Brizard: Schools need radical change

By Tim Louis Macaluso and Mary Anna Towler on March 17, 2010

Superintendent Jean-Claude Brizard. PHOTO BY JEFF MARINI

Even though Rochester has been buzzing for weeks about mayoral control, city schools Superintendent Jean-Claude Brizard has been relatively mum on the subject. That's understandable. Whatever he says, he risks offending either his current boss, the School Board, or his possible future boss, Mayor Bob Duffy.

But in a recent interview, Brizard didn't mince words about what it will take to improve city schools. We may be debating the wrong issue, he said. The question is not which form of governance is better - a School Board or mayoral control. The real question, he said, is will whoever is in charge have the political will to take tough, unpopular steps to bring about the kind of systemic change that's needed?

Teachers and principals must be held accountable for student performance, Brizard said. They have not been, he said, because unions protect ineffective people. True, the district's enormous concentration of poverty creates challenges for teachers in urban schools. But that isn't an excuse, Brizard said, for consistently low student performance. Our schools, he said, should be doing a better job.

Since coming to Rochester in January 2008, Brizard has pushed for his own brand of reform: instituting a contentious in-school suspension policy, and moving problematic teachers out of classrooms into what some New York City teachers call "rubber rooms." He wants to close eight low-performing schools, and to give principals in some schools more autonomy.

That's not surprising, given his experience in New York City's schools. With the support of a strong, independent mayor, New York's form of mayoral control has given Chancellor Joel Klein the freedom to do what needs to be done to shake up the system, Brizard said. Klein has taken on the unions in the New York City school district, and test scores and graduation rates have gone up.

The situation is different in Rochester, Brizard said. While he appreciates the need for employee unions, he said that the district's union leaders have over time become co-superintendents invested in the status quo. Brizard has a more business-like view of how schools should be managed. He is a fellow of the Broad Institute, an elite training ground for superintendents of urban schools. Broad's pro-business, anti-union stance is seen as the future of education in some circles, but has come under fire in others.

Brizard said he's on the fence about whether mayoral control is right for Rochester. But, he said, dramatic improvement in Rochester's schools will require radical change. That's going to take guts and grit. And the elected officials in charge have to be willing to risk their political careers, Brizard said, to bring it about.

The following is an edited version of a recent interview with Superintendent Jean-Claude Brizard.

CITY: What prevents you from firing incompetent teachers? There's a process to help poor-performing teachers improve, and if that fails, to terminate them. Yet the rap is that all of the teachers get good reviews.

Brizard: They do. The problem is national in scope, but we add some issues locally, which add to the complexity. In our budget process, we may want to cut certain things. But you can't because state law says you must have this. We know it doesn't work, but it's required.

When you look at teacher evaluations, for instance, the legislature passed a law a couple of years ago that states that we can't even use student achievement as one of the measures to deny a teacher tenure. That's crazy. No one advocates that it should be the only measure, but it shouldn't be completely divorced, either. You have a teacher for three years. She has five classes a year, and every single kid fails every single test. I still can't use that information.

We have a program called Careers in Teaching [a state-mandated teacher development and mentoring program]. If you talk to principals, they'll tell you it's a hindrance. I had a principal in my office almost in tears a couple of days ago. The process discourages principals from terminating ineffective teachers. It's cumbersome. It's difficult. It's much easier to push someone out of your school than termination.

So what you get in urban schools across the country is the dance of the lemons. It happens with administrators, too.

Why hasn't any superintendent, and we've had some really bright people, been able to deal with it?

Because the problem goes beyond us and into the real issues that people are often afraid to talk about. I've had colleagues who have lost their jobs because they have tried to tackle these underlying issues.

When people like [former interim superintendent] Bill Cala talk about poverty, he's not wrong. Urban environments are much more difficult than suburban environments in that regard. There are real underlying societal issues that prevent us from getting to nirvana. But we shouldn't be where we are, either.

People always ask me, "What do you need?" And I always tell them two things: leverage and talent. You allow me to do what needs to be done, and then hire the people I need, and you're going to get magic. When you look at some charter schools like Rochester Prep, the principal was able to do what she needed to do, hire the talent she needed, get rid of people, pay them different amounts of money, and operate much more like a business.

It starts with the School Board or the mayor, whoever has control. The question is: does the School Board or the mayor have the political will to take on the political issues that we often deal with as superintendents?

Then the question isn't whether one system of governance is better than the other.

No. I don't know if one is better than the other. In the cases of Washington, D.C. and New York City, what you have are very strong mayors. In New York City, you have a billionaire mayor in Michael Bloomberg who came in and unabashedly angered a lot of people.

When I moved to Central Office in July 2003, about 100 of us met with Bloomberg and [schools chancellor] Joel Klein. Bloomberg told us, "Don't worry about the politics. Do what needs to be done. If you get a call from a politician, transfer it to us. We'll deal with it."

And we did. School closures were very, very noisy, but we did them anyway.

Is the improvement in New York City schools because of the extra money that the court ordered the state to spend on its schools?

No. I don't think it was as much that as it was Joel hitting the high schools head on. He attacked the big dysfunctional schools that are dropout factories. We went after them, and we closed schools that had a decade of 30 percent graduation rates. We replaced them with a few small schools, and we had 90 percent graduation rates in no time.

Can superintendents of large urban school districts expect help from President Obama and US Secretary of Education Arne Duncan? They don't sound eager to coddle the teachers unions.

When you see the Obama administration with the Race to the Top forcing states to lift the cap on charter schools and change the laws on the data attached to them, they are trying to dismantle laws created to protect various special interest groups.

I don't disagree with the folks who point to the outside forces. But the fact is we have wrinkles internally in urban education. We need to hold teachers accountable, and make sure we have the best and the brightest in front of our kids.

When you look at groups like Teach for America, these teachers come into your schools with a different attitude. I'm not saying they are any better than the ones we have right now. But their attitude is: "I'm going to close the achievement gap. I'm going to look to create two to three years of gain every single year, and I'm not going to make excuses for what I can't control."

Are you saying then - leaving aside the concentration of poverty issues - that there is a problem with teacher quality?

In general, across the country, the answer is yes. In Rochester - let me answer this properly so I don't throw people under the bus: I think our teachers work very hard. I don't know that they all work very smart. It's not just the teachers. It's also the support they get from us in Central Office and principals.

I have a core group of teachers who don't think they need to be developed. Good educators understand that development is part of their ongoing work.

Then I have a large group of teachers who do some really good things. But there is a culture - perhaps an RTA culture - that has convinced people in Rochester that they are the best and brightest, and they don't need help. All of us need help, which is why I started first with my leaders. If I can get the best principals in my schools, they can begin to push the change. And they can tell you what obstacles they face.

When you are looking at a system where you can't control the teachers coming into your school building, and once they come, you can't get rid of them, and you're being told what to do on a regular basis - you're going to reach a plateau.

When you look at the fact that we tend to concentrate the neediest kids in certain schools, and that we have leaders in charge of certain schools who have graduation rates in the low 30's for seven, eight, or nine years - then you begin to understand the issues.

When you have leaders who walk into a classroom and don't know what good teaching looks like, then you have young teachers going unsupported. Then you have a model for failure. The issue is self-made.

The structures we have don't support the work we have to do. And the laws that are created sometimes prevent the work from moving forward. If you were to remove a lot of these barriers, the graduation rates would improve.

Watch what happens in Rhode Island [where the Central Falls School Board and superintendent recently fired all of the school's teachers]. The work in Rhode Island began with stopping the practice of seniority transfers, which allows teachers who have accumulated years of seniority to "bump" newer teachers for a position. That's huge.

Adam Urbanski, the RTA's president, will tell you that we don't have seniority transfers in Rochester. Hogwash; we most definitely do. We have done this quietly. We don't get rid of them. We shuffle them around.

What some teachers have done is transfer as a pack. So you may have five teachers in a school terrorizing a principal. When they left, they created a big vacancy. Then they went somewhere else in the system, and did the same thing. [This form of employee transfer is no longer permitted.]

Now people tell me when I close a school, I'm not fixing the school. That's not correct. New schools open and the leaders get a chance to select the staff. We give them a shot. You can create a much more heterogeneous group.

So what I am telling you is that what many of us do is work around the fringes. But the core issues are still there staring you in the face. I'm hoping that Obama and Arne Duncan are successful, because I think what they are trying to do is change the culture of education in America. And it's an uphill battle.

When they talk about changing the NCLB law and making some of the education money competitive, what they're getting at is in education we have a system where no matter how well or how badly you do - the money is there. The money is never tied to performance. We have a culture of compliance. We know how to dot the I's and cross the T's, but your pay is not attached to performance.

Rochester is debating the merits of mayoral control. Do you think the public understands the point you're making about performance?

The real conversation about this is getting lost. We're not arguing about the right things.

One of the things that mayoral control will do is stop this [makes a gesture, pointing in opposite directions]. With mayoral control, the city and the school district will stop fighting each other.

I am on the fence. I love Bob Duffy, but he doesn't always get to the point. I love my Board members, but I don't always like my School Board. They all mean well.

They wouldn't go through what they do if they didn't have real concern for the district's students.

The mayor should see the Board argue when they are making the tough decisions. He would see that fixing these problems won't be easy, and they are trying.

And Bob would see that he doesn't need to come up with a plan. There is a plan.

What you don't hear in the Board is the political will, the leverage to make things happen.

But does this School Board have the leverage?

Well, I don't know; with some things they do and some things they don't. Will they take on the political machine in Albany? Or will they confront the local politics here that prevent things from getting done?

I tell people that Adam Urbanski is not the most powerful person to my Board; it's the president of BENTE, Dan DiClemente. It's BENTE that has much more leverage with my Board than teachers. It's my non-teaching workers. Most of my teachers live in the suburbs. They don't vote for the School Board. Just about every BENTE member lives in the city, and they vote.

The first summer, when I was downsizing Central Office and I told my chief of staff, "Let's see where the noise is going to come from." We pushed some teachers out and not much happened. The moment we touched the BENTE employees, the e-mails began flying. And I said, "There it is."

What kind of support do you want from the mayor if mayoral control is approved?

Don't just talk about how you're going to offer political leverage. Talk to me about how you're going to help us with the other stuff, because frankly, you own a lot of it. We know that access to health care accounts for 25 percent of the black-white achievement gap. When you look at the city school district with 88 percent poverty, talk to me about how you're going to leverage resources from the city and connect them to the city school district.

Yes, there'll be some efficiencies and cost savings in the operations piece. But talk to me about how we're going to give our teachers and principals more leverage to do their jobs, while still holding them accountable. How are you going to make that happen?

One thing that Michelle Rhee in the Washington, D.C. school district has is the backing of Congress and the mayor. They are unabashed about taking on the entrenched political scene head on. Are we going to be doing that?

What Bob Duffy says is right: Adam Urbanski is very well-known. He's been around a long time. He's been co-superintendent for a long time. And I appreciate former superintendent Manny Rivera, but Manny gave a lot of power to Adam. Chipping away at that now is not going to be easy. So the question is, will he be willing to take that battle on?

It seems like the one argument the mayor is left with is that the teachers union is too powerful, and we need to break that power. And that's going to become a firestorm. It will be reduced to a union-antiunion argument.

This may be a teachable moment for our city. The idea that the gains in New York are not real is nonsense. They're real. You can say the tests are bad or that we shouldn't be using that kind of data. But what we need to do is compare New York City's improvement in scores to the other Big Five. Did we all grow? Yes. But the question is which one grew faster than the others?

Look at New York's English language arts scores. Compared to Buffalo, Rochester, and Syracuse, they are far ahead of us. You can say that we shouldn't be using ELA scores, but what else have you got?

Now Joel Klein didn't do it alone. What he and Bloomberg did was create a framework. They made the resources available for teachers and principals. Joel Klein gutted Central Office in NYC. He took millions out of that office and pushed it out into the classrooms. That is an example of giving principals the kind of leverage they need.

Are suburban teachers better than city teachers, or do you need a different type of teacher to succeed in city schools?

I think our teachers in many ways have to have a wider range of skills than suburban teachers. I would put my teachers against any teachers in the surrounding areas.

I often tell people if you really want to be a good teacher, start in urban education. If you can teach at Franklin, you can teach anywhere. If you can lead a high school in a city in America, you can lead a high school anywhere because your repertoire has to be that much wider.

The quality of teaching is an issue across the country. Being highly effective rather than highly qualified is the issue right now. If you are a principal and you get the best teachers, you can sit back and watch magic happen.

You look at Schools 19, 58, and 23, and what you have are good leaders who put together a good group of teachers. The challenge those principals have every single year is protecting that lot. You may have nurtured a teacher for five years in your school and that teacher has built something amazing. When you lay people off, you have to lay them off by seniority only, regardless of skill set. That means someone from another school can come in and bump that person off. It's a Teamsters mentality.

Are there enough of those strong leaders in the schools?

We have them in the elementary schools. Where we don't have enough is in the high schools.

The centerpiece of the argument for mayoral control is that the city is required by state law to give the district $119.1 million annually, and the mayor has no say in how the money is spent. The money comes from city property taxes, which City Hall is responsible for collecting. But will mayoral control really give the mayor a say in how the money is used?

This started with the Maintenance of Effort law or MOE, which I believe has roots in New York City. It was done to prevent the city from taking money away from the city schools. The state was saying, O.K., we will increase spending on education to improve student performance, but the city can't turn around and decrease its share, because then there wouldn't be any real net increase.

I think Duffy makes the argument that Rochester gives more money to its schools than Buffalo and Syracuse. I said this at City Hall: the argument is going to be that you want to balance your budget on the backs of children. And that's what has happened. The more the mayor complains about the $119.1 million, the more it seems to foster this belief. I don't know what he is thinking, but I don't think there is going to be any change in Albany to lower the city's contribution.

Yes, he can divert some of that money to do some of the things that he thinks are necessary to improve education. Ninety percent of our money goes to employees, so that probably means cutting people over here to add a program over there. But it can be done.

Co-mingling funds and using city employees to run those programs may be more difficult because state law requires using licensed teachers.

What isn't talked about as much is that when you look, historically, at the city's contribution to our budget, it was 28 percent. Now it's only 17 percent of our budget. What's difficult for cities like Rochester, Buffalo, and Syracuse is that the school budgets are much bigger than the city budgets. The budget for the schools has grown, but the revenue in these cities hasn't.

Can you do what needs to be done without mayoral control?

The short answer is yes. But fundamental changes would need to be made with the School Board. One, they need to work together. Two, they need to be trained. They are wonderful people, every one of them. But they don't really understand their role as a group. And they have to be willing not to be re-elected, and take on the fight. And it will be a fight. I don't know if that will exists right now.

The same is true with Bob Duffy. If you take this one on, you're going to anger a lot of workers. We have 7,000 employees, many of them living in the city. He has to be willing not to be re-elected to do what needs to be done.

The argument I've made is you can find cities with mayoral control with great student achievement. You can find cities with School Board governance with great achievement. But what you find in those cities is very strong school boards, very purposeful school boards.

I think what has happened is the Board has created a competing organization within the city schools. When you hear commissioners talk about sending out a joint Request for Proposals on something, I say "Come on, folks. We are one district. It's not the Board and the district."

You begin to realize that some of them don't see themselves as being part of the district. No, you are the district. When the district looks bad, you look bad.

Comments for "Brizard: Schools need radical change" (31)

City Newspaper is not responsible for the content of these comments. City Newspaper reserves the right to remove comments at their discretion.

Shameeka Williams said on Mar. 17, 2010 at 5:10pm

I understand the issues that lie within the board and the district but what can be done to get these children, especially the high schoolers, to attend classes more consistently?

Carrie Remis said on Mar. 18, 2010 at 11:46am

Great interview. Couldn't agree more that teacher effectiveness is the real issue here, and that the mayoral control fight is diverting attention and energy from it. Sadly, many stakeholders (parents, community leaders) who could be adding pressure for tenure reform and better evaluations aren't engaging in this issue because they've found themselves in a (strange, unholy) alliance with the RTA's opposition to Duffy. So frustrating that the public is acting against its own interest and continues to fall for Urbanski's sleight-of-hand and rabble-rousing.

Richard Nichols said on Mar. 18, 2010 at 11:59am

So Mr. Brizard states that what is lacking in Rochester schools is leadership. I agree. However, twice he said, I paraphrase, "give me what I want and there will be magic." Magic is not leadership. So I question which concept Mr. Brizard intends to deliver to the people and children of Rochester.

Leadership is the way a person influences others to accomplish an objective and directs the organization in a way that makes it more cohesive and coherent. Magic is an illusion, a slight of hand meant to fool people into believing an objective has been accomplished with no effort grounded in reality.

I have not yet seen evidence that Mr. Brizard has provided anything in the way of cohesiveness or coherence nor has he influenced others to accomplish anything. Point of fact his proposals have only entrenched the school board and divided the community and further alienated the urban from the suburban. Distancing himself from his influence over Mayor Duffy's mayoral control decision is helpful how? His image maybe.

"...there will be magic." Blame it all on the teachers. Coming off of a fresh round of teacher firings Mr. Brizard thinks teachers are to blame. Its their fault if a student does not learn. Ignore the fact that a teacher's ability to teach beyond The Test has been reduced by government mandate and that education at the teacher level has been jaw droppingly underfunded while executive costs skyrocket, then sure its the teachers' fault. And, while praising teachers, with a wave of his hand Mr. Brizard throws them under the bus. Problem solved, just like in Central Falls, RI as he gleefully points out - there will be magic. As there was magic in NYC, ignoring the push back of angry parents over the lack of success and dictatorial control exercised by Mayor Bloomberg (does Mr. Brizard deny he advised M. Bloomberg about mayoral control? No, in fact he is proud of it. Then why the turnaround with M. Duffy?). But there was unspoken magic not found in this interview. The illusion of The Charter School of which Mr. Brizard is a faithful prestidigitator. This is why he was sent to Rochester by the Broad Institute. The something for nothing magic here is that teacher pay dips further while executive pay shoots for Mars (many make $400 thousand+), students do no better sometimes worse then public school, and the taxpayer, well, pays even more and has NO say in policy or curriculum cause its private.

Leadership or magic? Mr. Brizard has provided none of the former but he promises a razzle-dazzle show if we give him what he wants.
************
Hope this was respectful enough. I'm not used to fluff pieces in City. If you truly want to educate your readers on Mr. Brizard I would encourage you to do some research on the Broad Institute, Eli Broad and his connections to schools in California, Buffalo, Oklahoma, Florida, Memphis,Washington State and DC, Nevada, Delaware and especially Central Falls, RI. You'll find that mayoral control is only the latest tool in the surgeon's bag for killing public education.

Dawn Lunt said on Mar. 18, 2010 at 10:01pm

I take offense to many of Supertendent Brizard's comments about how his hands are tied because of Adam Urbanski and the teachers' union. As a long time teacher in the Rochester City high schools, I have worked under many superintendents. One thing has NOT changed. The only way you end up with a bad teacher is if you had a bad administrator who did not do his/her job properly and timely. Administrators have three years with a new teacher before deciding whether this teacher should recieve tenure (and only then does the union actually protect a teacher from losing his/her job). I have long believed that the only way you get bad teachers is if you have bad administrators who allowed this teacher to get tenure. Start holding your administrators more accountable. Now if, after time, a once good teacher becomes ineffective, the CIT panel is there to HELP this teacher, a job the school administrators should also be doing, rather than antagonizing or ignoring the teacher. I have seen some ineffective teachers over the years but can honestly say that I have never seen the administration working closely with these teachers to help them improve and gain upgraded skills and strategies. The union does not fight to save a teacher who refuses to be helped or refuses to try to improve.

Dawn Lunt said on Mar. 18, 2010 at 11:01pm

continued...The superintendent wants to treat the District as a business. Our students are not manufactureable. They are individuals with a wide range of problems and issues. Many teachers have not been given the proper training to be able to effectively deal with these. More and more of our students are being labeled withADD or ADHD. I know of no program offered by our District to train us, all of us, on this kid of disorder.
The superintendent states that he wants to hold teachers accountable for achievement of their students. How can you hold me accountable when the vast majority of my ninth grade students never passed my subject area in the 8th grade? My students are coming in 2-3 or even more years below grade level, yet I am expected to get them prepared to pass the regents exam in June. How can you hold me accountable for student achievement when many of my upper level students do not have the necessary prerequisites to be in my class? I am very passionate about my job as a teacher and about my students. I can not, however, compete with after school sports programs that have cleverly gotten around any kind of academic elegibility program (supported by Central Office). I can not compete with after school jobs that pay the students to be there. I can not compete with parental needs that older children be home to watch younger siblings after school. How can I give these students the extra time and help they so desperately need? We do not have the resources or the manpower in our "small schools" to do all of the things that need doing. I serve on almost every major committee in the school as well as staying after school 3-5 days a week to help students. Why? I get so frustrated with the lack of accountability in the RCSD.
Now that, too, is a topic raised by the superintendent. How can he blame teachers when he himself is guilty of protecting jobs of bad administrators. When a principal is inadequate, he is merely shufled around to some other school. Why-so he can screw up another school? Just recently, over 90% of a school's faculty felt their principal was grossly incompetent. What happened you ask? This principal was put into another school. He wasn't fired. His pay did not increase. You blame teachers. Well I blame the superintendent.
In our school, teachers are allowed a certain amount of money each year for necessary supplies and materials. In February, two teachers (that I am aware of) asked for supplies to be purchased from the budgeted allowance. They were told there is no more money. Why did this happen? These teachers have not used one dime of their budget yet this year.
The quality of teaching is an issue across the county, says our superintendent. That is a statement I will agree with. Yet I see teachers who have only been teaching 4-5 years being allowed to have student teachers from area colleges. The supervising teacher isn't even "wet behind the ears" yet. Often they have taught only one subject in their academic field in the high schools. What can they possibly offer to student teachers who should be trianed in several areas of their academic major? Our student teachers are not always getting the benefit of good training from good supervising instructors.
Why is it that only some of our schools and some of our classrooms are equipped with the latest technology? I understand that money is the biggest reason. But is it fair to the students or the teachers who work in a school that does not have access to the technology to create more innovative lessons? Our schools do not always do what is best for the students. The Distict has a tendency to do whatever is easiest or best for the adults. No one is acting as an advocate for the student. This happens at all levels-from placing the student in a school that isn't a proper fit merely because it was fast and easy to removing a student from a necessary, reqiuired core class to put them in health (or whatever) because they could take the other class in summer school. Was this best for the student? NO! But it worked. It was an easy fix.
The superintendent has a "contentious in school suspension policy" you say. What are the teachers and administrators supposed to do with students who repeatedly ignore the rules, walk the halls, defy authority, disrupt the educational process, and use abusive, threatening language towards teachers and administrators? The administrators put these students in In School Suspension and the students act inappropiately in there and are removed--to where? They are sent to an administrators office where eventually they are overlooked and walk the halls again. The superintendent has said we are not to send the students home. Sometimes the student gets "long termed" and is sent to the "alternative education center". Maybe the student is assigned to 10 days there. They return, rehabilitated-not. The cycle begins again. The student returns from this place where they were receiving instruction. Yet when asked to do review work in the current chapter of study, they state they never did any of that at the alternative setting. This student is kept on the original teacher's rolls. The original teacher is to be held accountable for this students success even though they did not have the benefit of educating the student. The original teacher is given a grade to be entered on the child's report card, yet has no idea of what content was actually taught.
There are many problems in our District. I do not believe that our Superintendent can fix these and make everything better. Nor do I believe that the mayor can either. We are a large urban district that has suffered the bandaid appraoch for many years. Got a school on the State's list of low perfoming school's, we have a bandaid for that. We just do away with that school and reopen it with a new name. Eventually the injury is too large for our bandaids.

Kevin said on Mar. 19, 2010 at 8:49am

This guy has no clue. Mr. Blizzard is wrong again!

He can have 1 talented and gifted teacher for every kid in Rochester........and guess what? NOTHING would change. He is barking up the wrong tree (again). Until the home life is changed, meaning parents are actually held accountable and take a role in their kids education. There is no value on education in most homes. How can a teacher be mom, dad, brother, sister and friend and oh yeah.....teach math and science. The only magic would be getting rid of this (so called) leader. If Blizzard really cared about kids he would be finding ways to help them instead of dumping on teachers. I assume there may be some teachers protected by the process, but for him to make such a public attack on teachers is way off the mark. The parents and kids need to finally take their own responsibility. The opportunities are there, the majority of people just don't take them.

Felix Jacobs said on Mar. 19, 2010 at 9:29am

Superintendent Brizard thank you for saying what should have been said years ago.

Bill N said on Mar. 19, 2010 at 11:02am

R Nichols makes a great point about the difference between leadership and magic. By many accounts, JCB is a terrible leader - just ask Central Office staff about his first actions after he arrived. Plus, he cherry-picks data on results in NYC; there were greater gains on NAEP scores prior to Klein and mayoral control, and NYC's progress lags many other big city school districts since. And I'm tired of champions of the "business model" of schooling; as Diane Ravitch points out, schools (should) operate differently from shoe stores, they are supposed to be cooperative enterprises where adults work closely with one another towards common goals. Ravitch also cites the (widely ignored) evidence that charter schools on average do not outperform regular public schools. JCB is another guy with big dreams for himself, to be erected on the debris of his tenure in Rochester.

Mary R. said on Mar. 19, 2010 at 1:46pm

I have taught in this district for 20 years, and I love my job! I take my student's success personally! I arrive here ready to give my all, and leave here exhausted. All of my kids do their homework, prepare for tests, complete assignments on time, and will pass this school year! I refuse to let them let themselves down!
I WILL be downtown on Saturday night, supporting my union. JCB, the problems in the schools are not my fault!

jodama said on Mar. 19, 2010 at 2:46pm

Don't let Brizard do to your school district what's been done here in NYC. Everything is a sham. The high test scores - a sham, the high graduation rates - a sham. Kids come from homes with only one parent who is often working to make ends meet. They have no adult supervision. Then they come to school without doing homework, they never read at home, they have poor impulse control and all of that is placed on my shoulders. I'm a teacher - not a parent. Stop trying to make teachers the scapegoats for all the stresses of poverty and unskilled parents. An effective teacher is only one part of the picture.

Jo R said on Mar. 19, 2010 at 5:35pm

Well said jodama! I find it interesting that the mayor wants to take control of the school district when he can't even control what is happening on the streets of Rochester! When are we going to have more programs in place for parents, to HELP them with taking care of their children.
Yes, the teachers should be held accountable that we are doing our jobs, but it should not be JUST the teachers that are looked at. The problems stem way beyond our teachers. I understand that not all of our teachers in this district are constantly going above and beyond and there may have been some who "fell through the cracks" so to speak, but to lump ALL of our teachers together and put this blame on us is a huge insult! Not to mention we can only be as good as we can be with the resources we are given.

chris said on Mar. 19, 2010 at 7:19pm

Mr. Brizard is my leader and has no faith in me as a teacher. I feel horrible. I have dedicated my life to children and this district and would do anything for the children. So his claims are not only offensive but down right hurtful. He claims that Duffy will have to fix the community problems and work in conjunction with us - but Mayor Duffy has not fixed the community problems - so what is going to change if he has control? It is about money for him and I am very disheartened.

Paine said on Mar. 19, 2010 at 7:43pm

How sad that the RCSD has a man like this as its leader. His comments in this interview are insulting to every hard working teacher in the district. His assertion that Teach For America people are somehow superior to his current teacher corps is ludicrous. Believe me, those folks would do no better. Every day, in every school in the district, thousands of teachers are on the front line, delivering the best instruction they possibly can DESPITE Brizard's misguided views and policies. Anyone who doubts this should get into the sub. pool. If Brizard is such a proponent of accountability, he should hold himself responsible for the decline in the graduation rate, the decay in the climate of most schools (because he keeps the absolute worst kids, the ones who severely interfere with the educational process), the deep divisions between teachers and central office, the increase in high paid and useless employees in the SEG, the protection of ineffective administrators, etc. Brizard's tenure has been a sad one and he should go. Mayor Duffy, should you get your wish, you can do far better than this vain, polarizing, obtuse hack.

julzb said on Mar. 20, 2010 at 1:33pm

One thing that would help teacher retention is to pay them better or offer a child care benefit. In most professions that require a masters degree you are paid much better. When it cost 75% of your teacher pay to place your own children in child care you weigh if it is worth it. Your experience has shown you that children with a stay at home parent are more successful and one weighs the intensity and stress level that comes with teaching in the RCSD. Teachers are all trained the same with the same high requirements but nothing prepares you for the intensity of issues inner city children have. I have a circle of 12 teacher friends who all started teaching when I did and we are now all at the age of having children ourselves. 10 are stay at home moms for the reasons I gave above and 2 are working in the suburbs because the stress level is manageable when you have a family at home. You bring home your work and it is hard to sleep when you have classes full of hungry, abused, neglected,angry, unsupported, little faces looking to you help them. Knowing you alone can not unless the environment in which they live changes. Some of us make the choice that we have the power to help one child at a time and because of pay we choose our own.

rehab said on Mar. 20, 2010 at 3:03pm

If Pay and talent is the issue then why no replace Administrations and Principals who make the most and are not protected by unions. If younger people are more talented then hire younger Principals and pay them less. Would we be talking about any of this if Patterson wasn't cutting education. Washington seems to have money for wars, banks and corporations but no money for Mental Health or Education. See Duffy knows that crime creates jobs and he wants to keep that cycle going for his cops. His plan will only create more criminals. He will be in for a shock to see how well the schools do run as underfunded as they already are. The district might save some money by not paying the board. How about if the superintendent takes a pay cut too to show how dedicated he really is. The focus of blame is really incorrect.

Howard J. Eagle said on Mar. 20, 2010 at 3:48pm

Carrie,

With all due respect --- I must disagree with you on several points.

First, as evidenced by the Superintendent’s interview, your comments and others here, and those that have been appearing in hundreds of blogs on a daily basis, as well as many other ongoing daily discussions and conversations --- “the mayoral control fight is [not] diverting attention and energy from teacher effectiveness,” or from numerous other critical issues. On the contrary --- the ongoing debate around Duffy’s ill-conceived “plans” to take control of the RCSD is shining light on these issues in a manner that has perhaps never happened before. Thus, while I am vehemently opposed to mayoral control --- in a sense it’s probably appropriate to thank Duffy for raising this issue (although doing so was likely a gross miscalculation on his part). That is to say, he probably never dreamed that he was going to encounter the storm of resistance that he’s now facing.

We do realize that not everyone is resisting for the same reasons. However, it’s somewhat offensive to suggest that “(parents, community leaders) [have] found [ourselves] in a (strange, unholy) alliance with the RTA's opposition to Duffy, [and that we are] acting against [our] own interest.” There’s nothing strange or unholy about the fact that we are not willing to hand over our hard-won, blood-stained suffrage rights to a single, know-nothing politician who apparently thinks that he can run rough shod over our Constitutional rights to elect our local representatives to the Rochester Board of Education. This guy is demonstrating via his current actions just how much access we would have if he became (in addition to Mayor and sometimes still Chief of Police) the education czar.

Hopefully your idea that we are “falling for Urbanski's sleight-of-hand and rabble-rousing” is not a suggestion that you believe we are just dumb, blind sheep.

Once the issue of suffrage has been taken off the table --- we are willing to sit with all of the true stakeholders and other interested parties and talk, and plan, and WORK to help develop and implement comprehensive strategies aimed at producing the long-overdue fundamental, widespread, sustainable change and improvement that our students and their families so richly deserve.

Sincerely,

Howard

David Reilly said on Mar. 20, 2010 at 9:56pm

As a retired City teacher, I have written to City often since Mr. Brizzard became superintendent. At the risk of being repetative, my only comment now will be that I wish City would publish responses next week such as those by Dawn Lunt so readers can see how hard working City teachers feel about their job and their Superintendent. If the public knew more about siuations like the one that happened this week at #41 School where teachers were admonished and implied to be racists because they cared about their school and students, then Mr. Brizzard would be seen in a different light than the Savior and magic man he pretends to be.

MAT said on Mar. 21, 2010 at 2:08pm

Could one of you "outraged" teachers explain to this city taxpayer why you refused a pay freeze this past year? At a time when the people of our city are struggling with massive unemployment, pay cuts, and pay freezes, you chose to maintain your hefty pay raise. Tell me, why should we believe a word that comes out of your selfish mouths?

a teacher said on Mar. 21, 2010 at 2:16pm

I've worked in the city schools as well as in two local suburban districts and a local private school. I left the city having been helped out as a first year teacher with classroom management by my principal advising me to "throw furniture if you have to." I have heard city school board members state to my face that city teachers don't have high enough expectations of students there. However, doing similar things as a teacher in four other schools I did indeed succeed, of course, having had immensely better support from administration and colleagues. If we had the time to experiment with what might truly create radical change in our local schools, I would love to see all of the kids from one of our local, high-performing districts simply swap buildings and teachers with all of the kids from an urban school. I wonder if nothing else changed, what that might prove about the teachers, school environments, and home life of the students. I wonder what we might gleam about how and why students, or schools, succeed. There are amazing teachers that work in our city schools and they spend their own time, money and more to compensate for what the district and (many but not all) urban families fail to provide.

David said on Mar. 22, 2010 at 12:47pm

It's utterly pathetic what the RCSD has become. I'm a product of the RCSD (Thomas Jefferson Class of 1988) and until recently, so were my children. I pulled my children out of the district over Christmas vacation due to the lack of confidence I have in the system as a whole. All of the finger-pointing, politics and immaturity being displayed by everyone involved proves that there are deeper issues here than simply "children not performing in the classroom."

For Parents, please stop expecting teachers/teacher's aides to raise your children... it's not their job. I've seen first hand what differences dedicated teachers and principals can and do make in childrens lives. But, it's only for a few hours of day and the growth has to continue at home.

For Teachers, there's always the option of quitting your job and finding another one. If I complain about how I'm being treated at my job, this is what I'm told so why should you be any different. And before any Union folks decide to jump down my throat, my father lead the Amalgamated Transit Union Local 282 for 9 years before his death... I know how unions work, I'm not new to this.

For Mr. Brizzard, Rochester isn't filled with the simple-minded people that you may have thought you'd be coming to deal with when you left the comfort of big city living. You're doing a great job of botching any positive "change" you thought you were bringing to our schools. And, if the reports are true of you using "racial strong arming" to influence teachers because of their concerns... shame on you! It will be a great day when we can hear the word "Former" attached to your title.

There is a enough blame to go around here and sooner or later, all parties involved will need to ask themselves if they will continue to be a part of the problem or a part of the solution. As of this moment, our district is going nowhere fast.

God Bless.

Concerned Educator said on Mar. 22, 2010 at 1:49pm

Dear Editors,

As a college-level educator in the Rochester area, I was eager to read Tim Louis Macaluso and Mary Anna Towler’s interview with Superintendent Jean-Claude Brizard. Unfortunately, I was disappointed to find that Brizard is trotting out the usual excuses and clichés for poor performance in so many city schools: “Teachers must be held accountable for student performance. They have not been, because unions protect ineffective people.” On the surface, these statements are correct: any teacher stepping into the classroom has entered into a contract with the community to be the best possible teacher he or she can be; nonetheless, a certain number of “ineffective” teachers will surface at any school, where they are protected by unions and, once tenured, securely ensconced in their positions. But judging from my own experience as an educator, and from the overwhelming majority of dedicated elementary and secondary teachers I know who are fighting uphill battles in their classrooms, pedagogical ineffectiveness�"real or imagined�"is not the primary reason why students are performing so poorly. What Brizard and the majority of the public need to understand is that student performance cannot be remedied through teacher accountability alone. Students must be held accountable as well. Countless city schoolteachers try to teach an alarming number of undisciplined, unmotivated students and are rarely supported by their supervisors when they encounter discipline problems in their classrooms. These same teachers often feel pressured by administrators to inflate grades so that poor performance miraculously reaches acceptable standards. But is it a bad thing when teachers assign students the grades they deserve? If a particular teacher who has done his best must report, say, 15 failing grades in a class of 25 students, I do not think the report should necessarily reflect upon his teaching methods. Perhaps the real concern is whether or not those students actually want to be there, whether or not they are getting the proper encouragement from their parents, whether or not they bring a sufficient willingness to learn to their studies, and whether or not administrators trust their educators enough to let them do their jobs�"teach and evaluate. Unfortunately, this will not happen as long as state funding is tied to performance levels. Yet, until we are ready to acknowledge that poor performance in our schools is often related to factors beyond the classroom, and that our teachers do not have sufficient support or power to make tough decisions when they are faced with these problems, students will continue to perform badly�"no matter how much funding the schools are given, and no matter how many students get pushed through.

Sincerely,

Concerned Educator

Rabble Rouser said on Mar. 22, 2010 at 5:14pm

MAT, excellent question, and I am not one bit surprised by the sound of chirping crickets I am hearing. Let me sum it up for you, see, one of the main issues here is the sense of entitlement that teachers have in regards to their benefits and their pay. They feel that since they work so "hard" teaching our children, they are doing the work that only a select few can possibly be competent enough to do. In their eyes, they are miracle workers, you know, turning water into wine and the like. They then pay their union dues and hide behind the 800 pound gorilla I like to call NYSUT. This entitlement attitude that is common by many civil servants here in New York will be the downfall of our once great state. To use another figure of speech, it's the old "pigs at the trough" mentality, and the pigs are having a feeding frenzy in NYS.

Annoyed said on Mar. 22, 2010 at 9:43pm

Said the "Rabble Rouser" who has no idea what teaching entails. Step into my world. You wouldn't last a day.

Annoyed said on Mar. 22, 2010 at 10:08pm

cont'd ...and lets not leave out the fact that I spend on average $1500 of my own money on supplies per year (Not all tax deductible I might add), sometimes more. I buy everything and treat these kids like they are my own. You are so right, my own children don't need anything. What was I thinking? Also, does your job follow you home, because mine does. After a full day of breaking up fights and trying to teach the best way I know how, I go home, spend about an hour and a half with my kids and then continue doing work. I work on stuff for school in some capacity until 11pm. Go to bed and start over again. Are some teachers to blame? Sure! However, everyone is to blame! Administrators, teachers, parents, the school board, community members, and the government - local, state and federal. Am I complaining about not getting paid enough? Absolutely not! Am I saying that I get paid too much? Not at all! Do I deserve a raise every year? Not in the least! I simply want to teach. I love my job! I was born to do it! I can't imagine doing anything else! The only reason I am sitting here writing this right now is that I found a little smidgen of time before I go to bed.

Carrie Remis said on Mar. 23, 2010 at 8:39am

Responding to Howard Eagle:
Howard,
You and I both know that Urbanski represents the teachers, not the children or the parents. And you and I both know that he has a LONG history of using the parents as a shield and is currently using mayoral control to court the parent for other, less virtuous, issues. (Or perhaps you think the RTA's plans for an upcoming Parent Summit are well-intentioned?)

While you would like to deal with these issues sequentially--mayoral control first, teacher effectiveness second--the reality is that they are happening at once and are intertwined. Right now, Obama's School Improvement Grant process is being firmed up with explicit conditions that schools move away from seniority and adopt new teacher evaluation practices that measure a teacher's effectiveness based on student growth. Unless Urbanski bends on the teacher evaluation issue, Rochester students will lose out on millions of dollars per school--and during an unprecedented fiscal crisis.

You can hurl insults at me and question my integrity because I don't agree with you, but I've picked my issue, and its ensuring that all students get access to qualified AND effective teaching. Call me a cynic, but on this issue, the interests of the parents/students and the teacher's union are NOT the same.

Carrie

Concerned citizen said on Mar. 27, 2010 at 2:01pm

Not a city resident but very involved with the district. Administration needs to stop cutting corners and thinking about ways to get around things. The effort should be placed in honestly and professionally serving the public in the manner in which it is intended even if it may take a bit longer to achieve the results. Hire people you trust, support them and compensate fairly. There is no need to pay people too much when there is a chance of paying valued employees too little. Put the people you serve first, put the community on the forefront, serve your families, don't hire BENTE employees and have them serve in an instructional capacity. If they teach or provide any type of educational role they are teaching. Don’t tell your employees to bend the truth to get and to do their job. Begin to care about the members of your staff that are not part of the union as they too serve the district in a very important manner. Treat people as you would be treated; employee, student, parent or the city mayor- it should make no difference respect is respect it does not know color, race or residence. A true educator is willing to sacrifice to serve and will go above and beyond. And when it comes down to it no one person should expect another to do something that they would not be willing to do themselves.

RCSD Parent 14610 said on Mar. 29, 2010 at 11:59am

What is most interesting to me about this interview is the insight it provides into Brizard's mind-set regarding political power. We learn, for example, the way he views District employees who live and vote in the City. He draws a distinction between BENTE employees and teachers, noting that the former tend to live in the City and vote. Teachers tend to live in the suburbs and are therefore not a real problem for him. He describes how he cunningly identified BENTE employees as being the source of, "noise."
In Brizard's words, "we pushed some teachers out without much happening. The moment we touched the BENTE employees, the emails began flying. And I said, 'There it is.' "
Throughout the interview, the idea that the will of the people should be represented by elected officials seems absent from his perspective. He expresses great faith in his personal abilities and wisdom, but a lack of faith in the ability or wisdom of the electorate. His elevated sense of self-worth is reason for us to consider the current political struggle mindful of the human tendency to abuse power. The odds of that abuse occurring increase when power is concentrated in the hands of a few, or if Brizard has his way, in the hands of one.
That he is primarily motivated to maximize his power is expressed in his comments on mayoral control. He compares Rochester with the situation in NYC and suggests that Mayor Duffy might not be strong enough for the job. Duffy lacks Bloomberg's billionaire status which apparently enables the NYC mayor to prevent political opposition from interfering with any actions initiated by the office of the superintendent. In order for Brizard to reign freely under mayoral control, Duffy's relatively week standing would necessitate that the Mayor be willing to sacrifice reelection.
I am grateful to City Newspaper for publishing this interview and for providing the information that, as an active participant in the democratic process, I need to have.

RCSD employee said on Apr. 12, 2010 at 9:17pm

This man is actually taking credit for teaching those who are leaving RCSD for jobs in other cities? Has he taught them to be autocrats? Has he taught them that students will learn better if you belittle the employees? Has he taught them that anyone who opposes his opinion must be fired? One thing is certain, they have learned they would rather be somewhere else.

Not ready for prime time said on Apr. 12, 2010 at 9:31pm

I'd like to propose a simple experiment: For just one year allow "the best " from the private , parochial and suburban to trade assignments with an RCSD teacher. Just get someone on each side with several years of experience and allow them to compare results. Come up with any hypothesis you like. Don't bother changing payroll and employment status, just let them trade buildings for the year. Any takers? I'm sure I could get a few dozen from RCSD to do it.

Tom said on Apr. 14, 2010 at 7:09pm

I am a respected businessman and I woulod never ever be so arrogant as to say that if I can hire the people who I want to hire then I can make magic. This is pure nonsense and a great display of arragance and ignorance. To put it in real world terms - noone can work magic with peoploe. Also, Mr. Brizzard is a decision maker and a decision maker does not have the luxury of "sitting on the fence". This is a given in this world. This article and interview of Mr. Brizzard only solidifies that Mr. Brizzard does not have the leadership skills and wisdom that is necessary for a person in his positon. It is shameful that a leader in our community can get away with such ignorant talk and especially to say that he is sitting on the fence when it comes to difficult issues.

Charlie said on Apr. 18, 2010 at 12:52pm

Let's stop right here! Enough blaming, degrading others and pointing fingers. The students of Rochester need the mayor, the superintendent, the teachers and the entire community to stop blaming each other for the low graduation rates. It is unproductive and wasted energy. Let's all help each other and take responsibility for what we can do to help improve the lives of the students in Rochester. Our students really need us to work together. Yes, of course Mayor Duffy cares about the students in our schools and so does Superintendent Brizzard, even though I do not agree with all of his policies. Of course, teachers want students to be successful. We are not successful unless they are. I have been teaching in the city for 30 years and I cannot recall coming across any parents who didn't want their children to graduate from high school. Life for many of the children of Rochester is beyond difficult. They really need us to help them improve the quality of their lives. For us all to blame each other gives away our power to help make a difference. For me, it has been a privilege and an honor to be a teacher in the city and it's devastating for me to see many of our students quit school. Yet, I believe that I am not part of the problem, I am part of the solution and so is everyone else. Blaming and denigrating others is not part of the solution. I do not have all the answers, but as a teacher I can tell you what I experience in the classroom. Let's all have a chance to talk. Let's all spend most of our energy listening and working together. I have made mistakes as a teacher and I take responsibility for my mistakes, and make changes in my practice. I know that the communtiy has lost respect for me just because I am a teacher, but as long as the majority of my students continue to respect me, I will respect myself as a professional. From where I am standing, here are the things that make sense to me:

1. If the mayor wants to be involved in our schools, give him some significant power in the school board. One person should not have all the power though.
2. Of course, the parents in the community need a say in the school system. That right should never be taken away from them, but we need to change something in the school board system. That system needs to be improved upon.
3. Mr. Brizzard, I respect you because you are my boss. Please respect me in return. You have to understand that we teachers have seen a lot of superintendents come and go in this city. Our superintendents have not been committed to our students for the long-term.
4. Of course, Mr. Urbanski looks out for teachers. That is his role. Teachers need him. We have a hard job and we have to be vunerable to do our jobs well. How else could we put the needs of our students ahead of ourselves?
5. Students want discipline! They push the limits because they want adults to take control. That allows them to feel safe and secure. When the adults don't support each other and work together, the students run the schools. That is never in the best interest of what students need.
6. Most of the adults that go to work in the urban setting are not fully prepared for the unique challenges that we are expected to deal with. We learn quickly though and we appreciate professional development from people who really know how to help us do our jobs more effectively. Working in urban education requires additional teaching skills.
7. We need to do something about the high school students who enter 9th grade with seriously deficient reading skills. And, we absolutely need to make vocational skills training available to the students who desire that kind of program.
8. Going back to home schools can bring the students back into the neighborhood where they live. And, whenever possible, we need to keep our schools as small as possible to keep the sense of community within schools as strong as possible.
9. We need to continue to bring more community agencies into our schools. We have them in my school and for my students that see counselors, I see a dramatic improvement in their ability to function successfully in school. I value counselors and their unique skills to help our students. We also need to increase the number of high school guidance counselors.

These ideas are from my perspective, but I am always open to listening to other people's ideas and thoughts. I am ready to listen, learn, change and compromise to improve the lives of my students. Are you? Let's get real and face the incredibly hard work it will take to make a serious, honest increase in the graduation rate for RCSD students. It will not happen unless we all work together.

Respond on Your Blog

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.