Harvard Graduate School of Education

Children First in New York

City
Urban Education Reform in New York City: Challenges,
Policies and Implementation

Jason Wong, Jonathan Sproul, Sarah Kasok

5/4/2008
 The New York City Department of Education (NYCDOE) serves over 1.1 million

students and oversees more than 1,400 schools. 33% of students are black, 39%
are Latino, 14% are White, and 13% are Asian. In 2002, Mayor Bloomberg and
Chancellor Klein launched the Children First Initiative. Phase One of Children First
began with mayoral takeover and restructuring of the NYC public school system.
Children First rapidly evolved throughout NYC Public Schools and its successes have
attracted national attention; for the third year in a row the NYC Public Schools have
been a finalist for the Broad Award given to the most successful urban school
district in America. This paper documents the historical and political context of
Children First, it provides an in-depth description of the Children First, and it makes
informed recommendations about improving the district-wide reform efforts.
NYC public schools have been characterized by a nearly perpetual struggle
between decentralization and centralization since the 19th Century, almost entirely
dependent on group power struggles and /or public response to corruption. In
around the 1990’s, a series of stinging reports indicated that there was still
widespread mismanagement and corruption inherent in the NYC school district.
Historically, the state and city government of New York had not playeda very active
role in the daily operations of the NYC public schools. However, in 2002, the New
York State Legislature approved mayoral takeover of the NYC public school system.
In 2009, the New York State Legislature will have to reauthorize the NYC Mayor’s
ability to control the NYC public school district.
The need for mayoral takeover of the NYC public schools stemmed from
chronically underperforming student academic achievement levels, endemic
corruption, mismanagement, and lack of any coherent district-wide coordination.
Upon taking mayoral control of the NYC, Mayor Bloomberg appointed Joe Klein as
Chancellor of NYC public schools and they teamed up toimplement Children First.
Mayor Bloomberg and Chancellor Klein implemented Children First in two phases.
The first phase of Children First included the restructuring of the NYC public schools
in order to stabilize and coordinate a disorganized system of schools. The 40
citywide district offices were consolidated into 10 Instructional
Divisions(http://schools.nyc.gov). The NYC Public School System was also
consolidated into the newly created NYCDOE and the NYCDOE took responsibility for
the centralized oversight of the Children First reform.
After creating centralization and stability of the NYC public school system,
Chancellor Klein rolled out Phase Two of Children First. Phase Two of Children First
operates with the three core principles of empowerment, leadership and
accountability. The principle of empowerment recognizes that people closest to the
students should be empowered to make school level educational decisions, such as
budget, curriculum and professional development. The principle of leadership
recognizes that the success of empowering schools hinges upon the ability of the
school leaders. Finally, the principle of accountability recognizes that schools and
school leaders need to be held accountable for their performance and the NYCDOE
is reciprocally accountable for providing schools with the tools and resources to
achieve success.
Children First empowers principals to make decisions that will allow them to
meet the needs of their students. Principals are mainly empowered to make
budgetary, professional development, assessment and instructional support
decisions. Each principal is required to join a learning support organization.
Learning support organizations provides schools with three key support packages:
accountability and instructional support, special-needs support and youth
development support.
Accountability and instructional supports consists of providing school leaders
with the tools that allow capacity building within the school community; these tools
include utilization of the accountability tools, implementation of best practices and
targeted partnerships. Special needs supports provide school leaders with the
professional development to implement differentiated instruction for students with
special needs. Finally, youth development support provides best practices and
assistance with implementation of youth development programs that improve the
behavior, culture, achievement and overall school climate.
Each learning support organizations specializes in an area and varies in cost
for its services. For instance, Kathleen Cashin prior superintendent of Region 5,
heads the LSO entitled Knowledge Network Support Organization for $42, 438 per
school. This LSO specializes in supporting a “content rich” curriculum in science,
literature, the arts, and history. Region 3’s Judith Chin’s is in charge of the
Integrated Curriculum and Instruction LSO which focuses on implementing an
effective multidisciplinary curriculum and charges $47,500 for its services
(Herszenhorn, 2007).
Principals are required to decide which instructional support structure best
meet the needs of their school by joining their school into one of three learning
support organizations: Community Learning Support Organization (LSO),
Empowerment Learning Organizations (ELO) or Partnership Support Organization
(PSO). The fact that principals can choose their support choice does empower
principals in New York in a new and exciting way.
The mission of the LSO is “to partner with and support schools as they strive
to prepare students to achieve their personal best, fulfill their responsibility to the
community and, positively influence the course of events in the 21st century” (LSO
Fact Sheet, 2008). The LSO was founded on the belief that schools need to become
communities and develop meaningful relationships within the school community,
families and the surrounding community. The LSO’s are said to be the most popular
choice by Chancellor Klein and others because veterans of NYC public schools run
the LSO’s.
In 2004, the ELO was piloted in 48 schools that made up the “Autonomy
Zone” and, since then, the ELOs has grown to include over 500 schools. ELO give
schools customized support that align with the core belief that decisions about
education students should be made by the principal and school community because
they are the closest to students. These ELOs support the empowered schools to
make key school-based decisions, such as curriculum, budget, professional
development and assessment methods.
PSOs are support organizations operated by partners outside of the DOE,
such as intermediaries, colleges, and universities. The PSOs demonstrated records
of supporting communities and schools in a variety of capacities. The PSO process
consisted of the DOE releasing a Request for Proposals (RFP) to external
organizations. These proposals required the outside partners to outline how there
organizations would support schools and, based upon the merit of the proposal, the
DOE selected the PSOs. In 2007- 2008, the partnership support organizations
serving New York City public schools were Academy for Educational Development,
Center for Educational Innovation-Public Education Association (CEI-PEA), City
University of New York (CUNY), Fordham University, New Visions for Public Schools,
Replications, Inc.
Staffing of schools is another significant way principals are empowered by
Children First. In 2005 the New York City Department of Education negotiated a
contract with the Untied Federation of Teachers that allowed for a staffing rule of
“mutual consent.” This means that teachers and principals now have to both agree
on a teacher’s placement at a school. This new rule banished traditional rules of
teacher placement such as when seniority teachers could ‘bump’ another teacher.
Also, this change in the contract allowsprincipals to have more control over their
school site and empower principals to make staffing decisions (The New Teacher
Project, 2008). This progressive union negotiation proves that the district
leadership and the union leadership are working together to compromise on
managerial issues by making contractual agreements that align with the
empowerment core of the Children First mission.
However, there are some instances where the amount of principals’
empowerment in NYC public schools is questionable. Children First “empowers”
principals to provide extended programming and summer school, services to English
Language Learners, and programming for new teacher mentoring
(http://schools.nyc.gov/default.aspx). However, the question is whether or not this is
empowerment or simply giving large amounts of responsibility to principals without
providing structured support. For instance, teaching mentoring could fall to the
wayside if new teacher mentoring is not a priority on the principals’ agenda and if
principals don’t have the capacity to develop the mentoring program. Secondly, all
of these decisions about offering programming and changing the schedule must be
consistent with the union contract and it is unclear if the union contracts constrains
or empowers these responsibilities.
Additionally, principals are required to use a core English Language Arts,
Math, Science, and Social Studies Curriculum unless they petition otherwise
(http://schools.nyc.gov/default.aspx). So, principals are also bound to a certain
curriculum unless they are willing to take on a work heavy petitioning process. In all,
Children First must be careful to balance truly empowering principals to make
choices to meet the needs of their students with giving them too much
responsibility that it is nearly impossible for one person to sustain the role.
Although shared leadership can alleviate some responsibility, it remains to be seen
if Children’s First has found the right balance.
This plan’s success is contingent upon hiring excellent school leaders. The
New York City Leadership Academy’s Aspiring Principals Program (APP) recruits,
trains and supports NYC school principals. The APP is a 14-month programs that
prepares future school principals for placement into the city’s highest needs and
hardest to staff schools. APP graduates commit to serving in the DOE for at least
five years. The Summer Intensive uses problem and action based learning
curriculum that mimics a real-life school principal experience. During the school-
based residency, each APP participant is matched with a mentor principal and
placed into a year long school-based residency. In the final stage, Summer
Planning, the future school principal prepares for the transition into their upcoming
principal placement. Now, over 13% of NYC schools are lead by APP principals,
21% have opened new small schools and 90% of APP graduates continue to serve in
school leadership positions (http://www.nycleadershipacademy.org/).
Chancellor Klein and Mayor Bloomberg have designed a system based on the
management capabilities of principals, so a large question remains if they can find
and keep top-notch principals in the district. Secondly, school’s success is hugely
dependent on the capacity and effectiveness of the support organizations. If these
support organizations are indeed effective, then the differentiated support model
may indeed work. However, if the support organizations do not give adequate
support, then little will ultimately change in the day-to-day operations of teaching
and learning. Lastly, there are always budget concerns. Mayor Bloomberg has
increased spending on New York City Schools 72% since 2002 (Medina, 2008). In
January of this year, schools were forced to cut 1.75% from their school budget and
more cuts seem to be on the horizon. Bloomberg and Klein will have to find ways to
sustain the momentum of school reform in New York amidst a possible economic
downturn.
Accountability is a core principal of Children First and the district’s Office of
Accountability and Assessment have implementedan advanced qualitative and
quantitative assessment system for schools. Quantitatively, schools take a variety
of periodic assessments for formative assessments and students take the state
Regents as a summative assessment. Qualitatively, schools use quality reviews and
surveys as a measurement tool. The combination of the school’s qualitative and
quantitative assessments are used to produce a school report card, which gives
each school a A, B, C, D or F letter grade to communicate the schools’ performance.
Elementary and middle school students take annual State Regents and high
school students take the Regents in 10thgrade. The Regents are summative
assessments that determine if the students and schools are making sufficient
progress in ELA, math, social students and science. In high school, 10th grade
students are required to pass five Regents exams in order to graduate and these
Regents determine whether they’re achieving State standards in English Language
Arts, mathematics, social studies, and science.
In addition to these summative assessment tools, all students take English
Language Arts (ELA) and math formative, “Periodic Assessments”. These periodic
assessments are administered throughout the school year to provide a growth
model assessments measure for individual student progress. The results of the
Regents and periodic assessments are used to develop data driven decisions to
inform whole school instructional practices and develop personalized instruction for
students.
In SY 2007-2008, the Office of Accountability implemented four additional
school assessments tools: Progress Reports, Surveys, Quality Reports and
Achievement Reporting and Innovation System (ARIS). Progress Reports use a
variety of student data, such as student progress and overall school data, such as
safety and engagement, in order to grade each school with an A, B, C, D, or F.
Surveys ask students, parents and teachers to provide qualitative evaluations and
assessments of the school. Quality reviews are 2-3 day school visits by a team of
educators that observe classrooms, meet with school community and rate the
schools’ ability of improving student learning. Finally, the ARIS is a data
management tool that allows parents and educator to access student data and
other important information on student learning.
Key indicators suggest that Children First is a successful urban reform
initiative. First, fewer resources are being wasted on bureaucratic mismanagement
and corruption, and more resources are being made available to the classroom.
Compared to the school district’s prior history of bureaucratic and political
corruption, the NYC Department of Education has stabilized the school district and
laid the foundation for system-wide reform. Graduation rates have been increasing
for the past four years, across all ethnicities. Furthermore, more students are
graduating with more advanced degrees, also known as Regents Diplomas. In
terms of test scores, math scores have seen the most significant improvement.
English test score improvements among those who are English language proficient
have also notably increased.
From the New York case, there has been witnessed success with the Mayor
and Chancellor taking control of the situation, stabilizing the school district
politically and financially as a foundation for change. Other strengths of these
changes include strong political leaders that pull levers of power to maneuver
concessions from teacher unions and various other interest groups to steamroll
change, there have been more resources directed into the classroom, learning
organizations provide differentiated support which schools can choose from, and
schools are empowered to make responsive decisions to meet their students’ needs.
However, a major question remains, what will happen when Bloomberg and
Klein leave? It is unclear whether or not Children First reforms are sufficient enough
to outlast Bloomberg and Klein, especially considering Bloomberg’s potential larger
political ambitions. Other weaknesses include the fact that current reform heavily
relies on administrative leadership, it relies on relatively inexperienced learning
organizations to provide support to schools, and the reform’s direct impact on the
instructional core is questionable. Furthermore, it is unclear if the reform’s
increased funding is financially sustainable. Mayor Bloomberg has increased
funding in for the NYC public schools by 4.3 billion dollars, but this continued
increase in funding might not be possible, especially during economic downturn.
Although there have been significant improvements with students’ academic
performance and graduation rates in NYC, when accounting for English Language
Learners (ELL), English test score improvements remain more ambiguous. Since
ELL’s have a rapidly growing population, it is recommended that further reform
should specifically target this ELL subgroup. The Office of Accountability should add
additional ELL performance measures to the schools’ progress report card because
that will increase the school level focus on this subgroup. In turn, the districts’
learning support organizations will need to provide school leaders with the
resources and best practices that will best meet the needs of the ELL population.
 Since 2002, there has been significant rapid reform that has completely
changed the way in which the NYC public schools conducts its business. It is
important to sustain this current Children First reform initiative. Constant turnover of
school leaders creates layers and layers of reform upon reform, but Children First
eliminated a majority of these layers by structurally reformingNYC public schools.
Now, NYC must sustain Children First in order to build upon its success. In order to
sustain this reform, future political leadership must adopt and take ownership of this
reform strategy and continue to allocate sufficient funding and resources for
schools, continue to develop school leaders and refine best practices at the
individual school level and throughout learning support organizations.
Although political leadership of the Mayor and the Chancellor will inevitably
turnover, the schools and their communities will remain intact. Therefore, it is
necessary to engage the families and communities in Children First. Children First
was implemented as a top-down initiative that completely restructured the New
York City public and the process failed to include schools, families and communities
in the initial stages of the reform. Therefore, in order to sustain Children First by
gaining community buy-in, Children First must make a targeted effort toward
engaging families and communities in schools. Changing the names of schools is
one recommendation that can provide a catalyst for family and community
engagement. Currently, schools are named with letters and numbers, such as PS-
132. We believe that the community can come together to name each school based
upon an influential community member. This activity will create a bridge that will
allow families and communities to become engaged and take ownership of the
schools.
Children First fundamentally changed the way the NYC school system
operates and has improved student learning and graduation rates for its 1.1 million
students. With greater attention to ELL’s, increased community involvement, and
attention to sustaining and developing school leaders, Children First will continue to
serve as a national model for urban district reform. As a result, NYCDOE will no
longer be a finalist for the Broad Award, but NYCDOE will be a well deserving
recipient of this prestigious distinction.
References:
Children First: A Principals Guide to School Support Organizations (February 2008).
NYCDOE
Herszenhorn, David (2007, April 17). Klein Specifies Restructuring of City Schools. The
New York Times.
Medina, Jennifer (2008, March 20). Thousands Protest Budget Cuts Aimed at City
Schools. The New York Times.
The New Teacher Project. (2008). Mutual Benefits: New York’s Shift to Mutual Consent in
Teacher Hiring.
Web Resources:
http://www.tntp.org/publications/Mutual_Benefits.html
http://schools.nyc.gov/default.asp
http://www.nycleadershipacademy.org/