TESTIMONY
PARTNERSHIP FOR NEW YORK CITY
by Kathryn Wylde
PRESIDENT & CEO
New York, New York
June 4, 2009
press release (PDF 78K)Testimony Submitted to the New York City Council Committee on Education
Renewal of Mayoral Control of New York City's Public Schools
The Partnership for New York City represents the city’s business leadership and its largest private sector employers. The Partnership works together with government, labor and the non-profit sector to promote economic growth and job creation in New York.
An outstanding public education system that prepares young New Yorkers for jobs in the global economy is a top priority of our members. We have been a long-term partner in development and implementation of school governance reform and have actively supported corporate investment in the schools, improved school leadership, enhanced compensation for teachers and principals, and industry collaboration in career and technical education.
Since mayoral control was enacted in 2002, it has restored confidence in the education system. We all recall what conditions were like prior to Mayoral Control:
- The quality of public education in the city had deteriorated to the point where high school graduates often lacked the skills for employment in even entry-level jobs.
- Education debates focused on politics and ways to get children out of the system – such as vouchers and aid to private schools.
- There was little attention to student performance, which slipped miserably over the previous forty years.
- The widely known, distressed conditions of the education system made it difficult for business to recruit or retain employees with children.
- Any family that could afford it, headed to private schools or the suburbs. The schools were identified as the primary reason for middle class flight from the city.
Today, conditions are very much better. The business community is actually excited about the progress and has shown it by contributing more than ever through philanthropy, school partnerships and support for innovative initiatives in support of the schools. Taxpayers are enthusiastic about how their significant investment in the schools seems to be finally paying off.
In 2001, the Partnership participated on the task force that helped the Legislature develop the mayoral control statute and on the commission that proposed the statute to reverse school decentralization. For the most part, we believe that Mayoral Control has achieved the goals that were set forth by those panels: the school system has achieved greater top to bottom accountability than was every possible under the Board of Education and decentralization. The system is regularly measuring and reporting performance of students, schools, teachers, principals and programs. It is attracting talented and highly credentialed individuals to teaching and leadership positions throughout the system, including to the most challenging schools.
The intense public discussion that has taken place as we have debated reauthorization of mayoral control has led most New Yorkers to conclude that the school governance system that was enacted in 2002 is essentially sound. Certainly that is the position of the business community. By all important measures, the schools are in far better shape today than in the previous three and a half decades.
Of course, it is not perfect. The Panel for Educational Policy has not been as effective a forum as we had hoped for open public discussion of major policy changes. School Districts and their superintendents have not filled their expected role as liaison with parents and the community and in oversight and support of principals and other school professionals. The Community Education Councils are not uniformly engaging parents and the community in support of the mission of their schools and have had less input into zoning, school closings and other key decisions that affect the districts than we had contemplated.
On the other hand, we do not agree with those who suggest that the Panel for Educational Policy should have greater independence and authority. This panel was never intended to be a board that could overturn decisions of the mayor or chancellor. It was meant to provide a forum for public discussion of important policy issues. Its role in this regard can be enhanced by formalizing the public hearing process, in order to insure greater transparency and broader participation in these policy discussions. Changing the composition, terms or authority of the PEP, on the other hand, would contradict the most fundamental principle of mayoral control and would put us back in the era of fractured accountability.
Similarly, the Community Education Council at the district level was intended to provide a forum for discussion of local issues for the purpose of public communication and feedback. The CEC should not be involved in hiring decisions nor should it be in a position to override school or district management. That, again, would result in the kind of chaos and distractions that the city experienced under decentralization – where the focus of the attention was on everything but the children and their performance.
There are some solid proposals for amending the current law to strengthen the governance structure at the district and borough levels. These proposals, aimed at improved communication with and responsiveness to parents and communities, through an enhanced role for district superintendents, are consistent with mayoral control and could help the system function more effectively. Foremost among them is the opportunity for CEC’s to have information and input into school openings, closings and zoning decisions. But these decisions ultimately belong to management.
There is also a clear rationale for treating the Department of Education in the same manner as other city agencies when it comes to comptroller audits, budget oversight and procurement. These could all be accomplished without undermining mayoral accountability.
Finally, there is certainly a need for an effective parent grievance procedure, probably tied into the district superintendent’s office. We understand that parents are seeking a role in the system – not primarily at the macro policy level - but with respect to decisions that affect their own children and schools. This is not strictly a governance issue, but a matter of good management.
So there are some amendments that would further improve the governance system, and it seems consensus is building in support of some good ideas. But my closing plea echoes the credo of the medical community: first, do no harm! We have a good governance system in place that can be made better without disrupting the progress that we all recognize is underway.
About the Partnership for New York City
The Partnership for New York City (www.pfnyc.org) is a network of business leaders dedicated to enhancing the economy of the five boroughs of New York City and maintaining the city’s position as the center of world commerce, finance and innovation. Partnership companies account for nearly 7 million American jobs and contribute over $740 billion to the national GDP.