Bravo Mr. Macaluso. You have hit the nail on the head in so many different ways.

Basing fundamental structural change on faulty assumptions is quite simply bad policy. Elsewhere today I have stated that Mayoral control is a pointless argument to have. It just doesn't matter who's got their hands on the purse, or who's calling the shots in the office buildings inside the inner loop. The changes that need to be made need to happen in the neighborhoods, homes, churches and schools of the city.

The "graduation rate" argument is, unfortunately, the measure by which the state grades our schools. I say "unfortunately" not because I think graduation has no purpose - quite the contrary - I'm an educator in the District and my goal is to ensure that every student passing through my room gets the best education possible on their way to future success (including a diploma to start it all off with).
No, I said "unfortunately" because their standards are unrealistic in so many cases. To expect every student to make it through the current curriculum in 4 years is just plain wrong-headed. I, myself, took 5 years to get through high school, a fact I willingly share with my students. Not because I think they should follow my example, but to show them that not every successful person has to follow the cookie-cutter process laid out for them by the "system".
To require every student to fit in a rigid mold is to completely deny the incredible diversity of the student populace, and to refuse to celebrate those things which make them the incredibly vibrant future which they can be, if they are nurtured and encouraged in that direction. To declare that their primary goal is a failed mission if they do not get that sheepskin in 4 years is wrong.

Again - re-institute the Childrens' Zone. Learn from the mistakes of the past. This is the only long-term effective solution that will render fundamental positive changes in the lives of the children of Rochester.

Unless, of course, the point isn't to do that. If the point is to bloat some numbers temporarily to make yourself and your "legacy" better, then by all means, keep arguing about the arrangement of those deck chairs as the ship goes down.

Duffy is showing his lack of experience in the with the educational system by not allowing his document to be made public. If the document is just defending what we already know, then I am disappointed. I read that he will be hiring consultants to assist him with a final plan for restructuring the RCSD. Will that money come out of the City budget or the RCSD budget? I don't want to tell the Mayor how to do his job, but his plan should included timelines, financial reports and student breakkdowns, and projected use of human service agencies. He feels that since he has potentially secured the nod from Albany elite that an explaination to voters is not needed. He may win the battle in Albany, but he will face a war with the people that have not bought into his vision of mayorial control. At the end of his five years, which is when his term ends do we go back to school boards if his takeover is not successful? Rochester has taken some hard hits over the last few years. Our economic and neighborhood development is limited . If Duffy thinks he can raise graduation with an advisory board and a high priced consultant he is not the businessman I thought he was. He will need cooperation from the janitor to the principal. At this point he has every RCSD union waiting from him on the hill he projects to die on with this battle. I am not saying that a more comprehensive plan is needed for the RSCD that should included city issues. We all know that children need to be educated better. There are too many social and educational variables that need to be addressed in order for children to graduate from high school. I have only one question for the Mayor. A few years ago the D & C published an article about how many children enter the RCSD in 9th and by 12th the children have literally disappeared or dropped out. Can he draft a strategic plan for providing services just for that population? After school programs are an options, but not the answer. Giving more money to human service agencies to develop more programs that children are not interested in or don't meet parent needs is also not the answer. These are quick fixes that Duffy is outlining and I feel insulted.

To be factual Obama's Education Czar Arne Duncan's Race to the Top is a federal grant program designed to institute merit pay/eliminate unions; increase limit on charter schools, which though public, drain resources from already cash-strapped district; longer school day, extended school year; community-based instructional services, such as CASA and RASA. What's the payoff for breaking the unions? M-O-N-E-Y. In November 2009, State Senator Sam Hoyt (D-Buffalo) advanced legislation that would tie teacher pay to student grades! I teach at an area college and refute the assertion of Dr. Hirsch that the Mayoral take-over is both ill-advised and won't happen. It WILL happen. Race to the Top was NCLB which was ESEA, passed in 1964 as part of the Civil Rights Act under Johnson. Race to the Top requires even more standardized testing. Why aren't the unions complaining about it as they did when Bush was president? Race to the Top will require fundamental changes, as Obama said when he was campaigning. One last fact, when Urbanski took over the union, the graduation rate was nearly 85%--it is now just half that. How can anyone justify keeping the status quo? I volunteer to serve on the Mayor's board because I believe he is putting children--not jobs--first. (Oh, yeah, one other not-so-credible argument--the Board members are NOT educators. The Mayor will use Brizard in the same capacity as do they: He knows about education, not them!)