Restart Evaluation Negotiations To Begin
by Anne Silverstein
The ongoing negotiations between CSA and the NYC Department of Education over Principal evaluations at the city’s eight Restart and Transformation schools remain challenging for a number of reasons, but primarily because the rules concerning the Education Partnership Organizations’ relationships with schools remain fuzzy.
Education Partnership Organizations (EPOs) are privately run non-profits that sign a contract with a school district to run Restart schools designated as “lowest-achieving” by the state. The union officers are concerned on a number of levels – from a global perspective to how EPOs will function on a daily basis. (For the legal definition of an EPO, see Page 12.)
The current dialogue between CSA and the city concerns the Principal evaluations that will be employed at eight middle schools labeled Restart or Transformation. To qualify for federal School Improvement Grants (SIGs), these schools must be in compliance with state law 3012-c, which calls for, among other things, a new evaluation tool for supervisors and teachers. Presently, in NYC, the current Principal Performance Review is the only evaluation tool that may be used to rate Principals.
“We are worried that this is one more step in the continuing march toward privatization
of public schools,” said CSA President Ernest Logan. “I remain concerned that our governments are taking public school resources and giving them to private entities.”
“We are doing data analysis and research to enter negotiations,” said Executive Vice President Peter McNally. The union has signed a letter of understanding with the NYC DOE that “We are willing to negotiate a new PPR in compliance with the new state law,” he said; obviously, the union wants to help these schools get millions of dollars in aid for
which they are eligible.
State law now mandates that school districts comply with the new law – meaning a new evaluation tool for Principals and teachers – by 2013 pending collective bargaining agreements. In other words, if CSA and the DOE fail to reach an agreement on this subject, the current PPR stays in effect. (Ditto for the UFT and the city as well.)
How Restart schools will be run is also causing worries. “This has been a very difficult negotiation,” said Mr. McNally, “because no one seems to be clear on the rules affecting EPOs and their relationships with school districts.”
For example, Mr. McNally said, “When I asked the State Education Department and the NYC DOE, ‘What is the role of the EPO with school leadership teams?’ both said, ‘Peter, that’s a good question. We’ll get back to you.’ And they haven’t.” Mr. McNally added: “It’s a question our Principals are going to be asking first thing.”
One thing that is clear is this: EPOs “assume the powers and duties of the superintendent of schools,” (see sidebar below) but all collective bargaining agreements remain intact, Mr. McNally said, as they do at Transformation schools.
State law authorizes school districts to choose from among four “Turn-Around Models” for failing schools. Those models are Transformation, Restart, Turnaround and School Closure. NYC implemented the Transformation model last year, and this year designated 14 schools as “Restart.”
Designating schools as Turn-Around is linked with eligibility for federal School Improvement Grants.
NYS recently released $58,569,883 of federal SIG money for NYC schools to support implementation of the Transformation, Turnaround or Restart Model in 44 persistently lowest achieving (PLA) schools for the 2011-12 school year.
