THIS, is a very hot topic around New York City right now. Searing hot, like a blow torch. The law that grants the New York City Mayor absolute control of the public schools is going to expire on June 30th unless the New York State Legislature renews it. It’s pretty much a sure thing that it will be renewed, but precisely how and in what form is the matter at hand.
There has been quite the public relations effort nationally and internationally on behalf of Mayor Bloomberg and Schools Chancellor Joel Klein to sing the praise of the current version of school governance in the Big Apple. And, just last week we have heard from Arne Duncan, Secretary of Education, that the law should be renewed as is, for New York City is making great progress thanks to this form of mayoral control of the schools.
In today’s New York Times, Diane Ravitch takes up this issue head on, looking closely at the record and history. This is truly a David and Goliath battle, when you think of Diane, as an individual without a staff, up against Michael Bloomberg, who has a staff member or two.
Click here to read Diane’s opinion piece in today’s New York Times.
But before you do, I’ll offer this one thought for the moment about mayoral control of schools, particularly the kind we have here in New York City. I never liked the idea of creating law and policy based upon an individual personality.It’s a bad idea. In many ways, I think some people like mayoral control of schools in New York City because they like and trust Michael Bloomberg. So, they fight for it because they’re fighting for Bloomberg.
What if the next Mayor were one of the recent corrupt or inept politicians who have taken a fall in recent years? Those checks and balances Diane Ravitch argues for, for which the current administration abhors, may be just the thing that prevents an absolute disaster. Do people really want absolute control, with virtually no checks and balances in the hands of one person, and the only chance for real accountability is by either having them removed from office, or not voting for them if and when they run for election?
Plus, there’s something that I find hard to swallow in the argument that if you change the law governing the schools, if you tweak it one bit, the whole thing will come crumbling down. No hyperbole here, I was on a panel at NYU looking at school governance and that was the centerpiece of what a representative from the mayor’s office posited.
Okay, here’s the link again, to the David, in this David and Goliath of David and Goliath battles.
