School Closure Study Shows Inconsistency

By Jessica Ablamsky

In the strict hierarchy that is public education in New York City, the reigning commandant is Mayor Mike Bloomberg. The state legislature gave him that power in 2002, and reaffirmed it last year.

A report by the Public Advocate slams the DOE’s methodology for closing schools like Jamaica High School.

Acknowledging that the Dept. of Education, over which Bloomberg maintains control, has a “poor track record” of involving parents and other community members in decision making processes, a report by City Public Advocate Bill de Blasio and advocacy group the Alliance for Quality Education makes a variety of recommendations to improve school closure and co-location.

School closure has been big news over the past year. In June, the State Court of Appeals upheld a lower court decision that blocked the DOE from shuttering Jamaica High School and 18 other schools citywide, due to inadequate Educational Impact Statements. The DOE intended to replace the schools with smaller entities.

Less sexy, but perhaps with wider impact, is co-location. More than half of all City schools are located within an existing school building. Co-locations frequently involve loss of programs, and space, which can have a detrimental impact on students’ education, according to the report.

Before DOE officials approve such changes to City schools, current law requires an Educational Impact Statement that explains the effect on students and the community be made available for public comment.

Based on an analysis of 39 Statements, the report found that EIS did not explain how school space would be shared; members of the community were not given adequate time for comment or enough detail to make an informed decision regarding closure or co-location; none of the 19 schools proposed for closure this year met DOE standards for immediate closure; and no EIS laid out a clear plan for educational improvement for students effected by school closure.

“We are always looking to improve our community engagement efforts,” said DOE spokesman Jack Zarin-Rosenfeld. “With a better public process in place, more parents will understand the urgent need to replace schools that fail children year after year with new schools that have been shown to perform far better. We wish the Public Advocate showed the same amount of concern for our children stuck in failing schools as he does for DOE processes.” 

There are no consistent standards for what the DOE calls a failing school, according to the report. The DOE has three standards for assessing improvement and closure that differ slightly. What they have in common is an emphasis on improvement measures before closure is imposed.

Under Bloomberg’s school reform plan, Children First, principals are required to meet certain accountability goals. Considered for immediate closure are schools that receive a failing grade on their progress report and score less than proficient on their quality review. Schools face possible closure if they do not show improvement over time when they receive an F or D on a progress report, or a C three years in a row.

Progress report grades are not a standard measure, as the system has “evolved dramatically” over the years, according to the report. This makes it hard to determine whether a school is improving, or if closure is warranted.

Reach Reporter Jessica Ablamsky at jablamsky@queenstribune.com, or (718) 357-7400, Ext. 124.