Anyones best bet for improvement of the schools is ask those involved for a written plan. Don't ask people who are never in schools. Ask people who know. If the mayor has a plan, I would have to ask if has subjected his plan to scrutiny by those who would know where the problems lie and how to fix them. The mayor and the unions share the same goal of improving the schools dramatically.

Being at odds with those who work in the schools is as effective as a general who fights against his own army. The mayor and legislators must work with the people doing the job both to craft the plan and make it work. They are not working toward different ends!

I think most people believe Bob Duffy has benevolent intentions. God forbid he gets hit by a bus and we are left with mayoral control and someone without those benevolent intentions. Changing broad policy based on one person creates a single point of failure. It is always worse to create systems without checks and balances.

I've read from other sources that the poll ONLY included parents of children currently attending city public schools. This is a serious flaw because, while 1/2 half of this issue is how effectively money is spent to teach kids, the other 1/2 is about the money raised and the TAXPAYERS who are actually PAYING for the school. Public schools are not welfare for people with schoolchildren, they're for the betterment of society AS A WHOLE. Therefore society as a whole has a stake in the matter, and any poll on said matter needs to reflect that.

In addition, the poll's narrow scope excludes the opinion of: parents who are sending their kids to private school, parents with kids already out of school and are now realizing the missed opportunities due to an inadequate public school system, people who will eventually have school-aged children and are debating where they should go, and parents who left ROC altogether to avoid the schools (which would be an indication of a trend of current residents willing to leave in the future). Include these constituents and other stakeholders in a future poll, and then you'll have an unbiased, valid poll.

It doesn't take a great deal of intelligence or effort to skew a poll, as the unions and oppositional groups have done; in fact, its easy: rig the questions & restrict your pool of respondants.

As a matter of fact, I have just completed my own "poll" and 100% of Taxpayers surveyed supported Mayor Control. Like the unions and groups opposed to change, I limited my pool of respondants ... to myself.

Mayor Duffy is a fine Mayor of Rochester. He maintains his composure and explains his views very well on most issues. However, on the proposal that he take over the management of the Rochester City School District there is only the proposal; no details as to his plans to improve students' performance and graduation rates. Everything I have read (see "The 2009 Bracey Report") and heard (listen to former City Mayor Bill Johnson on WXXI with Bob Smith) leads me to believe that adding Rochester to the seventeen (yes, only 17in 50 states!) school districts so managed is not going to change very much. As Congress deals with the retooling of the NCLB legislation some of the same issues are being discussed: test scores, graduation rates and failing schools. And they have no magic bullet either.
When school attendance is low at best; when students attending the same school every day is not a 'given' because City residents seem to move easily, when class size increases due to financial concerns, when children don't always have nutritious meals and when family support with reading from early age is lacking how can having the Mayor in charge make a real difference?
I have been ambivalent about Mayor Duffy's proposal for awhile as I thought about how to 'cure' poverty for City families: who can do it? Will the Mayor being in charge change that? Listening to former Mayor Bill Johnson was important for his views after his many years with the Urban League are important to this discussion. I have to admit that now I do believe that Mayor Duffy's proposal is just not going to get the district where he wants it to go.
I worked with the School Boards in Monroe County for quite a few years. I know that most board members, after they are elected by their own communities, take their responsibilities very seriously. They spend much time learning about public education: the state laws, the State Department's requirements, and of course, what is happening in their own districts. They are determined to make sure the administrators and teachers are dedicated to the students in their districts. Many opportunities are provided for them by the local and state associations to continue their 'education' as board members. Those that work together toward the same aims seem to accomplish a great deal for their students and communities. To accomplish changes in the education of students in a district takes more than a year or two and is made more difficult as the student population shifts.
I have concluded that much as we may want the Mayor's plan to be the magic bullet, I do not believe it is.

Mayoral Control is all about money and not the graduation rate. Anyone making such an argument is on CRACK! Currently we have some of the best teachers on staff. They can only do so much. The problem exist with the mind set of some parents and some students. Because no matter who is in control, the student has to study, the student has to take the test, the student has to care, and the parents have to do the follow up. The Board of Education works on behalf of the parents in the community and they care as does the Superintendent, the teachers, and the support staff. Heck, I believe that even the Mayor cares. But he is using the concern as a smoke screen to control the money slated for Education to balance his budget and take care of his administration and not the graduation rate. I guarantee you folks that the 50% graduation rate will not change much under the Mayoral Magic Wand. It will only change under the mind set change of the parents and students.

Mayoral control will only be as effective as the Mayor's ability to affect student attitudes, behaviors, households and lifestyles is. Mayoral control is reform in the wrong place.
Mayoral control is reform at the top of the pyramid. The problems are all at the bottom of the pyramid. The schools are staffed (largely) with caring, well-educated, hard-working professionals who want nothing but the success of their students and an improvement in every student's life and prospects. Teachers seem to be the target of both Mr. Duffy and Mr. Brizard. By "target" I mean the focus of their "blame somebody" game.
Efforts have been undertaken every year since I have been employed by the district to improve teacher education and training through workshops, professional development, higher standards, and micromanagerial oversight. Given that these positive efforts haven't had much impact, now we're going to try the "hammer 'em 'til they give" approach.
Teachers are not where the reforms are needed!
Administration isn't where the reforms are needed (as much as I hate to admit it).
We need a return to the Childrens' Zone initiative, and we need to learn from the failure of its previous iteration.
The district's problems lie in the uncertain, violent, deprived and depraved lives of the students. Students come to school from neighborhoods where violence is a way of life, where the food is of poor quality, when available in any quantity, and where they are surrounded by people who themselves do not value education at the level of the larger American community.
This must change, and it must change now. No amount of threats, coercion, or "reform" at the administrative, leadership, or even teacher level will impact this in any material way.
If the numbers go up over the next few years under Brizard's policies or under Mayoral Control, it will be due to the fear that the district's teachers and administrators fear over the possibility of losing their jobs because their numbers aren't where the powers that be want them to be. Somebody will be fudging the numbers. I know this will be the case, because I am already seeing the first hints of it in the pressures we at the teaching level are feeling from above. They aren't so clueless as to say it out loud, but the implications and hints are there, and are growing louder.
Unless and until students are shown a better way, they will not be able to perform at the levels required by New York State's Board of Regents. No amount of Mayoral Control will change this simple fact.

I'm voting for anyone other than
Patterson for NYS Gov. And anyone
other than Duffy for Mayor. That will
take care of all of this foolishness.

Monday, 8:08 PM:
btw, I am a candidate for the New York State Assembly, 131st District. I hope others will follow and out vote Gantt & Morelle!
I just got back from the bus to Albany. Today, 29 of us talked to dozens of legislators & staff in Albany. The takeaway is they thought Duffy & Gantt & Morelle spoke for all of Rochester on the theft of voting rights. Now, they know better! :) It might take another trip or two but we will get the job done! btw, there will be a march on March 4 from the Liberty Pole to city hall to protest Mayor Duffy's school takeover. Watch tonight's 11PM news. I think CH 10. They got me departing the bus
with my T_Shirt that says: "Just say no to drugs & Mayoral
Control"
I am opposed to mayoral control of Rochester city schools. What mayoral control in cities like New York and Washington D.C. has taught us is that allowing the mayors to run these school districts hurts, not helps, the system. In these cities, the student performance among minority groups is poor and the gap is widening. And as Dr. William Cala pointed out in his op-ed in the City Newspaper, spending by cities on these school districts has increased. As an example, he cites New York City, where mayoral control under Mayor Michael Bloomberg increase from $12.5 billion in 2002 to $21 billion in 2009.

If we are going to invest more money in education, it had better be working. Taxpayers, and more importantly, our students deserve the best. And in Rochester, they deserve better.

That is why mayoral control is not the answer.

In his op-ed in the Democrat and Chronicle, former Mayor Bill Johnson asked several important questions. One of those questions was:

"Since urban districts with concentrated poverty generally require more, and not less, resources, what guarantees can be extracted in advance from state government to insure a successful takeover?"

The truth is Albany can�t make guarantees. New York City is in a different position. They have more money they can invest in their city�s education while also receiving state funds. But for Rochester, we are dependent on state help. And during these tough fiscal times for the state and Governor David Paterson proposing cuts to education, that help from the state won�t happen.

To answer Mayor Johnson�s question, there are no guarantees. The state government can�t help. If anything, our education funding will be cut by Albany and we must do more with less.

One of the great crimes we have seen with mayoral control is its negative impact on minority students. In a city like Chicago, test scores for Black and Latino students are improving, but very slowly. And that improvement in many cases means moving out of single-digit percentiles into the teens. Going from eight percent proficient in a certain subject area (i.e Math) to 12 percent might be considered an improvement, but it�s still a disappointment. Combine that with the test scores of white students that aren�t any better and mayoral control is an experiment that has failed.

Rochester should not make its students part of that experiment. It has been proven in other cities to be a failure. It only gives more powers to mayors who believe they need to take the reins from school boards and school administrators and run the schools themselves. The problem is, as history has taught us, they aren�t doing any better.

In New York City, the Board of Education was replaced by a panel set up by the mayor and those individuals, instead of serving on behalf of voters, serve at the pleasure of the mayor. That is not what we need. We need independent thinkers who oversee our education system. We do not need people who will be beholden to the mayor, whether that�s Mayor Robert Duffy or anyone else down the road.

We need a board of education who was accountable to taxpayers and responsible for achieving the best possible education for all of our students. And it must be free of mayoral influence.

I oppose mayoral control and will continue my opposition against running our city�s educational system through City Hall. The future of our students should not rest with one solitary individual, but rather a classroom of competent teachers working with our bright minds to raise test scores and to increase student performance.

Harry Davis
Rochester, NY
www.HarryDavis2010.com