Community Education Council 24

P.S. 91 Room 119 68-10 Central Avenue

Glendale, New York 11385
Phone: 718.418.8160 / Fax: 718.418.8168/ Cec24@schools.nyc.gov

New York City Department of Education

Nick Comaianni Dmytro Fedkowskyj Lelani Bomani Ernest Cury Marge Kolb
President 1St Vice President 2nd Vice President Treasurer Secretary

Council Members Department of Education Region 4 Officials

Cecilia Chavez Charles Amundsen
Bill Kregler Regional Superintendent
Deborah Tscherne Catherine M. Powis
Peter Vercessi Deputy Regional Superintendent and
Community Superintendent District 24

FINAL BOARD APPROVED MINUTES

Minutes of Calendar Meeting
May 22, 2007
PS 58, Maspeth, New York

1) Call to order and Roll Call -- The Calendar meeting convened at PS 58 at 7:00
PM

Roll Call – Present

• Lelani Bomani
• Nick Comaianni
• Ernest Curry
• Marge Kolb
• Bill Kregler
• Debbie Tscherne
• Peter Vercessi

Roll Call – Late

• Dmytro Fedkowskyj (Excused)

Roll Call – Absent

• Cecilia Chavez

Also present: Sandy Brawer, Executive Director of Operations Regions 4 and 5;

Joanne Scichilone – Special Education Advocate and Tim Boyce Divisional Director,
NYC School Quality Review Team
2) Approval of Minutes – Nick Comaianni motioned to approve the minutes of April
24, 2007. Debbie Tscherne seconded; roll was called and minutes were unanimously
approved.

3) Report of the President

Nick Comaianni stated that he was unhappy with the busing system which he
experienced first hand while on a field trip with his son from IS 119 to the NY Museum
of Natural History. He stated that the time actually spent at the museum was not enough
due to the fact that the school bus had to be back at a specific time to take children home
from school at various times. He suggested that in order to add to the quality of field
trips the Office of Pupil Transportation should keep buses specifically for field trips
during the course of the school year in so that the students can have quality time once
they arrive at a field trip location.

4) Report of the Community Superintendent

Ms. Powis stated that NYC Principals have complete selecting the school support
organizations that they have determined will help their schools succeed. The DOE has
now given every school the power to choose a support partner that best meets the
educational needs of its students. Since January schools have been learning about the 14
school support organizations comprised of empowerment support organizations in which
principals affiliate into networks of higher learning support teams. Twenty-five of the
thirty-two schools in District 24 chose ICI, which is the Integrated Curriculum Support
Organization, the CEO is Julie Chen, one school chose, Core Knowledge and the CEO is
Kathy Passion and 6 schools are empowerment schools.

Ms. Powis stated that Mayor Bloomberg announced that the 4 year graduation rate for
NYC has reached 60%; the highest since the city had begun calculated the rate in 1986.
The State Education Department, using a different methodology put the city’s graduation
rate at 50%, still a 14% rise since 2004. Ms. Powis stated that under either formula the
city has made impressive gains with its graduation rate.

Ms. Powis stated PS/IS 87 was honored by the State Education Department at the
Learning for Leaders ceremony for Title 1 high performing middle and high schools.

Ms. Powis stated that the Department of Education will conduct informational workshops
to help parents understand the No Child Left Behind Act and Title 1. She announced
session dates.

Ms. Powis closed her report by stating that the DOE has invited all middle school and
high school parents to complete surveys.

Marge Kolb asked Ms. Powis which schools were the new empowerment schools to
which Ms. Powis replied that the new empowerment schools were PS 89 and PS 128.
Ms Kolb also asked Ms. Powis if she knew what would be happening to her office in
light of the reconstruction to which Ms. Powis stated that she believed the office and staff
would remain in place. Ms. Kolb then Ms. Powis to explain what her oversight of the
empowerment schools would be to which Ms. Powis responded that currently she meets
with the principals of empowerment schools twice a year to review their goals and
objectives. There will probably be more involvement next year as the roles become more
clarified. Ms. Kolb asked if her relationship with the principals of empowerment schools
would be the same as with principals of non empowerment schools to which Ms. Powis
stated that she was not yet sure. Ms. Kolb then asked how to find out what kind of
programs are available to children district wide under the new reconstruction specific to
special education to which Ms. Powis stated that evaluations will take place in the same
way as they do now.

Bill Kregler asked if Ms. Powis would explain the 10% differential between city and state
graduation rate statistics to which Ms. Powis stated that she would get back to the council
as to how the city specifically calculated the graduation rate.

5) Guest Speaker – Joanne Scichilone, Special Education Advocate

Ms. Scichilone stated that on Wednesday May 22, 2007 the Special Education Parent
Advocacy group had a meeting on May 22, 2007 at Chambers Street. Deputy Chancellor
Alonso was present as well as Martine Guerrier discussing feedback from the advocacy
group on ways to improve the responsiveness of schools to parents with children who
have disabilities. They were very receptive and all participated actively in the discussion.
We also discussed the development of a central call center for parents of children with
disabilities. Many other things were discussed especially the concerns that parent
coordinators have not been trained in special education needs. The DOE is taking
training into consideration. There was also a long discussion of the backpack CEC
notices and this request will also be considered by the DOE. Ms. Scichilone stated that
most CSE offices and function according to the DOE will remain the same. Ms.
Scichilone closed her report by imploring the public to keep a folder and meticulous
notes as to their correspondences with the DOE.

Tim Boyce Divisional Director, NYC School Quality Review Team

Mr. Boyce stated that school quality reviews have been conducted for the past 12 months
in NYC. We started with British reviewers going into 99 pilot schools across the city and
it was extremely successful. As a result of this the City of NY engaged us to review ever
school in the city. We have been very well received. We grade school according to their
ability to use data to make decisions in how they run their school and thus the education
they give your children. It is the city’s opinion that those schools that use such data
accurately are the schools that are most successful. We grade on a 3 point scale
proficient, substantially sufficient and undeveloped. This is an on going program that
will continue in the city. The name of the company that is undertaking these reviews is
called Cambridge Review and is based in England. We were chosen because we have
enormous expertise in the area of school improvement. We have had very positive
feedback from principals regarding how to achieve objectives and how to meet the
individual needs of each student. We are also discussing with the DOE a better way to
review District 79 and District 75 schools which we feel is a challenge under the current
process. The city has asked us to do an in-depth analysis of District 75 and in order to do
so we would need more time. 54/9
Marge Kolb asked what the data was made up of to which Mr. Boyce stated that the
Cambridge Review uses the entire range of data from all academic subject matter. Ms.
Kolb stated that next year students will get assessed every 4 to 6 weeks in reading and
math, how is one supposed to analyze that data in that time frame before the next
assessment comes up and individualize the education plan of children in need to which
Mr. Boyce stated that it happens and good schools are able to do it very successfully on a
whole range of subject areas including science and social studies assessments.

Sandy Brawer, Executive Director of Operations Regions 4 and 5

Mr. Brawer started his presentation regarding Fair Student Funding* by stating that
changes in the new structure is that local level decisions will be made by individual
schools, there will be accountability and we at the DOE feels the concept of Fair Student
Funding (FSF) is an exciting new concept. FSF is funding that will be spent on the
students based on certain criteria and will follow each student, that is to say schools will
no longer be funded but students will. The Mayor came out with a plan in January and
the Chancellor had a hundred meetings regarding FSF and the DOE heard your
comments loud and clear. FSF will empower principals, we’re offering additional
resources to every school and we will combine 5.3 billion dollars in the budget, with
fewer restrictions, and more dollars. We will raise up the under-funded schools. We are
also making budgets more transparent. With the new FSF of the tax levy money 80% of
it will be spent the way each individual school decides and of the total budget 60% will
be spent at the free will of the principals. FSF is about helping all schools, and not
hurting any schools. The DOE is looking at progress reports to see where students are,
where they need to be and how they will get there. This, together with the quality reviews
and Parent Surveys and in conjunction with FSF principals will be in a better position to
spend money how it is need most for the individual student. It allows the school to create
a better structural plan. It also allows each school to be accountable for such things as
test scores and the students’ academic performance. FSF means that money follows the
child and is based upon particular criteria for every student that is to say; every student
will receive the same funding base. Then there are supplemental obligations that may
change the base funding depending on the needs of the child, for example, an ELL child
or a special education child will get differential funding or a higher allocation of funds.
FSF allocation criteria are broken down into three groups: K-5, 6-8 and 9-12 and two
categories: poverty and achievement. There is also funding for academic intervention. It
is broken down into categories because in the achievement category there is only testing
above grade 3 and so for K-2 there is nothing to differentiate allocation of dollars and so
studies show that 90% of children in those grades under poverty level do not perform
well. The poverty level of any school that begins under 3rd grade will get extra funding.
If a school begins at grade 3 the FSF will be based on test scores. This budget is all about
rewarding success and not rewarding failure.
Mr. Brawer took questions regarding Fair Student Funding from the public.

*For copies of the presentation given by Mr. Brawer please contact the Community
Education Council District 24 office at 718.418.8160.

6) Resolutions—None

7) Report of the Committees

Marge Kolb, Chair of the Curriculum Committee commented that the parents who
initiated the law suit regarding the cell phone ban in schools have decided to appeal the
court decision to uphold the ban.

8) Old Business – None

9) New Business – None

10) Public Agenda Session – None

11) Adjournment

Nick Comaianni thanked Jeanie Bassini of D30 for attending the meeting. Mr.
Comaianni then motioned to adjourn, Bill Kregler seconded; meeting was adjourned at
10:30 pm.