City fiscal watchdog John Marshall Lee writes that when it comes to Superintendent of Schools Paul Vallas, the dire education predictions of CT Post editorial writer Hugh Bailey, the Connecticut Working Families Party and Bridgeport Education Association have not materialized. Lee commentary:
Can anyone remember any major positive events from the 2010-11 school year, academically, fiscally, etc.; anything? I am having trouble doing so. Would the Bridgeport Education Association please speak up? What concept was the Working Families Party working on at the time?
So the 2011-12 school year began with a State-appointed Board in power (meaning an elected Board had become history by its own vote) and this became an issue for the courts to decide. And the Charter change was turned down by voters. Though the school budget was not formed and voted upon officially, the community heard many teachers would be laid off, some schools would be closed, and we were running a $12-15 million deficit. These predictions did not take place.
Paul Vallas, a non-traditional educational leader with experience in district turn-arounds in larger cities, was invited to Bridgeport to lead in a transformation of the failing educational system. Coincidentally Bridgeport’s Mayor Finch, calling himself an “accountable” leader and dedicated to improved education results appointed a Charter Review group to study the Charter, and more specifically to provide him with power to appoint future school board members.
Today Hugh Bailey, members of the Working Families Party and the Bridgeport Education Association cannot publicly bring themselves to focus on 20 months of change that do not include their dire predictions. And they provide no fair-minded assessment of what has happened, in my opinion.
No schools have been closed. Two of the worst-performing schools (Curiale and Dunbar) have received special attention and funding under the State Alliance District programing for poorest performing districts. More money has come from the State IN ADDITION TO ECS formulas. Such funds could have entered Bridgeport earlier, the same as Hartford and New Haven, if educators, legislators and business leaders had been informed, curious or asking questions. That does not describe our recent history of folks in City Hall, of educational leaders in the past decade or most State representatives and Senators elected to do the work for our City. And it puts no halo on the editorial offerings of the CT Post either during that period where the Mayor could flat-fund education for several years and still earn an editorial endorsement.
Go to one of the Vallas Thursday sessions this month. Hear about: Quality instructional time must increase … too many absences on the part of teachers and students. Lots of ways to do that. Negotiate it in the teacher contract … don’t teachers want good outcomes? Vallas is looking to increase teacher compensation as they adjust to greater responsibility for students. Raise teacher pay. But put a spotlight on healthcare issues that currently cost the system over 25% of personnel costs before a foot goes into the classroom.
Benefits, claims and liability issues are business issues that can be studied so current dollars can be spent in the classroom. Teachers in the classroom deserve more professional support and that is part of his plan in raising the skills of those available to work directly with students.
Children from 0-3, a time of rapid development for young minds, can benefit from a ‘Cradle to Classroom’ approach and the 25% of four-year-olds who do not yet get early childhood education pre-kindergarten need to be included.
Finally, parents need to be heard as to their wishes, when they have listened to careful descriptions of alternative paths for their children. Schools chartered by the State (non-profits only in CT) might bring added dollars to Bridgeport in addition to ECS dollars, for instance, with parental support.
In summary, I heard Vallas talk about raises for educators, more resources for the classrooms, earlier educational opportunities for the youngest and a break for taxpayers by using State formulas (in addition to Education Cost Sharing) that are available to districts like Bridgeport.
What part of the Vallas five-year plan don’t you like? If 75% of Bridgeport teachers reside out of town, then they may not be sensitive to our tax issues, but tax issues are real for voters here. And if certain BOE candidates are dedicated to eliminating Paul Vallas as Superintendent, doesn’t the public deserve to hear that before the election? Assuming he does not survive the CT Supreme Court decision, what is their plan of replacement? What has been set in motion that is a “keeper?” What is to be rejected? What will fit in place of the Vallas plan? Do voters have a right to ask before we elect people? I’m looking for answers and dialogue. I happen to favor the open, accountable and transparent operation fiscally that is on the public schools site.
If you want to know more, listen to Vallas on Thursday. I am pretty sure he will be repeating the comments I heard last week. Time will tell.
Then how is it when Mickey was running the place none of these things happened? Much of the dysfunction you talk about was here before Vallas came. JML was talking about what changed since his arrival. Much of this dysfunction is a result of Mickey’s (let’s call him Ramos) poor choices for school leadership (principals and such) and teachers who do not have the leadership skills to manage an unruly urban school classroom. JML’s question is ‘what changes implemented by Vallas caused things to get worse and which caused things to get better or stay the same?’ i.e. Vallas’ budget means no schools where closed and no teachers were laid off. That is better. Vallas putting Chromebooks in the high schools gives the teachers and students the opportunity to use this technology to increase the amount of learning that goes on in a school day. Better. If they do not use them for that, then it stays the same.
Ramos decreed all students should be referred to as scholars. That inspired no real difference. I do not remember anyone with degrees in education and years of classroom experience thinking Ramos was doing a bad job or holding him accountable, in part, for the city takeover of the BOE even though he was running the schools (into the ground) when it happened.
FINALLY!!! Every “dysfunction” Vallas is blamed for was here before he stepped foot in Bridgeport. The BEA and WFP want to go back to the “good ol’ days” of the BOE running deficits, hundreds of educators being threatened with layoffs and students not getting the support and technology they need to learn. I thought you people were for the kids. Nope, you’re just for your anti-reform agenda that BENEFITS adults and HURTS kids. Back UP!!!
Many of the issues on the front burner this campaign season were boiling well before Paul Vallas arrived in Bridgeport. If we kept going on the path set before he started, we would be strangled by these same issues, but worsened by a greater deficit, 180+ fewer teachers and staff due to layoffs, and a couple less schools to boot.
Paul Vallas did stop the financial bleeding. Now comes the harder job of growing our resources and implementing positive reforms that benefit every child and make a positive difference day in and day out in the classroom. In order to accomplish this, we need open-minded, effective Board members who will listen and respectfully debate to achieve decisions based on the best interest of the kids.
If we put those back into power who share a similar ideology with those who controlled the District in the past, we are bound to repeat history, and the past is too painful to go through again.
Maybe his $800,000 fruit and vegetable grant will do the trick. Can’t make it any worse, you’re 165 out of 165 CT School Districts.
JMart,
The millions of dollars that flow to students in the Federally funded education/nutrition program feeds the bodies. An additional $800,000 is helpful if the youth learn to consume a variety of fruits and vegetables daily. And the BOE nutrition program even shows a “surplus,” I am told, that helps the rest of the BOE budget.
You have made it clear being 165 out of 165 distinguishes this district as the worst, at the bottom, and must get better. Yet in many of your posts you gather stories from outside, without adaptation to our setting. What are your answers? What is being done that is positive? What needs to be changed? Or is status quo adequate? What is apparent on your observation deck? Time will tell.
The Nutrition Center epitomizes our basic problems in education. We spend a lot of money on food the kids get for free and throw away. The Nutrition Center does not offer anything the kids want and what the kids want they do not offer. Now, we can spend another $800K on stuff nobody wants. I believe the Nutrition Center surpluses go back to the state and they play under a different set of rules than other departments. Most nutrition employees are minimum wage, non-union people. The rest are part-time 10-month employees. For reasons I do not understand, returning some part of the food budget to the state has become a feather in the cap for the nutrition center. You would think spending everything you get on the best food you can would be a better idea. They also work diligently to put any expense they can on other departments. The Nutrition Center depends on maintenance to clean up the café and kitchen and teachers and security to watch the kids eat. In most schools they have ‘TV dinners’ warmed up by a 10-month, part-time cook and 3-4 minimum wage part-timers hand out the food. A good deal of real cooking goes on in the high schools but that is about it. On the bright side, if we are 165 of 165 we have nowhere to go but up.