CSA Has Misgivings On School Support;

Privatizing Concerns
CSA Has Misgivings On School Support


The leader of the Council of School Supervisors and Administrators expressed concern last week that the Department of Education's new school support system was privatizing too many functions.

ERNEST LOGAN: 'Members apprehensive.' Schools Chancellor Joel Klein said that the new system would empower Principals by giving them a wide array of choices. But CSA President Ernest Logan questioned whether the nonprofit organizations chosen to assist Principals would have the same expertise as the administrators and supervisors who now work at the 10 regional offices, which are being dismantled.

'Can't Lose Expertise'

"The expanding scope and complexity of running an effective school has made the expertise and support of education Administrators and Supervisors absolutely essential," said Mr. Logan. "We need educators who understand teaching and learning."

His comments came several days before a tentative contract agreement for Principals was announced.

The new school support system gives Principals three choices: they can opt for an Empowerment School, which provides a pared-down support structure in exchange for more spending freedom; they can join with a city-led Learning Support Organization; or they can pair with a nonprofit-sponsored Partnership Support Organization.

The four public-sector Learning Support Organizations are organized by themes, such as community, leadership and integrated curriculum, and are led by former regional Superintendents who are public servants.

The nine Partner Support Organizations are nonprofit entities that were selected from 35 groups that submitted proposals, including 25 nonprofit and 10 for-profit organizations.

"The privatization aspect of this new reorganization is still very troubling," said Mr. Logan. "There are skilled Administrators and Supervisors in place at regional offices that plan and organize each program and then oversee most aspects of those programs, including funding, legal compliance, attendance and supervision."

Denies It's Privatizing

DOE officials said that the new plan would not take school functions out of the public realm. "This is not privatization," said DOE spokeswoman Melody Meyer. "[Partnership Support Organizations] are not managing the schools, they are there for support. They have no ability to fire or hire or to evaluate Principals."

One parent advocate said he believed public employees, such as retired Principals and former regional Supervisors, would be hired by the nonprofits in order to fulfill the new contracts, and he questioned the efficiency of the shift.

"Is this a way of bringing experienced Principals back into system?" said David C. Bloomfield, president of the Citywide Council on High Schools, an elected parent body that advises the Chancellor. "And then will they be double-dipping between pensions and private organization salaries?"

More than half of city Principals have been on the job for less than three years.

The groups chosen as Partnership Support Organizations range from very large, Washington, D.C.-based groups that consult internationally, such as the Academy for Educational Development and the American Institutes for Research, to local groups that have extensive direct experience with city schools, such as New Visions for Public Schools and the Center for Educational Innovation-Public Education Association. The list also includes centers at the City University of New York and Fordham University.

Some advocacy groups that support portions of the reorganization echoed the Principals' concern about the expertise available, especially given what could be a rapid increase in scale.

"They have essentially vendorized their mid-level bureaucracy," said Noreen Connell, executive director of the Education Priorities Panel. "When you have so many schools, the question becomes, do these groups really have the staff?"

Nonetheless, Ms. Connell says "it's worth the experiment" because she believes the regions weren't working.

Some PSOs have put limits on how many schools they will serve, while others have no maximum number. Principals will prioritize their top choices and will have to include one of the unlimited PSOs in case their top picks are filled. In the case of more applicants than slots, DOE officials will decide how schools are matched.

Produce or Depart

If a PSO attracts only a few schools, they will not be retained by the DOE, according to a spokeswoman. Schools may budget as little as $24,432 and as much as $145,215 to retain one of the nonprofits, depending upon the size of the school and the group they pick.

There is no cap on the number of schools that the Learning Support Organizations can serve or the number that can become Empowerment schools.

DOE officials say that the new system will be more transparent than the past one. "The accountability measures not only hold Principals accountable," said Ms. Meyer, "they also hold the support organization accountable."

Principals will be required to make a two-year commitment when they link with a nonprofit. If at the end of the first year the Principal is not satisified with the services, she or he can petition the Chancellor to opt out and switch to another nonprofit.

DOE may decide not to renew a contract if a nonprofit group is failing to meet accountability measures across the board, which will be assessed using test scores, progress reports and Principal input.

There is a fair planned this week in each borough to allow school leaders to browse their options. Choices must be submitted by May 15 and schools will be notified about the final decisions by May 30.

Union officials said they were waiting to see more details of the plan. "There are few specifics at this late stage about how schools will be supported," said Mr. Logan. "Our members are anxious and apprehensive because they need to make the best decisions possible for their schools."