critics alike to draw hard lines in the sand.
A decision on how this law will go forward is probably just weeks away, and I believe we must all remind ourselves that the politics of conflict aren’t going to get us to where we need to be, which is ensuring a school governance model that supports schools and educators and, most important, creates safe, high-quality learning environments that help children prepare for college and for life. Randi Weingarten, our president, strongly believes that public education at its best is the great equalizer, the great opportunity-maker, and that is why we must first and foremost be focused on our educational mission and improving outcomes for children. That is precisely the approach we would like to take as we frame this discussion on mayoral control.
The sunset of the school governance law has given us a wonderful opportunity to re-examine the current structure and to improve and strengthen the model. Many proposals have been made on how to do that, and the UFT’s position is very simple: The governor and the state legislature should reauthorize the school governance law with modifications. We believe the Mayor should still appoint the Chancellor, control the budget, and drive policy, but we also believe that the system needs more checks and balances, transparency and accountability. Think of this modified law as Mayoral Control 2.0.
The initial version of the mayoral control law – we can call that 1.0 – in many respects was a welcome change for many, and was made possible partly by the UFT’s support. Progress has been made in many ways under this law. More than anything, it brought cohesion, stability and resources to our schools.
We do not under any circumstances want to return to the days when schools were unstable and under-funded. That sentiment is particularly timely considering the current situation that we are in with the city budget. Schools stand to lose over $400 million, which amounts to more than a quarter-million dollars on average per school. That means that many of the academic intervention programs, tutoring programs and after school programs that have led to higher test scores will be eliminated. Additionally, class size, which is already rising across all grades, will rise even more, compromising our children’s educations.
The stories are already coming in from all over the five boroughs. In Manhattan at MS 104, a District 2 school, cuts threaten to eliminate after school programs including: sports; art; music; drama; computers and more. Equally devastating, this middle school could see classes grow from the low 20’s to over 30 students in a classroom, which could reverse the momentum they’re seeing on student achievement, including English Language Arts (ELA) and Math scores. Bronx students attending Urban Assembly – a middle and high school in District 9, are facing a double blow – after-school tutoring, much of it targeting English Language Learners and its Saturday Academy, which provides essential supplemental learning, will be cut. Our teachers at Boys and Girls High School in Brooklyn’s District 16 fear major cuts to their tutoring and P.M. School, the very programs that make it possible for students lacking sufficient credits to graduate on time. Moreover as a School placed Under Registration Review (SURR), these services are not a luxury – they are necessary to get the grades up. In Queens, where some elementary schools are facing class size increases that threaten quality learning, District 2’s P.S. 154 could suffer so much more. Teachers there report that cluster programs, Academic Intervention Services (AIS) and English Language Learners programs that provide the targeted learning experiences for P.S. 154’s entire student population could be scaled back or eliminated. Without these core programs and services, these kids will slide backwards – and they will not simply be “left behind” – they will be sorely neglected. Slashed programs could also severely impact Staten Island’s District 31, including P.S. 44, a Title I school, where at-risk services could be eliminated.
We can’t afford to let these stories become a reality. Our schools are moving in the right direction and we need the city to restore as much education funding as possible, so we don’t lose this momentum. Working together with our representatives in Washington, we were able to secure federal stimulus dollars to help stabilize our schools. Working together with our representatives in Albany, we were able to secure new revenues that offset looming cuts. It is now time that we all work together here on the city level to minimize these cuts. These are difficult times economically, but we need to invest, not divest, because children do not get a second chance.
Luckily, the sunset of the governance law means we do have a second chance at improving mayoral control; and there are reasons why that is necessary. Again, mayoral control brought cohesion, stability and resources to our schools. What we need to add to that formula are checks and balances, transparency and accountability – both top to bottom & bottom to top. The lack of transparency and accountability has led to troubling controversies, and when issues reached a boiling point, educators, parents and communities were forced to protest in the streets or take legal action because they had nowhere to go with their complaints.
There are different ways to bring about the positive change that we describe. For example, as we have engaged in this governance dialogue, the UFT has recommended enhancing the make-up of the central Panel for Education Policy (PEP) by altering the appointees, thereby creating a more inclusive structure that allows more voices to be heard.
We have also advocated for other strategies that could be pursued independently of whether or not the PEP’s make-up is changed. For instance, giving PEP members fixed terms would allow them make decisions without fear of being arbitrarily removed. The Chancellor could be made an ex-officio member, paving the way for the Panel to choose its own chair. The Panel could also hold hearings on the expense and capital budgets, and make policy proposals public in advance of panel meetings, complete with a list of pros and cons about the issues themselves.
Beyond making changes to the PEP, other steps can be taken to improve the law as well. Specifically to improve the transparency of student achievement data and spending, we recommend that the legislature create independent access to and review of fiscal and performance data. Enacting this measure would immediately reinforce credibility and go a long way toward ensuring integrity in data collection and analysis. The public’s trust in the numbers is crucial to their confidence in the system as a whole, but right now, the city uses different metrics from the state and federal education departments to assess schools, leading to confusion over exactly how they are doing.
We have also recommended that the state legislature re-empower School Leadership teams, District Leadership Teams and Community Education Councils so they are able to carry out all of their responsibilities under state law. Parents must have a role in decisions affecting their children and have their grievances addressed. District superintendents, who for a long time served as an important link between their communities and the central Department of Education, should also be re-empowered to oversee the schools in their districts, improve parental access and provide schools with localized support.
Beyond these modifications, we recommend that the legislature also strengthen oversight and enforcement mechanisms, to ensure that the Department of Education (DoE) follows the letter – and the spirit -- of the law.
There is no one perfect system. Over the final few weeks of the state legislative session, I truly hope that everyone can dial down the polemics, get past the politics of conflict, and work together to find smart ways to improve the current system in a way that looks forward, not backward. The state legislature now has the opportunity to create strong, supportive processes and structures that help schools improve outcomes for kids - the true promise of what mayoral control can be. Ultimately, I think that if people’s voices are heard; if people collaborate; if the system is transparent and everyone is accountable, then we are on the right track. Thank you.
###
