- Image courtesy of shutterstock.com
On Tuesday I wrote that the mayoral election in Newark, New Jersey, was a referendum on “education reform,” aka education privatization. The election results that night had “reform” candidate Shavar Jeffries losing to Ras Baraka, a Newark high school principal who wants to improve the very damaged Newark school system, not dismantle and replace it.
I just finished reading an incredibly good article on the Newark education battles in the New Yorker: SCHOOLED: Cory Booker, Chris Christie, and Mark Zuckerberg had a plan to reform Newark’s schools. They got an education. Unlike most education stories, this one doesn’t take sides. It lays out the plans by the privatization/charter school advocates, a coalition of ex-Mayor Cory Booker (Democrat), Governor Chris Christie (Republican) and Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook founder, party unknown), to transform Newark’s schools, which have been controlled by the state since 1995, and the problems they encountered along the way. It’s very long, but it should be required reading for anyone who wants to understand the size and scope of the problems facing inner city schools and the monumental difficulties that confront anyone who wants to change things, no matter what their motives may be. I came away shaking my head. No easy answers to be found anywhere.
Having said that, my impression is that the educational good guys won in Newark. I wouldn’t want to be mayor-elect Baraka, what with the problems Newark faces on every front. But I’m hoping a man who knows one of the city’s toughest high schools from the inside, as principal, will employ his experience and a strong dose of common sense as he attempts to improve things. The New Yorker article leaves me with the impression he’s not a doctrinaire anything, and that he’ll try to take what he can from the strengths of public schools, teachers, unions, charter schools and big money philanthropists to make things a little better for the children of his city.
The media circus has landed in New Jersey with Chris Christie playing the angry clown, and a good time is being had by all. Meanwhile, a very important education story is playing out in Newark right now which will take years to develop.
This article appears in May 15-21, 2014.
Gosh, nobody cares about what you wrote. LOL After all its Newark.
David, Thanks for the link to the New Yorker article. It was very well done…one of the least biased pieces about so-called education reform I have read. The fundamental problem that Baraka is going to face as he creates his own quality education agenda is that many of the most vocal groups that supported his candidacy have a vested interest in supporting the status quo ante…where a huge portion of the Newark district’s budget was spent in ways that have no connection to improved student learning. None of the legions of administrative support people in that district contribute to student learning. How is Baraka going to maintain their support while shifting tens (or even hundreds) of millions of dollars into Newark public schools classrooms where it is needed?
Newark seems very similar to TUSD. In our largest local district more than ten cents out of every dollar is spent on administration and less than fifty cents out of that dollar goes into the classrooms where learning actually takes place. The political dynamics in TUSD are not dissimilar from Newark’s. The unions that support the status quo are afraid to call out the administration on the way it fails students through its budgetary priorities because they’d be antagonizing some of their own constituencies. At some point people who support quality public education for all students will need to call out districts that do not make choices that improve student learning, no matter whose oxen get gored.
Thank you, David, and Marty too, for your thoughtful “read” on the situation here. By “here”, I mean: I live about 7 miles from Newark center, in Essex County. And I’m vitally engaged in progressive actions and campaigns in Essex County.
The New Yorker article is extraordinary — it is dense, and spills some beans that pre-date my 1997 move to Essex County. Many locals are talking about it.
Though Newark elections are “non-partisan” [because everyone’s a Dem], this was a high-stakes political battle for the Democratic party represented in this race. Interesting that of the many candidates that announced, only two candidates ultimately ran. Jeffries ran as a law & order reformer [crime, crime, crime] and big supporter of charter schools, and was endorsed by Newark king-makers, including the Essex County Exec and the north ward Dem Chairman who owns several charter schools and pulls many strings.
Baraka represented and was endorsed/supported by the progressive wing of the North Jersey Dems, inside and outside Essex County. His running was seen a direct challenge to the Essex County Exec, who’d immediately jumped on the Christie bandwagon in the governor’s race, and the Democratic “machine” in NJ. Jeffries had a pile of IE [independent expenditure] money. Baraka had much less money, but significant labor boots on the ground on election day.
Setting politics aside, if possible: tho’ I got involved in Baraka’s campaign, and was thrilled that he won, I’m concerned that he’s weighed down by and beholden to a teachers’ union in Newark that is seriously in need to reform. I’m not sure he can get out from under that. He’s by no means conventional in his thinking and approach to governing, but he’s got a huge municipal deficit, the now angrier-than-ever state breathing down his neck, and, imho, a challenging teacher’s union.
I wish him well, and, of all his positions, he was articulate on education. With our golden boy gone — Cory Booker, who certainly brought home the bacon — there will be much less attention paid and seed/development money coming in to Newark.
[Actually, it is because I have a Google alert for Booker that I saw this piece 😉 ]
Fascinating New Yorker piece and discussion here. While I have no reason to doubt Ellen’s opinion of the teachers union in Newark, I am not sure how well it translates in TUSD. First, I look at criticism of teachers unions with a skeptical eye. Reformers have cast unions as interested in nothing more than preserving jobs and not caring about the educational welfare of students. That is often an exaggerated response to teachers’ legitimate concerns about the effect of high-stakes testing and standardization of education on kids, as well as charter schools’ ability to hire less credentialed teachers and pay on a lower scale. Questioning these issues is not automatically selfish and unconcerned with students. Second, I have seen TEA do some good work here that seems fair and good for students. But I’m not well connected to the organization, so just my impression as a parent.
I share Dave’s surprise at the article’s neutral perspective. A sorry commentary on the state of journalism. Perhaps the journalist and Baraka share the same approach to what they do. It will be interesting to see whether Baraka can navigate a path that is new.