Bill Cala, former interim superintendent of city schools. FILE PHOTO
by William C. Cala, Ed.D
(William Cala is the former interim superintendent of the RochesterCitySchool District and former superintendent of Fairport schools.)
Looking at the statistics of urban schools across the country is enough to make anyone consider radical tactics. In nearly all of these schools graduation rates hover around 50 percent and rates for African-Americans and Latinos are as low as 30 percent. New York State is no different and Rochester has the dubious honor of leading the pack in negative statistics for children. The Children's Agenda's annual report is a must read for anyone who cares about Rochester's kids. And it's not all about graduation rates; it's about health and living conditions that are causative factors of poor school performance. One statistic alone, the teenage pregnancy rate, should make us think twice about where we are putting our reform efforts. Rochester has one of the highest teen pregnancy rates in the developed world, putting it in the same statistical arena as a third-world country. That has produced kindergarten classes that are made up of nearly 25 percent of the children coming from teenage mothers.
In "Class and Schools" by Richard Rothstein, a clear case is made demonstrating the catastrophic effects of poverty on urban school performance. From community safety to poor health due to living conditions and lack of access to adequate health care to joblessness to a lack of a family structure, children across the country are ill-equipped physically, emotionally and socially to succeed in school. Rochester is the 11th poorest city for children in the country. I have had numerous conversations with pediatricians over the past 20 years, and they have relayed horror stories about the damage that poverty has done to children before they enter the school-yard gate (i.e. the average urban kindergartener has 1/3 of the vocabulary of a suburban counterpart).
Given this scenario, a logical question to ask is, "How will mayoral control of the schools help urban children and the factors leading to the lack of success of children in urban schools?
Is it about academics?
We have heard about the "success" of mayoral control in cities such as New York, Chicago, Washington, DC, and Cleveland. Since New York has been used as an exemplar for mayoral control here in Rochester, it seems only fitting to look at what Mayor Bloomberg has done since taking over the New York City schools. Historian Diane Ravitch recently provided some eye-opening statistics about this ersatz "success."
The National Assessment of Educational Progress is a federally funded and administered test that is considered by scholars to be the best and only valid measure of student performance in the nation having a 40-year track record of solid performance.
Ravitch points out that of the urban districts that have been tested since 2002, the highest performing districts were Charlotte, North Carolina, and Austin, Texas. The lowest performing districts were Washington, DC, Chicago, and Cleveland. Charlotte and Austin are not controlled by mayors and the lowest performing districts are all controlled by mayors (Cleveland and Chicago have been controlled by the mayor for over a decade).
The city with the most sustained gains is Atlanta, Georgia (not controlled by a mayor).
New York City has been controlled by the mayor since 2002. To date there have been no gains on NAEP in fourth-grade reading, eighth-grade reading, or eighth-grade mathematics. Additionally, there have been no gains for African-Americans, Latinos, Asians, whites or lower-income students. Is this closing the achievement gap? Is this progress? Hardly.
Let's talk about those pesky graduation rates. One of the keystones of Mayor Bloomberg's campaign this past fall was the improvement of the graduation rates in New York City. He has claimed a rate as high as 70 percent. Here are the facts: New York State Education Department statistics clearly determine that the graduation rate in New York City is 52 percent. Mayor Bloomberg has conveniently invented his own mathematical formula to determine the NYC graduation rate. What he and his chancellor of education, Joel Klein have done is create "Discharge Codes." Discharge Codes are ways of designating students who have disappeared from the city schools as "other than dropouts." In fact, they have invented so many Discharge Codes that they are unable to determine what actually happened to the student. This is a convenient manipulation to obfuscate the graduation rate. So egregious is this activity that Advocates for Children did a study this past year citing tens of thousands of children being listed as "discharged" (not dropped out) yet the New York City administration was unable to demonstrate where these children went. Over the past six years, most of the discharges are students of color. The graduation rate for African-American males is 29 percent.
The New York City Department of Education is currently under investigation for this practice. (By the way, the Houston Independent School District has its brand of Discharge Codes called "Leaver Codes." They have over 20 Leaver Codes. They too were called out for seriously manipulating the graduation rate. The "Houston Miracle" turned out to be The Houston Mirage. Unfortunately, the No Child Left Behind Act that governs education nationally was built on the Houston system, which has since been thoroughly discredited).
Is it about money?
If controlling the Rochester school district is about saving money (The City of Rochester is required by law to contribute no less than $119 million to the RCSD coffers), then perhaps we should again look to the beacon that has often been mentioned as Rochester's model, New York City. In 2002 Mayor Bloomberg took over the schools. The budget at that time was $12.5 billion. In 2009 the budget is $21 billion. Given the lack of student performance in NYC, how does Bloomberg justify a 68 percent increase? If we look to other cities controlled by mayors and were to evaluate those mayors based on student performance and cost savings, the public debate could logically center around a voter recall of those mayors.
In 2005 Wong and Shen, in a study called "When Mayors Lead Urban Schools: Assessing the Effects of Mayoral Takeover," examined finances and staffing in the nation's 100 largest urban school districts. They reported that mayoral takeovers did not produce the promised improvement in financial stability and concluded that "no general consensus is emerging about the overall effectiveness of mayoral takeover."
One has to minimally ask the question whether mayoral control is about breaking unions and creating a lower paid workforce with fewer benefits. Author Danny Weil's December 2009 post should cause serious reflection:
"This is the point, and why mayoral control and Eli Broad, Gates, The Fisher family and the Walton family (and a host of other such charitable capitalists) along with Green Dot schools and other EMO's who seek to privatize all of education are so giddy. Creating a sub-prime school system that breaks the backs of the teacher's union is the goal of the new managerial elite who seek only to turn over public schools to private operators and entrepreneurs. This way they can reduce teachers to at-will employees, de-skill them with the "best practices," force them to work longer hours for less pay and less benefits and of course eliminate collective bargaining; that will then give the new managerial elite and their corporate masters, control over the entire educational enterprise - from curriculum development to the hiring and firing of teachers."
If Rochester's City Hall is unhappy with the mandated $119 million it must contribute to Rochester school district, the mayor and council members should look at the track record for mayoral control across the country. If they were to reduce costs under a system controlled by the mayor, they would be the first to do so. While the disdain for the $119 mandate is understandable, how does the city's contribution compare to the share that Monroe County suburban taxpayers contribute to their schools? $119 million is less than 18 percent of the total Rochester school district budget. By comparison, suburban communities contribute well over 50 percent of their total budgets. The local argument is that Rochester's share to RCSD is higher than that of Syracuse and Buffalo. True enough, but it's high time to start looking to models of success rather than using other urban failures as a benchmark.
Is it about crime?
Do dropouts cause crimes or do crimes cause dropouts?
Would there be less crime if the graduation rate were higher or would the graduation rate be higher if there were intact families, less crime, safer neighborhoods, better health care, and most importantly, jobs? While it is easy and convenient to narrow the focus to one culprit (education), the answers are much more complex and require the political will to tackle all of the above issues including educational reform. (See "Class and Schools" by Richard Rothstein for additional information on this topic.)
It is a great sound bite to look at crime statistics and announce that the perpetrators are dropouts. This statistic is a "no-brainer." Of course the vast majority of crimes are committed by dropouts, but in fact in most cases, that which led up to dropping out is the initial crime. Unless we search for the root causes of problems, our efforts are misplaced, ineffective and wasteful. While in the City of Rochester, I made it my business to do a forensic study when children committed serious crimes. Without exception, the home lives of child criminals were stunning.
For example, one adolescent drop-out shot and killed another boy. His life looked like this: His father sold cocaine out of the home. He was arrested and imprisoned twice while in elementary school. His mother was repeatedly beaten by the father. The Department of Social Services was often involved in attempts to resolve domestic abuse. The boy in question was sexually abused by the father and ran away twice. All of this occurring in early elementary school! The boy eventually dropped out. Living off of the streets was less painful.
I wish this were the exception to the rule. In varying degrees, this scenario repeats itself on a daily basis. Surely we should do everything within our means to adequately educate our children and keep them in school rather than having them drop out. However, the elephant in the room cannot be ignored or denied. Our efforts must address the external forces that lead to near certain school failure. At the national, state, and local level, I am afraid that resources are not addressing the root causes. We do not need more money going to urban school districts for programs that do not address root causes.
Mayoral control will not fix this.
In addition to being ineffective, mayoral control is wrong
Clearly, mayoral control doesn't work, but beyond its failure to produce, it is quite simply, wrong.
City residents are already disenfranchised by laws governing big cities in New York State. While suburban citizens are empowered with the right to vote on their district budgets, city residents are not entitled to do so. Mayoral control effectively removes Rochesterians from any meaningful input into the education of its children. I believe that this particular issue outweighs any consideration relative to academic outcomes and political perceptions of economic feasibility. Eliminating yet one more avenue to parent and citizen participation in government is an outright assault on democracy.
I am not alone in this belief. A 1997 case study of mayoral control in Chicago found some evidence that appointed officials were "less accountable to particular constituencies and... therefore, better able to put system-wide concerns above constituency demands."
Mayoral control involves establishing boards appointed by the mayor. Frederick M. Hess has conducted the largest study of mayoral control in the nation. He states that:
"Scholars raise several important concerns about appointed boards. Appointed boards tend to be less transparent than elected boards, and minority voices are more likely to be silenced or marginalized. There is also a risk that politically savvy mayors and their appointed boards may eventually settle into comfortable accommodations with special interest groups. Mayors themselves can also be a problem if they politicize school boards in self-serving ways or neglect education in favor of other issues."
I recall one particular action by Bloomberg and his appointed board early on in the mayoral takeover of the New York City schools. The mayor's appointed board was presented with a plan to retain any third grader who did not pass a standardized test. Up until that point, the mayor empowered the board to make educational decisions. Two of the mayor's appointees could not in conscience vote for a plan that defied all research on child development. The mayor fired them and replaced them with nominees who would support the plan.
A comprehensive national study of mayoral control was presented to the general assembly of Johnson City, Missouri, in October of 2009. Citing numerous research studies on the topic across the nation they concluded that:
1) There is a lack of democracy with appointed mayoral school boards and a concern about education becoming too involved in politics.
2) The larger role mayors play, the more costly their elections become, opening the door for big business involvement in elections (Meier 2005).
3) There is a greater risk of limiting minority participation through mayoral control (Wong 2006).
4) There is debate over whether mayors or other non-educator administrators can offer the expertise necessary to transform a school (Wong & Shen 2003).
5) Mayoral control does not address root problems such as reducing top-heavy administration or the multiple layers of bureaucracy overseeing the school system (Council of Great City Schools 2007).
6) There is no evidence that there have been improvements to the budget process.
7) Financial stability remains unresolved with mayoral control (Henig & Rich, 2005: Wong & Shen, 2005).
8) Minority students are disproportionately underrepresented (educational opportunities) with appointed school boards. Elected school board members are more likely to represent the makeup of the community, and these elected officials make it their business to advocate for them (Leal et al.,2004). (N.B. the formation of the department of African-American Studies in 2007 in Rochester. This department became a reality due to the advocacy of elected minority School Board members.)
Imagine for a moment the following scenario: The New York State Legislature by 2003 had not passed an "on-time" budget in 20 years. Since 2003 it has been named as the most dysfunctional legislature in the country. And recently, a coup was attempted by the Senate to reverse the majority party by winning over two indicted members of its body. That should be sufficient background to justify the statement: The New York State Legislature doesn't work.
Using the logic of advocates of mayoral control, what should happen is that the governor should seek a change in the New York State constitution to eliminate election of legislators. Subsequently, the governor would take complete control, and citizens of New York would no longer be able to vote for their local representatives to state government. From a very cynical point of view, the thought of removing scores of down-state legislators is quite appealing, yet our democracy is much too sacred to be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Does a smaller-scale assault on democracy (mayoral control of schools) make the rationale any more valid?
Would a parallel scenario ever be conceived in the suburbs? Imagine the outrage if an equal coup were attempted by a town supervisor to take over a school district or eliminate elections of town board members. Not only would it never happen, such thoughts would never see the light of day. I cannot help but believe that democracy is threatened more readily in urban centers where the vast majority of its citizens are entrenched in poverty and do not have the capacity to have their voices heard. Is it any wonder why voting among the poor is so low? Losing one more opportunity to have a voice (voting in School Board elections) will bring about a deeper cascade into hopelessness and a lack of faith in our democracy.
If not mayoral control, what?
I have no doubt that Bob Duffy truly cares about education in the City of Rochester. I am convinced that he is willing to expend political capital to accomplish the goal of educating all of the city's kids. If not mayoral control, what path should he and local legislators seek instead of greasing the chute for a mayoral takeover?
1) Start a campaign to seek better School Board candidates. After the state elections this past November, editorials sprung up supporting efforts to seek out better candidates to run for the Senate and Assembly. No less of an effort should take place for the RCSD. No one called for a gubernatorial takeover of the legislature!
2) Eliminate salaries for School Board members. This has a lot to do with getting better candidates. School Board members do not get paid in the suburbs and shouldn't be paid in the city, either. Perhaps we will see candidates whose only agenda is children.
3) Eliminate party affiliation in order to be placed on the ballot. Let's face it: if you are not an endorsed Democrat, you are highly unlikely to become a RCSD school board member.
4) Institute term limits. Given the nature of the political machine and the low voter turnout due to a sense of hopelessness by the citizenry, ineffective School Board members are difficult to vote out of office. Perhaps term limits will renew a sense of promise and encouragement.
5) While huge urban districts are notoriously clumsy and overly bureaucratic, the fact of the matter is that poverty is the real issue, an issue that often seems beyond solution, leading to the endless (and fruitless) attacks on urban schools.
The real solutions that will solve the graduation puzzle have very little to do with what is being proposed by the mayor, the governor, or the national secretary of education. The real solutions are with children ages 0 to 5 and their families. There is absolutely no debate about the importance of quality pre-school education, child care, and after-school programs. There is overwhelming evidence that addressing the social, emotional, physical, and financial ailments in homes with young children produces significant increases in graduation rates (more than any power reorganization, school-only program, testing regime, or pay-for-performance scheme).
Three of the four most effective programs in the country that produce the greatest increase in graduation rates are programs involving children younger than age 5. And right here in Rochester we have the Nurse Family Partnership, which is a highly researched and greatly effective program that receives inadequate financial support.
6) And speaking of the Nurse Family Partnership, community leaders should be looking at all of the recommendations of the Children's Agenda. They are researched based and proven to work.
7) Now to go into really dangerous waters: as stated previously, poverty is the real issue as it relates to performance in poor urban settings - poverty and the concentration of poverty in cities. Our cities (specifically Rochester) are exemplars of economic apartheid (Rochester is poorer and more segregated than it was in 1954 when Brown vs. Board of Education outlawed segregated schools).
All of the recommendations above assume the maintenance of RCSD as one urban district under someone's control, be it the mayor or an elected school board. A better solution, however, eliminates the Rochester City School District and sectors off Monroe County into slices of a pie. Each slice or sector would incorporate suburban districts and a small portion of RCSD students. Each educational sector would be managed by the current suburban board with additional board representation from the ranks of the city.
Research tells us that if schools consist of more than 40 percent children and families of poverty (high concentration of poverty), they will not succeed. This recommendation pays attention to the research on what works by providing a middle-class education for the urban poor. Other significant advantages include a massive savings by eliminating one of the most costly bureaucracies in the state, maintenance of local control, and supporting democracy by not eliminating the voice of the voter.
Conclusion
Mayoral control has been a hands-down failure in this country. The mayor has stated, "Documented improvements... are a proven fact in such cities as New York City, Boston, and Washington, DC." The only improvements documented are created by the spin machines of each of the mayors of these cities and the others that I have previously mentioned. Parents and citizens in cities controlled by mayors are up in arms because they have lost their voices and lost their schools, and there is no better performance in schools created by mayors as measured by any valid scrutiny (see http://www.pureparents.org/ and http://www.timeoutfromtesting.org/ , two of scores of parent groups in Chicago and New York).
Citizens of mayoral controlled communities have experienced massive school closings and reopening with private charters that have done no better, and in most cases, worse than their public predecessors. As Danny Weil stated, this is more about breaking the backs of teachers and their unions and putting schools in the hands of investors who don't care about kids, but whose only concern is making money. Perhaps that is why hedge-fund investors are wild about taking over New York State realty (http://www.examiner.com/x-28545-NY-High-Schools-Examiner~y2009m12d9-Hedge-Funds-invest-in-Charter-Schools). Teachers are not the enemy. Poverty is the enemy.
But much more important than whether or not mayoral control is measured as an academic or financial success is the disenfranchisement of the urban poor. Taking away the right to vote is not an option in a democracy. Taking away the minority voices of the urban poor is an egregious assault on civil rights. The mayor, the governor, and the legislators who are lining up behind this ill-thought-out plan should re-think their positions and seek to tackle the root causes of poor performance in the city. If they expect city kids to graduate, it is imperative that poverty and its trappings are vigorously addressed. Paving the way legislatively for mayoral control of the Rochester City Schools would be one more flagrant act of hubris by the New York State legislature.
There are more viable paths available to achieve better results for urban kids than mayoral control. All take commitment and substantial political will and capital. And yes, they all will bring substantial and necessary "incremental" improvement. Remember that the only truly successful paths to graduation are built in pre-school programs that incrementally build to the pride and joy of graduation. The mayor and the superintendent have stated that we do not have time for incremental improvement. I would argue that we do not have time "not" to improve incrementally. We cannot afford the failed policies that emulate Chicago, New York, and Washington, DC. The public debate of this issue must take place immediately. Before any bill is drafted, all sectors of the public should weigh in.
It is not just our city's future that is at stake. Democracy is at stake.
Comments for "COMMENTARY: Mayoral control doesn't work and is wrong" (27)
City Newspaper is not responsible for the content of these comments. City Newspaper reserves the right to remove comments at their discretion.
Robyn McMaster said on Jan. 14, 2010 at 9:11pm
Bill, you have a heart for children and want the best for them. Your heart cries out for those children who suffer the devastating effects of poverty. Thank you for presenting the facts and information that go with the issues connected to mayoral control. We need to hear this wisdom from someone as knowledgeable as you share with us here.
You certainly have a track record that shows your heart for minority children since you have spent much time and effort to establish schools in Africa as well as to help develop teachers there.
I respect your track record, your work and your honesty and most of all the courage it took to make your position public. Thankfully we do live in a democracy and people like you find the courage and tone to speak out..
rochester99 said on Jan. 14, 2010 at 10:56pm
I don’t see how anyone could make a generalization as to the outcome of Mayoral control of any school district. There are scores of significant variables that determines what creates successful/unsuccessful academic outcomes in urban school districts throughout America. Trying to compare NYC, Chicago, Washington D.C or even Austin and Charlotte with Rochester makes no sense. There are the obvious variables of size of a city, the form of government, the economic dynamics of the city…is it growing, is it stagnate or significant loss of population and wealth, how are the schools funded….state, county or city taxation formulas and funding sources vary widely among all urban school districts, level of teachers salaries, poverty rates ….etc. the list is endless and these variables create “distinct” urban environment for every city. Then you look at the type of Mayor that may have control of a city school district. Is he/she dynamic, creative, innovative, a good manager of budgets, the quality of the staff…etc. Does the Mayor have the support of corporate leaders and the city council? Every city is different…thus don’t be tempted to create generalizations at to its potential outcome.
To me the process of education is comprehensive ….not just confined within a school building. The outside environment is probably much more important in developing a child’s education. And the Mayor has much more control over this component…yet now….massive funds are going to schools with little to the city in developing its urban environment. The status quo is just not acceptable and any fine tuning of the current strategy will not produce the changes that are needed.
There comes a time when you need to shuffle the deck in a total different manner. New people, new management and a new strategy could act as a major catalyst for change. It can’t get much worse than exist now. Give the Mayor a chance….an opportunity to create a more innovative and dynamic environment. But I do hope he brings in fresh people, new ideas and outside assistance to help in restructuring the city government/city school consolidation. Too often relying on the same people with different titles isn’t really change. And there will be much more power for the Mayor. Power that could be benevolent or abused and considering the size of the school budget and the proposed one billion dollar school construction budget over the next 10 years, there needs a vigilant populace to ensure transparency.
But I am willing to give the Mayor a chance and I hope the region fully supports his efforts. The city schools, the city of Rochester and the total region desperately needs to work together to get it right.
CoolGrrl28 said on Jan. 15, 2010 at 1:34am
"A better solution, however, eliminates the Rochester City School District and sectors off Monroe County into slices of a pie. Each slice or sector would incorporate suburban districts and a small portion of RCSD students. Each educational sector would be managed by the current suburban board with additional board representation from the ranks of the city."
That was one of the BEST PARTS of his commentary! I love this guy! He really knows what he is talking about, and faces the tough issues head-on. BRAVO, Dr. Cala!!!
Please push for such a necessary combination of school districts! All of Monroe County's children would benefit from such a non-divisive union! Then, redundancies could be eliminated, sending those funds right back where they belong... into the classrooms of Monroe County!
Speedmaster said on Jan. 15, 2010 at 10:48am
Mayoral control may solve some immediate pain, but I do not believe it's the long-term answer. This would just shift control from one group of politicians and bureaucrats to another. The correct move is to privatize it, all of it, let schools and teachers compete for the business. Competition works, we'd end up with a MUCH better product for less money and it would be more efficient. Too many interest groups with power and money to lose (e.g. teachers' unions and politicians) consider this a non-starter. However, it's still the proper answer in spite of that.
Speedmaster said on Jan. 15, 2010 at 10:53am
The poverty angle is, in my opinion, a red-herring. Decades ago, the majority of children in both rural and urban settings were even more poor (often much more so) by today's standards and managed to do quite well academically, often in one-room schools. I'd bet far far more of the current students performing so poorly in RCSD (and other) schools have indoor plumbing, TV, AC, cars, etc., things unavailable to nearly all say 80 years ago. Pouring more money down the government school rat-hole will not change anything for the better, even if the letterhead on the paperwork changes from Brizzard's office to Duffy's office.
Bman said on Jan. 15, 2010 at 11:39am
Speedmaster, You are correct about the poverty level changing a bit. However I believe that the family breakdown combined with the new poverty level is the combination that kills. Their is no family structure at all in the majority of minority homes below the poverty level. He is right, kids need more before the age of five to lay the foundation for garduation.
Speedmaster said on Jan. 15, 2010 at 12:29pm
>> "Their (sic) is no family structure at all in the majority of minority homes below the poverty level."
Agreed, and I don't think this was the case prior to the 1960s in this country (including among African-American families). Any ideas as to why it's so prevalent now?
ibtch said on Jan. 15, 2010 at 1:11pm
My greastest hesitation is based on the role of the mayor. How many youngsters will get locked up for disruptive behaviors? How much authority will the mayoral role play in the discipline process? The sooner we have a community dialogue, the more questions will be answered in a public forum. Which model is the mayor modeling?
rochester99 said on Jan. 15, 2010 at 1:25pm
There is no comparison with poverty today vs. what exists a couple generations ago. Back in the day….families were intact…much less divorce and typically one parent worked and the other stay at home with the kids…feeding them wholesome foods and spending quality/quantity time nurturing the children. Streets were safe, drug usage and violence did not dominate the urban environment. And there was much less diversions for kids…cell phones, 200 channel cable TV, computers, video games…etc.
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that extreme levels of poverty, the concentration of poverty and the saturation of despair, violence and lack of opportunity creates a very poor environment for any child to excel. Again, the issue is not improving our schools, its improving the environment outside of school. You could hire all Teachers with PHD degrees and place them in every school and it would have little impact in urban academic performance. And you could take a poor child with a very weak family structure and place them in suburban schools and I believe you still would not get greatly improved academic performance….yet we continue focus only on schools…pouring hundreds of millions of dollars in the school system and continue to get very poor results.
The Mayor and city government has the ability to change the environment and integrate it with the school system and MAYBE a positive outcome for our children could occur. Let’s give it a chance.
Nancy Sung Shelton said on Jan. 15, 2010 at 2:43pm
The idea that the prevalent urban communityâ��s home structure in non-existent is a very subjective opinion birthed out of a view of privilege and from the majority culture. I reside in the community that harbors the most concern, 14621. I have seen many tragedies AND many successes. There is no denying that there is a need for vast improvements, however one cannot have this discussion regarding the effects of pervasive poverty and its affects, without discussing the inequities present in our community and the systems set up to support us. There is much merit in the argument surrounding â��institutional racismâ��, specifically when we speak to the concentration of poverty in certain areas of town due to early redlining efforts (we can call it redistricting these days), and how it seems that when we disaggregate the data and truly read the story that it is telling us, that there are numerous identifiers of glaring disparities among minority populations â�" teenage pregnancy, poverty, high school drop-out, low wage earners, infant mortality, homeless, incarcerated, exposure to community violence, etc. This information is not new to our leaders, but the fact that they apparently appear to highlight that there is an issue, but choose not to truly address the issues is unfortunate, and most of all, unacceptable as PEOPLE languish in this community.
I am weary of the comments that come from folks in the community that say that individuals are where they are in life due to choice â�" essentially, all they have to do is pull themselves up by their bootstraps and get it together. This is an easy answer to a complex problem that many have chosen to ignore. Most of the groups that were able to pull themselves up from their bootstraps had the boots in the first place - provided, as a gift, for being a part of the majority group. As time has progressed, many people in the community fell comforted that, through our social efforts, a store has been provided - with access to all - to purchase these bootsâ�¦ this is great, but the fact remains, that a large part of the Rochester community still cannot afford them.
Please be careful about your opinion about the family structure of other communities, donâ��t just assume that it is broken based on your perspective of what fixed means to you. Tread carefully when venturing into territories that you have not taken the time to become familiar with â�" intimately. And please, Leaders take the time to listen to those communities that you are supposed to represent, the challenge lies in the attempt to accurately represent a cultural community that you do not belong to. You must remain objective, receptive and respectful. When you impose your beliefs on anotherâ��s way of life, you run the risk of damaging honored practices and belief system, which can further disenfranchise those you are intending to help. According to Peggy McIntosh in her paper entitled, â��White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsackâ��, leaders from the majority culture (and individuals in general), serving minority populations must be careful how they present their message, because that very message sent out to the overall community may give others license to behave in an ignorant, oblivious, arrogant, and destructive mannerâ�¦ (and reinforcing) the myth that democratic choice is equally available to all. (This approach keeps) most people unaware that freedom of confident action is there for just a small number of people, props up those in power and serves to keep power in the hands of the same groups that have most of it already.
I am in support of any position that considers the best interest of the people and our children of this strong community. We cannot diminish the history of strength, perseverance, ingenuity, passion, determination and pride coming out of the communities of color. We are not broken, our families are not ruined, and our community is not lost. We need to stop accepting this message and sending it out ourselves. Too many have died and suffered for us to succeed â�" we owe it to our next generation.
Avery True Blackman said on Jan. 15, 2010 at 3:08pm
The term urban education translates as a population of overwhelming black students with mostly white teachers from surburban areas. The politics of the permanent underclass is the backbone of status-quo America. Until the masses of blacks deal with the lingering cultural indentity crisis, urban edcaution will continue to expose black hyprocrisy.
Dave Atias said on Jan. 15, 2010 at 3:13pm
I honestly mean no disrespect, but if everyone is in agreement that poverty and outside conditions have an overwhelming effect on schools, and the Mayor (as well as the last Mayor) hasn't made a real dent in these conditions (whether his fault or not), why would we think this or any Mayor could "fix" the schools? Urban mayors have enough on their plate, they should take care of what they were voted to take care of in the first place.
Nancy Sung Shelton said on Jan. 15, 2010 at 3:46pm
To make it clear, I am not a proponent for Mayoral Control. I do see value in cross pollenation of the conversation between the City and the School District, but appreciate the unique challenges under each body's purview. As a resident, I prefer that a concerted and focused effort is placed on City issues based on the expertise, experience, and resources that the City has available to them. I am not confident that the City has those same conditions to be adequately translatable to tackle the RCSD challenges. I am fearful that we, the stakeholders and parents of this community, will lose our voice through the loss of our vote and that our children will continue to suffer as our leaders make changes and try to "figure things out". Our county was founded on democracy that included the right to have representation, I am not sure that an appointed Board will accurately "represent" my view or my children's best interest. I will continue to follow this conversation and conduct my own research, as I recommend all of you do.
City Dweller said on Jan. 15, 2010 at 5:51pm
As a city resident and an employee of the RCSD, I greatly appreciate hearing from Dr. Cala. I respect his commitment to urban education and his attitude toward both the families and the education workers. He was an excellent superintendent for the brief time he was in office, in my humble opinion.
I also respect Nancy Sung Shelton for her message. Working with urban families is humbling when you see how many of them cope with hardships that middle class folks cannot really imagine and often do so with grace and courage. True, there have been serious assaults on family and community structure, and I agree that there has been inadequate focus on addressing that problem, but it feels like blaming the victim to characterize all poor families as dysfunctional or broken.
I won't pretend to know the solution, but I suspect Dr. Cala's "pie" structure seems a step in the right direction. We in the greater Rochester area need to realize that our futures are interwoven. We will never be truly successful as a community until we meet the needs of the whole community.
Dave Reilly said on Jan. 15, 2010 at 6:12pm
It was a sad day for the RCSD when we couldn't keep Bill Cala. I applaud him for his efforts to help those in Africa, but I wish he could have stayed and helped the kids and families of Rochester.
JWags said on Jan. 16, 2010 at 9:25am
"Dave Reilly said on Jan. 15, 2010 at 6:12pm
It was a sad day for the RCSD when we couldn't keep Bill Cala. I applaud him for his efforts to help those in Africa, but I wish he could have stayed and helped the kids and families of Rochester."
My sentiments exactly! Dr. Cala, won't you come help us? In my 19 years with the RCSD, I've never seen it run so smoothly or employees have such confidence in our District than when you were interim superintendent. We truly miss your leadership.
Dan DiClemente said on Jan. 16, 2010 at 1:56pm
Finally an intelligent assessment of mayoral control from a man who has actually devoted his life to the education and well-being of children living in poverty throughout the world. Dr. Cala's comments are backed up with statistical data and research; not ill-conceived sound bytes about landing planes or picking a hill to die on.
I applaud Dr. Cala for his willingness to stand up for the rights of the citizens of Rochester, where, in an ironic twist of fate, their elected representatives are lobbying in Albany to take away their right to vote. What's even more impressive, is that while some may not agree with Dr. Cala's assessment, at least he offers some creative solutions as to how to revise the current system without resorting to mayoral control.
Stay vocal, Bill. There are many in this community who still believe that the only way to preserve grass-roots democracy is through grass-roots democracy. Your expertise on the subject will go a long way toward helping people understand how wrong this is, and hopefully, the citizens of this community will gather together on the steps of City Hall to say enough is enough.
Jeff R said on Jan. 17, 2010 at 9:11am
Bill,
You may be right about poverty and the fact that we seem to believe that the RCSD is responsible for all of the problems in our city. BUT how about presenting a balanced argument on mayoral control? It always amazes me that anti-testing advocates will always use testing data when convenient to their cause. Wasn’t it you who completely disparaged the RCSD BOE at the end of your short tenure with your report? Make up your mind, man.
I have been an employee of the RCSD for over 20 years and I watched your six months at the helm of the school district. Unlike those who are completely unaware, I know how much havoc you almost created in the district. Go in peace dude and focus on your retirement. We don’t need another suburbanite trying to Save the Children.
Jeff
James Spount said on Jan. 17, 2010 at 11:13am
Dr. Cala, your commentary on this issue is appreciated, though I imagine that had you actually stuck around and attempted to implement changes to effect dramatic improvements in the district for longer than five minutes, you would be singing a much different tune.
The Rochester school board is among the most ineffective bodies in NYS. Take a look at the lethargy with which they have responded to decades of failure. The hope that board term limits or eliminating pay would somehow impact the quality of education for students is pure fantasy. The system itself needs to fundamentally change, not the way we select board members. I say give Mayor Duffy 4 years and let the voters decide how much he has improved the state of our city's education.
Evaluating the track record of mayoral control inititatives in other cities is tricky at best. The biased report cited here by Diane Ravitch is riddled with inaccuracies - no surprise since Ravitch has long had a personal axe to grind with Mayor Bloomberg. The fact is that NYC student achievement scores have gone up every year that Bloomberg has been in office. The same cannot be said for NYS or for Rochester over the same time period. Plus, the NAEP results do not take into account the inceased volume of autonomous and charter schools Bloomberg introduced in NYC over the past 8 years - an unequivical boon for student achievement in the city.
The question of poverty is among the most fascinating raised by Cala and others whenever the issue of improving city schools is raised. When will we stop accepting this an an excuse? Our kids deserve better. Of course, the challenges presented are very real. But schools in our city (school 58, school 23, and all five charter schools) and across the country are proving every day that poverty does not have to be an insurmountable barrier to academic success. These schools - designed specifically to address the needs of an urban poor population - are achieving extraordinary success and there is no reason the RCSD cannot go full scale with the strategies that are making the most difference. Solving urban education is the silver bullet for so many of the problems we seek solutions for - crime, economy, teen pregnancy, health care. Yet, our board feels zero motivation to make this happen. Of course, this is to say nothing of the racial achievement gap involved. Closing this gap should be the civil rights movement of our time, which is so fitting given Monday's MLK holiday. What would he think today to see that African-Americans in this country are allowed to eat at the lunch counter now, but can't read the menu? Are we really going to stand by and watch as the old policies in our city continue to fail our students? Or are we willing to stand up to the entrenched interests and demand a change?
Let's stop wasting time and finally start making a difference based on the model of successful urban education reform repeated so often in schools across the country. The old approach is not working. I'm more than convinced that the school board can't do it, so I'm willing to give the Mayor a shot.
Notso said on Jan. 19, 2010 at 11:51pm
"A better solution, however, eliminates the Rochester City School District and sectors off Monroe County into slices of a pie. Each slice or sector would incorporate suburban districts and a small portion of RCSD students. Each educational sector would be managed by the current suburban board with additional board representation from the ranks of the city."
Right on, Dr. Cala! Get back in there and make it happen!
MAT said on Jan. 22, 2010 at 9:41pm
Good luck convincing suburbanites of their responsibility for helping "fix" the ills of our inner city schools. They want nothing to do with us. You should understand that, Dr. Cala, since you yourself refused to move into the city...
Lori Larson said on Jan. 25, 2010 at 9:54am
As a city resident I appreciate Dr. Cala's commentary. I am disappointed that the Mayor has not drafted a plan before now. I believe that he should have developed a report prior to annoucing his takeover of the RCSD so that he could back up his position. The fact that he did not do that I have some concerns that he is having a knee jerk reaction to city problems. I applaud the unions for taking a stand. This issue will divide the city and more people who have been urban by choice will become suburban by choice to get away from the political games that in the end children will still miss the educational mark.
John Hughes said on Jan. 26, 2010 at 9:30am
As a principal who has served in the South Bronx in three different schools for twelve years, I have not read as cogent and articulate a dissection of mayor control as Dr. Cala's, particularly as it relates to New York City. It won't change anything, but it's good to know that there is someone out there who understands what's going on.
Joe Alessi said on Jan. 30, 2010 at 12:42pm
Funny, Bill mentions Charlotte, NC as a city that shows mayoral control is not necessary to show great gains. You know what Charlotte did for so many years before even they have budget issues...they came to New York State and scooped up our newest teachers on the spot at job fairs right out of college. Then pays for them to finish their Masters in their State. The teachers are excellent. Teachers know what teachers need. Spend the time fixing the community, the pregnancy rate, the drugs, the family that can not sustain themselves, the fear and the depression in our urban youth. Spend time there, not in governmental control of the school and budget. This in no way says that the School Board does not need a complete overhaul as well. You can not run in chaos. The mayor will not fix this. Teachers will if given the opportunity and the voice.
towner13 said on Feb. 05, 2010 at 11:05pm
The bottom line is, our society no longer values education. THAT is the underlying issue. We say we do, but look at cell phone usage statistics, Wikipedia as a research paper source (Really?!?!) and the hazy look people give you when you ask them to do something that involves brain power. Do what you will to the politics of education and the structure of the administration, but until parents (guardians, grandmothers, role models, etc) tell kids that their education is important, and set an example, then we are in a downward spiral that nothing will get us out of.
Patrick Griffin said on Apr. 13, 2010 at 12:53pm
To satisfy all parties concerned, why not offer Dr. Cala the position he held as Supt.
of the RCSD and allow him to finish what he started.
Brad said on Apr. 14, 2010 at 1:13am
Yes, indeed, democracy is at stake. And, if Mr. Cala has his way, the entire RCSD would be disbanded and the kids sent to suburban schools, since those schools are inherently better. Maintaining a small board of "city people" who could easily be overruled by "suburban people" in every district, since former city people would be in the minority in every suburban district, would effectively disenfranchise every single parent in the "former" RCSD. Not only that, but by segregating people by "city" and "suburb," Mr. Cala would have a scarlet letter painted on all of these parents and children. Awesome. This is what doctoral level thinking gets us in this town? Blow up the city because the suburbs are better! Honestly, if I wanted that kind of analysis, I'd read the comment section of the Democrat and Chronicle.
We need county-level education. That is, abandon ALL school districts at once. Or, abandon none. Singling out the RCSD for being a failure, when you've already acknowleged that the problem is concentrated poverty, is nothing more than a retread of the "city vs. suburb" status quo. It's boring, uncurious, and twenty years behind the times.
Leave A Comment
Respond on Your Blog
Create an Account
or
Login
If you have a City Account you can not only post comments, but you can also respond to articles in your own City Blog. It's just another way to make your voice heard.