Testimony

Dr. Leo Casey

Vice President, Academic High Schools

United Federation of Teachers

before the

Education Committee

Of The

New York City Council

April 6, 2009

2Good afternoon, Chairman Jackson and members of this distinguished committee. My name isLeo Casey, and I am Vice President of Academic High Schools for the United Federation of Teachers(UFT). Thank you for this opportunity to testify before you on this important topic.Twenty years ago, the late UFT and AFT President Al Shanker laid out a compelling vision for anew and different type of public school. Freed from stultifying state and district bureaucracy and micro-management, this public school would be an educational laboratory, an incubator of innovativeapproaches to teaching and learning which would be shared with other public schools. The men andwomen who worked in this school could be empowered as educational professionals to use their skills,knowledge and experience to provide the highest quality education for their students. The school itself would have organic ties to the community it served. Shanker called this new type of public school a“charter school.”Today, we in the United Federation of Teachers remain deeply committed to this originalShanker vision of a public “charter school.” And when it comes to this vision of charter schools, wedon’t simply talk the talk. We walk the walk: we have started two charter schools of our own in EastNew York, and we have partnered with Green Dot to start a third charter school in the South Bronx. Weproudly represent educators in nine charter schools in New York City, and our national union, theAmerican Federation of Teachers, represents many more across the country.The original Shanker conception of a public “charter school” was not ideological and political,but educational. In recent years, however, political ideologues opposed to public education and toteacher unions have sought to turn the charter school concept into its opposite, using it as a vehicle toprivatize public education and undermine teacher voice and professionalism. To this end, these politicalideologues divisively pit school against school, parent against parent, charter against district, using thepolitics of conflict. That we will always oppose, as educators and as citizens. Our democracy dependsupon public schools, both district and charter, which unite us as Americans.What is at issue here is not the existence of charter schools, but their character. Charter schoolsmust be “public schools” in the fullest meaning of the term, dedicated to education for the public goodand in our common purposes as American citizens. They must serve all and bring us together. Theymust be a force for improving public education.For the promise of charter schools to be fulfilled, we believe that they must rest on a foundationof six pillars:1.

QUALITY: Charter schools must provide a high quality education and meet the sameeducational standards, serving the same students, as district public schools.

32.

INNOVATION: Charter schools should be places of educational experimentation, developingand testing out new approaches to teaching and learning which can then be disseminated amongall public schools.3.

REAL CHOICE: Charter schools should supplement, not supplant, existing public schools. Theyshould provide students and their families with more choices among quality public schools,including a choice to attend a traditional neighborhood school. It is important here to maintain abalance between neighborhood schools and charter schools, such as we have advocated for years.4.

EQUITY: Charter schools and other public schools must be treated equitably, provided withequivalent resources and supports. No student should be educationally shortchanged because theschool he or she attends is not in political favor.5.

VOICE: Charter schools must welcome the participation of parents and teachers in importanteducational decisions, and the right of charter school staff to organize and bargain collectivelymust be recognized.6.

ACCOUNTABILITY: Charter schools must be accountable, in public and transparent ways, forstudent performance, admissions and enrollment policies and how public funds are used, asrigorously as district schools are held accountable.We do not simply advocate these principles for all charter schools; we live by them in the charterschools we have sponsored and in our representation of teachers in other charter schools. Theeducational records of our charter schools demonstrate that far from being an impediment to learning,real parent and teacher involvement in school governance makes schools better. Our ability to providesuch features as a longer school day and intensive literacy and numeracy instruction for our studentswithout placing impossible time and work demands on educators demonstrates not only that schools canmake such innovations, but that they can accomplish that in sustainable ways which can be replicated onscale. The school-based contract we have negotiated for Amber Charter School, and are now negotiatingat other charter schools where we represent the educational staff such as Green Dot, show that collectivebargaining can take place in a way that respects both the uniqueness of a charter school and theprofessionalism of the educators who perform all of the essential work within it. Our record is a publicrecord.

What Path For New York City Charter Schools?

Recent developments with respect to New York City charter schools have raised seriousconcerns for many in the public education community. An increasingly obvious strategy is being