<![CDATA[ECC - Parent-Voices]]>Mon, 06 Apr 2026 14:38:03 -0400Weebly<![CDATA[Education Council Consortium Statement Demanding Reinstatement of the CEC14 President]]>Sun, 15 Sep 2024 12:22:24 GMThttps://www.ecc-nyc.org/parent-voices/education-council-consortium-statement-demanding-reinstatement-of-the-cec14-presidentOn Friday June 14, 2024, David C. Banks, the Chancellor of the New York City Department of Education (DOE), removed two Community Education Council (CEC) members, one of whom is Tajh Sutton, the President of the CEC District 14 (CEC 14), the other is Maud Maron, a member of the CEC District 2 (CEC 2). 

On June 19, 2024 the Education Council Consortium denounced the removal of the CEC 14 President Tajh Sutton by the Chancellor and demanded that he restore her membership to her Council. The Education Council Consortium continues to demand her reinstatement. .

Chancellor’s Regulation D-210 (D-210), cited as the basis of removal, was created at the urging of CEC members, mostly women of color, who experienced ongoing verbal violence, doxxing and racist, misogynistic meeting environments created by other CEC members. Bad behaviors were directed to the work of many equity-driven CEC members, who fight to center the needs of historically marginalized students - Black, Brown and AAPI students, students with disabilities, English Language Learners, students living in poverty, in temporary housing or foster care, and LGBTQ students. 

The regulation was developed by equity-driven CEC members in collaboration with the DOE to institute a process by which CEC members who behave in harmful, harassing and discriminatory ways are held accountable. Unfortunately, during the administration of Chancellor Banks, the DOE has consistently failed to commit the necessary resources to effectively investigate complaints filed under D-210, leaving parents and DOE students vulnerable to harm.

The DOE has failed to  publicly release information concerning the number of complaints filed under D-210, and it was only by filing a Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) request that we were able to learn that a total of 60 complaints have been filed (from December 22, 2021 to July 1, 2024), of which only one had been filed against CEC 14. Seventeen complaints had been filed against members of CEC 2, which is more than three times the number filed against any other CEC.

Anticipating disciplinary action would be taken against her, CEC 2 member Maron (along with her co-plaintiffs, Citywide Council on High Schools member Deborah Alexander and CEC District 1 member Noah Harlan) filed a lawsuit in federal court on March 26, 2024 challenging the constitutionality of D-210. On April 15, 2024, plaintiffs filed a motion with the court for a preliminary injunction, seeking to enjoin the DOE from implementing or enforcing D-210, “including conducting any investigation or disciplining or removing from office any Community Education Council or Citywide Council member on the basis that the accused engaged in ‘frequent verbal abuse and unnecessary aggressive speech that serves to intimidate and causes others to have concern for their personal safety,’ … expressed ‘disrespect towards children’ or ‘derogatory or offensive comments about any DOE student,’ or speech ‘that would publicly reveal, share or expose private or personally identifiable information about a DOE student or a member of such student’s family without their consent.’” Their lawsuit, framed on free speech grounds, was in fact designed to chill the speech of others, by allowing Maron, Alexander, and Harlan the ability to harass and intimidate other CEC members and those members’ children, free from DOE sanction.

Maron has a long history of racist and transphobic statements, but it was her direct attack on a DOE student that finally compelled the Chancellor to remove her from her position. As the Chancellor stated in his letter removing her from CEC 2, Maron “engaged in a public, personal attack against a student… in the context of an issue that is highly politically charged, in a climate in which harassment and targeting of those who express unpopular opinions is common, and in a tabloid publication whose articles often provoke extreme reactions. Predictably, [Maron’s] conduct provoked a number of other highly offensive and hostile attacks...” 

Inexplicably, even before the court had a chance to rule on the plaintiff’s injunction motion, Chancellor Banks preemptively suspended enforcement of the relevant portions of D-210,  announcing to families that he would not take action to protect their children from intimidation and harassment by CEC members. Instead of defending our students from harm, the Chancellor capitulated, signaling that he will no longer stand in the way of Maron and others who would seek to publicly attack DOE students (see footnote below). 

On September 3, 2024, Maron and her co-plaintiffs received the injunction they requested from the court, and Maron was reinstated to her position on CEC 2 pending the outcome of her lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of D-210 as a violation of the First Amendment. 

In the meantime, as we indicated in our June 19 statement, CEC 14 President Tajh Sutton’s removal constitutes an abuse of power. CEC 14 President Sutton has fought tirelessly to make the public education system in New York City equitable and just. In return, she has faced harassment, doxxing, and death threats, causing her to suspend in-person meetings of CEC 14 and instead hold them online in a safe space for the community. In response, the Chancellor cited her for violation of the Open Meetings Law and removed her from her position. In addition, CEC 14 President Sutton’s advocacy for the Palestinian people played a major role in the Chancellor’s decision to remove her, and his official actions in that regard clearly infringe on her First Amendment rights.

While Maron has been restored to her position by the court, and the Chancellor has even voluntarily agreed to suspend enforcement of D-210, CEC 14 President Sutton’s removal has not been reversed. The Chancellor can voluntarily restore CEC 14 President Sutton to her rightful position, and indeed he should do so, especially given the uncertainty surrounding his removal powers after the court’s reinstatement of Maron on First Amendment grounds. 

To do otherwise, the Chancellor has weaponized the very regulation necessary to protect women of color and used it against a woman of color, while using the process to protect a white woman who is known for her racism and transphobia. The Chancellor’s decision sends a message to our children that NYC Public Schools will tolerate racism and transphobia. We will not accept this unethical conduct of the Chancellor.

We also question the legality of the Chancellor’s decision to voluntarily suspend enforcement of D-210 without a public review or the official vote of the Panel for Educational Policy. Such unilateral exercise of power is emblematic of the undemocratic nature of mayoral control of our schools.  

The Education Council Consortium again demands that the Chancellor restore CEC 14 President Sutton’s membership to her Council.  

Board of Directors
Education Council Consortium

Footnote: NYC Corporation Counsel’s August 28, 2024 letter to the judge states: “Given that DOE cannot unilaterally or immediately revise the regulation, because revisions to Chancellor’s Regulations require both a 45-day public notice and comment period as well as approval by the PEP, see N.Y. Educ. Law § 2590-g(1)(c) and (8), the Chancellor has taken the immediate step of waiving enforcement while DOE prepares to post revisions in an effort to address Plaintiffs’ concerns. This is a further reason that a preliminary injunction is not appropriate at this time.”  The full letter can be found at https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fw_C8EDLfKX9Xs9j4PLViE_hV0e2qleS/view?usp=sharing]]><![CDATA[EDUCATION COUNCIL CONSORTIUM STATEMENT DENOUNCING REMOVAL OF CEC14 PRESIDENT BY THE CHANCELLOR]]>Wed, 19 Jun 2024 15:47:58 GMThttps://www.ecc-nyc.org/parent-voices/education-council-consortium-statement-denouncing-removal-of-cec14-president-by-the-chancellorOn Friday June 14, 2024, the Chancellor of the New York City Department of Education (DOE) released a statement (see below) which announced the removal of two Community Education Council (CEC) members, one of whom is the President of the CEC District 14. 

The Education Council Consortium denounces the removal of CEC 14 President by the Chancellor and demands that he restore her membership to her Council. 

The Chancellor’s Regulation D-210, cited in the statement, was created at the urging of CEC members, mostly women of color, who were experiencing verbal violence, doxxing and racist, misogynistic meeting environment created by other CEC members. Bad behaviors were in response to the work of many equity-driven CEC members, who were fighting to center the needs of historically marginalized students - Black, Brown and AAPI students, students with disabilities, English Language Learners, students living in poverty, in temporary housing or foster care, and LGBTQ students. The regulation was developed by equity-driven CEC members in collaboration with the DOE to institute a process by which CEC members who behave in harmful ways are held accountable. 

There is a very drastic and stark contrast between the two removed members. On one hand, one of the CEC members removed is a member of Moms for Liberty, who has made many racist comments publicly, is openly hostile toward our trans children, and has actively advocated to maintain a discriminatory and segregative school system. The D-210 regulation was intended to address these types of harmful and hateful behaviors. 

On the other hand, this very process is now being egregiously misused and weaponized against a woman leader of color. CEC14’s President is a well known and widely respected activist for intersectional social justice, an activist who has always elevated the voices of those who are silenced by the public school system and society at large. She has consistently demonstrated “high standards of ethics, integrity and decorum” as the Chancellor urged of all CEC members in his statement last Friday.  She has shown commitment to the very kind of “authentic and effective family and community engagement” the Chancellor promotes, and has been very intentional about creating a welcoming, inclusive and safe space for parents, particularly those who have been harmed or marginalized by the public school system. 

Those of us who have supported the CEC14 President are aware that her advocacy for the Palestinian people played a significant factor in the Chancellor’s decision. The DOE’s actions are complicit in a widespread MacCarthyite repression of those speaking out against an ongoing genocide.

We are deeply disturbed by how the Chancellor attempted to equate the actions of a genuine social justice activist to the actions of a person with a pattern of abject racism and transphobia, and applied D-210 as if whatever complaints were made against these members should be evaluated on equal footing. This type of action reeks of political expediency and manufactures a  “both sides” argument where none exists. 

The Chancellor’s statement cites violations of the Open Meetings Law (OML) as a cause for removal of the CEC14 President. We are deeply concerned that the Chancellor is relying on OML violations to remove CEC members and believe this is a dangerous abuse of his power.  Non-compliance with the OML should never be used as grounds for CEC member removal, particularly when such non-compliance stems from concern for the public’s safety. 

This action, taken by  this Chancellor, has taken mayoral control of NYC’s public schools to a new low. It is bad enough that this system has been dictatorial for the last two decades—this action has truly pushed the system even further away from any semblance of a democratic school system. 

We see the removal of  CEC14’s President as an abuse of power against a Black woman parent leader who has fought tirelessly to make the public education system equitable and just. In the name of “family engagement,” this administration has selectively engaged with affluent and privileged families who are intent on keeping and expanding the most discriminatory policies that lead to resource hoarding. Finally this administration has demonstrated that it is not only unwilling to engage with those who fight for what is right, but is willing to remove them altogether. 

It is indeed a “sad day” when New York City Public Schools discover a new way to further erode any confidence in this administration. 

Education Council Consortium Board of Directors

*************
NYC Public Schools Press Release

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 14, 2024


STATEMENT FROM CHANCELLOR DAVID C. BANKS ON THE REMOVAL OF COMMUNITY EDUCATION COUNCIL MEMBERS 
NEW YORK- Today, Schools Chancellor David C. Banks made the following statement addressing determinations he issued today regarding two CEC members: 
“Today in accordance with state law and Chancellor’s Regulations, I issued orders removing a member of Community Education Council 2 and a member of Community Education Council 14. These orders are rooted in my responsibility to ensure our families are represented by leaders who respect students and follow state law.  


We have consistently and repeatedly made it clear that parent leaders must observe high standards of ethics, integrity, and decorum. Those responsibilities include ensuring that applicable legal requirements are implemented and followed. Among these requirements is Chancellor’s Regulation D-210, which was advocated for and developed by parent leaders and approved by the Panel for Educational Policy after public review. Authentic and effective family and community engagement is a central pillar in all that we do, and that includes maintaining an inclusive, accessible environment for our school communities and acting when parent leaders fail to comply with the rules. Another requirement is New York State’s Open Meetings Law, which establishes clear and unconditional requirements for how public bodies must conduct their meetings. 


It is a sad day when New York City Public Schools is compelled to take the actions I have ordered today, but the violations committed by these two individuals have made them unfit to serve in these roles. The Office of Family and Community Engagement will continue supporting both councils, including with the prescribed process for filling vacancies and, in the case of CEC 14, holding monthly meetings in compliance with the law.”  


Chancellor’s Regulation D-210 was approved by the PEP in 2021. Under the regulation, the Equity Compliance Officer (ECO) investigates complaints of misconduct, including harassment and discrimination, in our CECs and citywide councils, in consultation with an Equity Council comprised of parent leaders.  For more information, see https://www.schools.nyc.gov/docs/default-source/default-document-library/d-210.pdf.   
]]><![CDATA[Testimony on the Solutions Not Suspensions Bill]]>Sat, 13 May 2023 17:00:53 GMThttps://www.ecc-nyc.org/parent-voices/testimony-on-the-solutions-not-suspensions-billGood afternoon, everyone. 

I’m coming to you today representing the Education Council Consortium, as the chair of its charter accountability committee, but also as the current president of the Community Education Council of District 17, which spans from Prospect Heights to Brownsville, from Crown Heights to East Flatbush. 

I’m here to speak in favor of the solutions not suspensions act, not merely as a parent but as the CEC president in a district that has done this work. Under the leadership of our former superintendent, Dr. Clarence Ellis, who is currently the superintendent of the East Ramapo School District upstate, and my current Superintendent Shenean Lindsay who was his deputy, our district created a task force to address the disproportionality in how students from different demographics, nationalities, and lived experiences are supported or disciplined in different ways. 

In partnership with a now-defunct statewide program almost a decade ago, District 17 worked to help our school staff think differently about their interactions with students. As you can imagine, our district is extremely diverse—through nationality, religion, socioeconomic status, by ability, and beyond. 

In some cases we’ve seen the suspension process being used simply as an extraction tool to remove students who present as a challenge. At its worst, students with undiagnosed or diagnosed special needs that the school is ill equipped to address are simply suspended for minor infractions to get —and keep— them out of the classroom. Students whose mannerisms translated to disrespect to a staffer from a different cultural background might find themselves in the principal’s office and, ultimately, being sent home.

And the data bears this out. In a 2015 report from Columbia University, whose release coincided with the institution of our task force, researchers recognize that Black children are disproportionately removed from the classroom for minor infractions. But even there, we see inequity. In New York, Black boys were six times as likely to have a disciplinary case than their white counterparts; for Black girls, that number rises to ten.

Aside from the disruptive effects that this has on the parent who simply feels targeted—because they did not see where the ‘disrespect’ took place—this has significantly disruptive effects on the student’s education. Being removed from the classroom for an extended period of time is bad enough but, because it was a “punishment” no one is empowered to create tools to help the student catch up. This has a long-term and cascading effect on the student’s performance, the family’s relationship to the school community, and the way school staff treat the student. 

Our approach was simple: hand-crafting a culturally responsive approach rooted in equity for all students, fully inclusive of all identities and experiences, with the goal of increasing educational outcomes. The work was broad ranging, from helping parents learn how to secure appropriate support for their students, to developing new policies to handle conflict. We created a process that maintains a child’s connection to the school community instead of excommunicating them from it. 

A few fast facts about District 17: we have one of the largest, if not the largest, charter footprint in the borough. With 17 charter schools housed within our borders, we do not have a shortage of charter schools. As Dr. Ellis and Lindsay pushed forward, the charter schools located in our district presented as a stark contrast from the empathetic equity work we were doing. Families frequently left charters for our schools—with the drumbeat of recent reporting about charter efforts to self-control their own student population, I see why. They were more likely to see their identities respected, embraced, and welcomed in our schools. They saw the stability associated with schools invested in keeping children in the classroom, recognized that their children wouldn’t be “pushed out” or find themselves on a “must go” list, and chose us. 

And, with that stability, we saw dramatic improvement in our academic outcomes. The district presented with year over year improvement in math and ELA scores. Enrollment began to increase, too. Families see the work, hear the good news, and buy in. It is a net good.

So, having said all that, I am here to speak to the good that a bill like this represents, and the radical shift in the futures of children when we seek to not push them out, but pull them in with empathy and resources that speak to their needs. As a CEC member, it was exciting to hear educators talk about seeing and educating the whole child, meeting them where they are and bringing them to where the world needs them to be. As a parent, though? Watching a principal take my child, arm in arm, and say “we’re going to get you there together” still brings tears to my eyes. It doesn’t just empower the student, it empowers and, dare I say, comforts the parent. The babies will be alright.

Capping suspensions is necessary, essential, and vital. But it must come with an apparatus prepared to stand in the gaps if we want to keep every child in the classroom. And while I don’t believe I saw a funding mandate with this bill, there at least needs to be a collection of resources empowered and prepared to push in. 

I say to you, with fidelity, that this work has value, and has the capacity to change lives. I implore you, with fidelity, to support it. Our families are counting on you. Thank you.

​Erika Kendall]]><![CDATA[Sounding the Alarm for Local Education Councils]]>Thu, 16 Feb 2023 11:33:06 GMThttps://www.ecc-nyc.org/parent-voices/sounding-the-alarm-for-local-education-councilsBelow opinion piece was published in the Daily News on Saturday February 11, 2023. 

If “all politics is local,” there’s no question that the most important political race in NYC is the 2023 Citywide and Community Education Council (CCEC) Elections.  As a veteran parent leader, I can tell you from firsthand experience that some of the most important policy gains in public education have been made by CCECs. From parent engagement to admissions, CCECs have influenced policy.  While parent leaders do not agree on every issue, it’s important we continue to insist on a seat at the table. After all, what’s more important than the education of our children?

Make no mistake, local school governance is under siege. The current CCEC elections have not received adequate publicity and DOE has abandoned “parent empowerment.” Nepotism has eroded the trust between DOE and parents. Disenfranchisement has led to the mass exodus of Black families, the canary in the coal mine for the health of New York City schools.
 
And yet, local school governance is more important now than ever. We must remember how the perseverance of collective parent advocacy can lead to significant changes. New York City’s  “mayoral control” legislation will sunset in 2024 - strong parent voices will be important in determining how education policy is made and who governs our schools. The Governor's Executive Budget started the new season of political game of monopoly that shifts resources away from public schools to the private sector. What’s important is that our children’s interests remain at the center of the decision-making, and that is why we need parents to run for CCECs.

This is a final call to parents - the deadline for running for a CCEC seat is next Thursday, February 23rd.  The future of New York City schools will be defined by those that join the conversation. Please don’t miss this opportunity to make a difference.


NeQuan C. McLean is the President of Community Education Council #16 in Brooklyn, which
serves Bedford Stuyvesant and Crown Heights.


]]><![CDATA[Statement on Lifting the Charter Cap]]>Fri, 03 Feb 2023 01:59:32 GMThttps://www.ecc-nyc.org/parent-voices/february-02nd-2023​We are deeply troubled by Governor Kathy Hochul’s proposed modification of the charter cap and what it says about her commitment to New York City and our schools. 

Charters do not need to expand—if anything, with individual charter schools experiencing significant enrollment decline of their own, they need to be saved from being cannibalized by their own industry. With over 270 schools in New York City alone, allowing charter expansion at the same time that NYC is facing its own declining enrollment not only threatens the stability of every school in The City, but threatens The City itself.

Unstable education systems are making parents leave the state entirely. Families do not want the “free market” approach to education—they want schools in their communities that meet their children’s needs, and they do not want to have to shop around or “game” a “system” to do it. In three recent high-profile cases, parents mobilized to plainly state they did not want charter expansions in their community. Black and Brown communities in The Bronx and Queens spoke loudly and clearly, and the proposals were pulled—is anyone in Albany listening? 

A revision to the cap like what Governor Hochul is proposing not only flies in the face of what parents have demonstrated they want, but it explicitly undermines it. And, with almost non-existent regulation and weak accountability measures in place, the fabric of public education is slowly destroyed, all while The City’s children suffer. 

We cannot let that stand. We are calling on all of New York City’s representatives to take a stand—to call for not only maintaining the cap, but also the creation of standards that allow poorly performing charters and bad actors to have their charter revoked and the cap reduced. It’s time to let Albany know that the experiment on our children is over.


Fast Facts on Charters in NYC: Did you know…
…that the rent for a charter school in New York City comes out of the city’s education budget? That’s right—New York City is the only municipality in New York State where the rent for charter schools comes out of the New York City Schools Education budget. In the rest of New York State, their rent is paid by the State.

…that New York City is the only municipality in New York State that does not receive supplemental aid from the State for having more than 2% of its students enrolled in charter schools? That’s right—if more than 2% of a school district’s students are enrolled in a charter, the State is supposed to send in money to the district to make up for the loss of students. For some reason, New York City is barred from receiving those funds.

…that waitlists for charter schools are never audited by any government agency to verify any claims of families “waiting for seats?” That’s right—no agency in neither New York City nor New York State can verify any claim about who is actually waiting for seats. Families in New York City Schools can apply for more than 10 schools at a time all on the same form, ranked by choice order—but that isn’t the same as a waitlist. If that’s a wait list, virtually every school in New York City has a waitlist. And even still, high numbers of students receive their first choice of schools—no wait list involved.

…that while charters boast about waitlists, they actually rarely fill the seats in the schools they have? That’s right—charters frequently talk about their proposed enrollment, but aren’t required to share their current enrollment. Dig a little deeper, and you’ll find that even as the charter sector expanded, the enrollment still dwindled.

…that the share of English language learners served by charter schools is 40% lower than the share served by public schools? That’s right—despite charters being densely packed in predominantly Black and brown communities, charters still manage to avoid having to accommodate students who require not just multilingual instruction, but multilingual resources and programming that charters often lack.

…that charter schools were able to get pandemic aid that public schools were ineligible for?  That’s right—charters skirt regulations and call themselves “public” when it is convenient for them and “private” when being public is inconvenient.  Meanwhile public schools are held to one consistent set of rules and regulations and, as public entities, could not apply for the kinds of pandemic aid that charters received.

…that even as Governor Hochul proposes increased per pupil for charter schools, there is no meaningful accounting for how much funding charters receive and spend per pupil compared with public schools, and very limited public disclosure and accounting for how they spend their funds, while public schools provide copious disclosure of every school’s budget in a real-time public interface.


]]><![CDATA[Dear NYC District 2 Superintendent Kelly McGuire]]>Thu, 27 Oct 2022 10:40:57 GMThttps://www.ecc-nyc.org/parent-voices/dear-nyc-district-2-superintendent-kelly-mcguireI'm the parent of two New York City public school children, who count immigrants among their great grandparents, as well as office cleaners and entrepreneurs. We have a long experience with the NYC DOE admissions process. I'm specifically writing about the 2022 Middle School Admissions Process, which impacts 9-and-10-year-old children. My city has become entangled in a proposed return to the sorting and segregation of young school children, which is promoting resource hoarding among economically enhanced parents. I ask that NYC School District 2 not return to the harmful middle school screening process — no school district should —and am writing to shine a light on the misinformation campaign happening in real time over middle school admissions.
 
Emboldened by the negative commentary about New York City public school students from Chancellor David Banks, Community Education Council District 2 (CECD2) passed Resolution 209 to demand the school district do away with its current lottery and reinstate a middle school screening process. I am outraged at their embracement of an outdated model of public education, which reinforces middle school segregation, as well the lack of real facts being utilized in the discussion of who has access to quality childhood education. Lies have been publicized at CECD2 meetings regarding middle school lotteries.  
 
Certain CECD2 members embarked on a misinformation campaign regarding Brooklyn School District 15 (D15), which transitioned to a lottery process for middle school admissions pre-covid. These lies disparaged the accomplishments in D15 and placed D15 in a negative light for having moved away from screens to a lottery. Two examples of the misinformation campaign include: 
     
  • A "MIT STUDY" was referenced in public meetings. CECD2 members claimed that a MIT study showed the D15 admissions process had negative effects on enrollment. Yet the cited study was never a published study! It was a PhD Dissertation, not a peer reviewed study.  Furthermore, the dissertation in fact concludes that the D15 diversity plan decreased socioeconomic and racial segregation in D15 middle schools, as intended.
  • Statements about enrollment loss (a.k.a. white flight/high income flight) after the lottery was instituted were also made about D15. This is fundamentally not true! In reality, District 15 had a charter school relocate to a different building in a different school district, reducing the number of students in D15.  
 
When I reached out to members of CECD15 I learned that something remarkable is happening. Families are moving into their district so as to avoid the harm from a middle school screening process. White and affluent families have continued to choose D15 middle schools, so much so that some of its schools have lost Title One funding. In addition they pointed out DOE Director of Enrollment Research and Policy Andy McClintock has debunked the notion that there was enrollment loss in year one of the D15 plan. 
  
Let's be real about the state of public education in 2022 because CECD2 is not. Children currently enrolled in elementary school have had a severe disruption to educational experiences due to the pandemic. As I write this Covid Exposure Notifications are being emailed to parents like me, and school staff are covering for teachers who tested positive for Covid and are unable to work. This is the new normal and it disrupts education. Now is not the time to use test taking as an admissions process for middle school, nor have there ever been circumstances where this would be acceptable for young learners. There has never been a fair delivery of quality education to all elementary schools. Class sizes are much too large. Our elementary schools do not even have librarians! The list of disparity goes on. 
 
Let's be real about the situation in school District 2. Our local school council, CECD2, has a few members who use the coded language of "advanced learners" to make us believe there is a select group of students somehow being deprived by the middle school lottery. The fact is all 9-and-10-year-olds are advanced learners by the very nature of their rapid brain development at these ages.
 
The reality is Resolution 209 endorses policies rooted in segregation. The goal of this resolution is primarily to segregate as a method to hoard resources, and to maintain a feeling of privilege. CECD2 Resolution 209 aims to sort children by an ability to "bubble in" the answers on tests. Sorting by testing is a useful tactic to move test-prepped children away from the masses, placing them into a few school buildings. This feeds directly into the stereotypes of "good" and "bad" middle schools in a district. It reduces choice for all families in the district due to this stereotype acting in combination with resource hoarding. 
 
"Public school enrollment policy, which determines who has access to specific schools and who is excluded, was established with land use and local funding and control in mind," said Valerie Sterne and Janelle Taylor, Parents' Conceptions of School Enrollment as Property; Poverty & Race journal; September 2022, Volume 31: Number 1. "Claims of entitlement to attendance at a particular school stem in part from ideals of white privilege and the historically racist foundations of school choice." 
 
Now, as a parent of a student in District 2, will I be forced to participate in school segregation? All because of individuals' misguided view of childhood and lies? We should continue segregation here because of elected officials who feel no responsibility to deliver a quality education for all students—even to children in a pandemic? Resolution 209 reminds me of Alabama Governor George Wallace, because his disgusting vision for humanity specifically targeted education in his pro-segregation campaign.
    
When one of my children attended kindergarten, the classroom was called the Ruby Bridges classroom. Ruby Bridges was one of the first black children to integrate a school in New Orleans in 1960. Last year the book Ruby Bridges Goes To School was targeted for book banning in the state of Tennessee. I see the same vile sentiments, and misguided use of our taxpayer dollars, in CECD2 Resolution 209. Hoarding education as an asset not to be shared, putting in place barriers to education, be it at obstacles at the doorway of a school building, or assessment tests and screens, it’s one in the same —school segregation. And I remind you that I feel this way already knowing that our New York City school system is the most segregated public school system in the United States of America. I cannot fathom our city, our school district, continuing to walk in this same direction. 
 
Lies have been spread about middle school lotteries. Please do not bring back middle school screening, and keep in place the middle school lottery. 
 
Sincerely,
Colleen O’Connor-Grant
New York City Public School Parent 

]]><![CDATA[EDUCATION COUNCIL CONSORTIUM DENOUNCES NYC SCHOOLS CHANCELLOR BANKS’ COMMENT]]>Sat, 15 Oct 2022 02:24:04 GMThttps://www.ecc-nyc.org/parent-voices/education-council-consortium-denounces-nyc-schools-chancellor-banks-commentAt a meeting of business leaders, David Banks, the Chancellor of the nation’s largest public school system, spoke about the admissions policies to middle and high schools.  He justified the discriminatory practice of screening 13-year-old children by saying children who “work really hard” should be given access to high schools over students “you have to throw water on their face to get them to go to school every day”  The Chancellor also said: “It’s critically important that if you’re working hard and making good grades, you should not be thrown into a lottery with just everybody.” 

His comment dehumanizes children and shifts the blame for the school system’s failure on children  instead of the adults in charge. The comment perpetuates the myths of meritocracy and deficit narratives thrust upon Black and Latinx children, students living in poverty, students with disabilities, English Language Learners, and students in temporary housing. The Chancellor justified the maintenance of a two-tiered, segregated public school system in a public event after already making disparaging remarks against our disability community. Last month, the Chancellor stated families with students with disabilities were “gaming the system” by using the special education process to provide their children with support and services.  This is unacceptable for a Chancellor who is responsible for educating all of his one million students.

We call upon the Chancellor to examine his biases and assumptions about the majority of the students in the system under his care.  Some children don't have the luxury of having their own bed or getting a good night's sleep, and others may be dealing with the effects of trauma at school or home.  Some schools are so unable to provide additional educational resources to support a child who needs it, the child has tapped out. Instead of devaluing a child who may require extreme measures to go to school, he should be asking why a child hesitates or refuses to go to school in the first place. Instead of defining hard work in the narrowest sense, he should open his eyes to the hard work of our children who remain in a school system that does not prioritize their needs or worse, criminalizes them. We call upon him to find compassion, and provide the same educational opportunities for students who, for a variety of reasons beyond their control, may find that 98 average just out of reach.]]><![CDATA[ECC Statement on Mayoral Control Extension]]>Thu, 02 Jun 2022 10:48:07 GMThttps://www.ecc-nyc.org/parent-voices/ecc-statement-on-mayoral-control-extensionOn Tuesday May 31st, the State legislature released the bill to amend and renew Mayoral control of the city’s school system (A10499/S9459). The bill has some important changes that are responsive to our advocacy efforts, such as enabling CECs to interview a minimum of 3 candidates for superintendency, requiring a CEC representative on the District Leadership Team and adding an elected parent member with a child in a D75 program to every CEC. The bill also extends Mayoral control by two years, rather than four, and tasks the NYS Education Department Commissioner with reviewing and assessing school governance. 


We appreciate tremendously the legislators who communicated with us throughout this process and fought for changes supported by the ECC.  However, we are deeply dismayed by some of the amendments in the bill.  In an effort to be responsive to as many stakeholders as possible, the law seems to have become a hodgepodge of disparate ideas without a cohesive vision for what this system should be.  We share our concerns below. 


Changes to City Board of Education (a.k.a., the Panel for Educational Policy or PEP)
  • Citywide Councils are excluded from electing a representative to the PEP. Citywide Councils were mistakenly left out from this process when the law was amended in 2019.  We have asked for this simple fix for the last three years, yet, instead of making the fix, there will now be five PEP members elected by CECs - one member from each borough - without Citywide Councils. 
  • PEP members will serve one-year terms. This is a terrible idea that will prevent PEP members from developing professionally to become effective policy makers. The annual turn over will create disruptions and instability.  Having all new PEP members every year will likely empower the Chancellor to make decisions without adequate consultation with the PEP. 
  • PEP will have 23 members. This seems unnecessarily large even for the nation’s largest school district.  
  • Only 4 of the 13 Mayoral appointees are required to be parents of children in the public school system. The amended law requires at least one parent who has a child with an Individualized Education Program, one who has a child in a bilingual or English as a Second (sic) Language program and one who has a child in a District 75 program.  We support requiring these representations, but believe the majority of Mayoral appointees should be parents with children in the system.
  • Although PEP members can no longer be removed for voting against the appointing authority’s direction, they can still be removed for “good cause,” a term so undefined that it could mean anything.

Changes to Community District Education Councils (CECs)
  • With the addition of the D75 parent member,  CECs will have 12 members.  Boards that make decisions by a vote normally have an odd number of members to avoid ties.  
  • Every school is now required to have a parent coordinator and principals are required to consult with CECs in hiring of parent coordinators.  Parent coordinators can be important facilitators to parent engagement at the school level and can have a significant impact on parents’ experience with the school system.  However, this particular change came out of the left field.  If a school has an active PA/PTA, then it should be the PA/PTA, with the Title 1 PAC, that is involved in hiring the parent coordinator.  CEC should only be consulted if a school does not have an active PA/PTA.  We also believe it would be more meaningful for the CECs to have a role in hiring of the principals. The law is also unclear what high school principals must do when hiring a parent coordinator since the Citywide Council on High Schools is not mentioned.  
  • There will be two non-voting student members, who must be high school seniors. We welcome the addition of another student member but believe juniors should be eligible to serve. 

Powers & duties of PEP and CECs 
We requested enhancing powers and duties of the PEP and CECs to create more checks and balances.  Unfortunately very little has changed. Here are some changes that were not included in the amended law. 
  • Requiring the Chancellor to seek approval from the Panel for Educational Policy (PEP) on policies and initiatives. Most of the controversial decisions in recent years - G&T, admissions, school reopening, AP for All, the Bronx Plan, etc. - did not require a PEP vote.  In fact the PEP was not even consulted before these initiatives and plans were announced. 
  • Requiring the DOE to provide data and information upon request by CCECs and elected officials without going through the FOIL process. CCECs do not always receive data and information in a timely manner and sometimes must resort to submitting a FOIL request which may take over a year. Yet, CCECs are mandated by law to review educational programs and student outcomes and issue reports. 
  • Giving CECs authority to approve or reject proposals on significant changes to school utilization.  PEP now must respond within 30 days if it votes against a CEC resolution on significant changes to school utilization.  However, CECs are not required to pass a resolution on these proposals. 
  • Clarifying school zoning to include school phase-out, closures, grade expansions and grade truncations.  These changes affect school attendance zones and we believe they must be approved by CECs.  

Task Force to develop a democratic alternative to Mayoral control
We are pleased that there will be a process for a thorough review of the school governance.  The law tasks the NYS Education Department Commissioner to review and assess school governance and to contract with an institution of higher education in doing this research.  It is unclear if there is any funding set aside for this purpose.  The Commissioner is also required to hold one hearing per borough to engage the rights holders. 


We hope the Commissioner will create an advisory committee, working with the institution of higher education.  Public hearings are welcome and necessary, but they are rarely the appropriate platform for thoughtful and in-depth dialogue among rights holders to consider and vet ideas.  

​Conclusion
This amendment process illustrated why we needed a task force.  Some of the changes made are not in alignment with the realities of the roles in which we serve. As we feared, legislators ran out of time to have thoughtful and deliberate discussions regarding which immediate tweaks should be implemented to create more checks and balances, and which should be decided after the thorough vetting of a commission.  We will continue to advocate for a better school governance system because this is about our children and the future of our City.

]]><![CDATA[We need you writing and calling your state legislators!]]>Tue, 17 May 2022 10:23:08 GMThttps://www.ecc-nyc.org/parent-voices/we-need-you-writing-and-calling-your-state-legislatorsFirst watch this video to understand why Mayoral control is undemocratic. 
The State legislature is poised to extend Mayoral control for three years. Please send emails and call your legislators today and every day for the next week. Please keep sending letters by clicking here.
After you email, please call your legislators and tell them:
  1. Do not extend Mayoral control for three years (one year is enough)
  2. Give us a Task Force to develop an alternative
You can do this at night and leave a message.
Tweet and tag your legislators. Post on Facebook and Instagram. Tell your friends to take action.  Here is the toolkit.

]]><![CDATA[G&T or SEM - Fight for Equity]]>Sun, 24 Apr 2022 19:49:38 GMThttps://www.ecc-nyc.org/parent-voices/gt-or-sem-fight-for-equityOn April 14, 2022, the Mayor and the Chancellor released their plan for the Gifted & Talented program. We are deeply disappointed by their lack of commitment to create an equitable and anti-racist school system as evidenced in their willingness to continue segregating students. The Mayor claims he is “expanding equity” and how this new plan will end parents fighting for a small number of seats. The Chancellor says he is moving to “end the era of scarcity” by offering two entry points: Kindergarten and third grade. These declarations ring hollow to the vast majority of families whose children will not be served by the G&T program.


The numbers simply do not support the claim of equity or ending scarcity. There are more than 70,000 students in each elementary grade in NYC. Kindergarten G&T seats of 2,500 amount to about 3% of the Kindergarteners. For third grade, the plan calls for identifying the top 10% of second graders in every school and inviting them to apply. The plan also adds 1,000 seats to the third grade G&T program. If we assume the number of G&T seats is relatively stable as it moves up the grade from Kindergarten, then the total number of G&T seats for third grade will be approximately 3,500 - about 5% of the total third graders and half of eligible students. We want to know how a segregated program serving 5% of the children is equitable.


The DOE press release states the “expansion is the result of the DOE’s engagement with parents and community stakeholders.” Considering the very small number of families served by the G&T program, we are left wondering with whom the DOE engaged. We know who was NOT engaged in the conversation.


Black, brown, immigrant and low income parents have been forced to fight for crumbs for decades. Parents of children with disabilities are not even given crumbs in the current system of segregation. We must not be duped into believing that adding a few more crumbs to a slightly larger pool of historically marginalized students is equity. The ECC supported the School Diversity Advisory Group’s recommendation to implement a School-wide Enrichment Model (see below) to replace the current segregated G&T program. The DOE, under the de Blasio administration, was in the process of developing Brilliant NYC as the new program (the DOE website for Brilliant NYC has been taken down). Yet, the new administration has disregarded this equity work and is rolling back what little progress we have made.

We must continue to fight for equity and advocate for the School-wide Enrichment Model (SEM), which is widely implemented as both an enrichment program used as an alternative to gifted and talented programs and as a magnet theme/enrichment approach for all students. The purpose of the SEM is to develop the strengths and talents of all students.

The SEM provides enriched learning experiences and higher learning standards for all children through three goals:

  • developing talents in all children,
  • providing a broad range of advanced-level enrichment experiences for all students, and
  • providing advanced follow-up opportunities for young people based on their strengths and interests.
The SEM focuses on enrichment for all students through high levels of engagement and the use of enjoyable and challenging learning experiences that are constructed around students’ interests, learning styles, and preferred modes of expression.

Many schools in the City are using this model, either as all day cluster class events, across a whole grade, or on rotating semesters.

If you would like to learn more, watch this SEM presentation (start at 11: 15:00) and read about Ms. Halley Potter's Strategies for School Leaders and Educators. With questions about SEM, you can reach out to Halley at potter@tcf.org]]>