Sunday, October 2, 2011

Denied Use of their Building Harold Washington College Community Holds Public Forum Critical of Reinvention

On September 15th, Harold Washington College's (HWC) faculty, staff, students and their communities got together to have a frank discussion about the harmful effects of the Reinvention. They named their forum  the HWC Community Roundtable on Reinvention. Even though the meeting was exclusively co-sponsored by the unions representing the faculty and professional, clerical and technical workers of the college and by the college's faculty council they could not hold their event at the facilities of the college. The organizers of the forum were forced to hold it at the Chicago Temple, several blocks away from the college, because the CCC administration cancelled their room reservation in a crass act of censorship. Fortunately, Labor Beat recorded the event and produced an edited version. We reproduce below Labor Beat's announcement and link to their video.

PEARL







HWC Community Roundtable on Reinvention

Watch it on bliptv


The controversy surrounding the city-wide so-called Reinvention plan for City Colleges of Chicago continues and grows. On Sept. 15, 2011 a meeting was planned to take place at Harold Washington College (part of the CCC system), sponsored by the AFT Local 1600 chapter at HWC. The administration at HWC blocked this by claiming that, since the student's families and community were invited, it was not a sanctioned CCC event, and demanded a $500 vendor fee. The meeting was moved to another location in the Loop -- the Chicago Temple. The meeting that took place yielded a rich discussion and clarification of the concerns facing faculty, staff, and students that the Reinvention scheme will end the school's traditions as a portal to higher education for low-income and minority students, dismantle faculty and staff rights and income, and deepen cuts in the name of the business model. The meeting was edited down to 27 min. for Labor Beat.

Speaking (excerpts) are: Floyd Bednarz, President of CCC Labor Organizing Committee at HWC; Eric Taylor, HWC Data Processing Lab Manager, AFT 1600; Delores Withers, President of AFT 1708; Rosie Banks, President of HWC Faculty Council; Amy Rosenquist, Adjunct Faculty, CCCLOC NEA (Adjunct Faculty Union); Héctor Reyes, Vice Chair of HWC Chapter, AFT 1600. Also included in this show are some excerpts of the audience discussion that followed.


 Rosie Banks, Pres. of HWC Faculty Council speaking as panel listens.


Héctor Reyes, Vice Chair of HWC Chapter of AFT 1600 speaking.

Photos: Labor Beat

Produced by Labor Beat. Labor Beat is a CAN TV Community Partner. Labor Beat is a non-profit 501(c)(3) member of IBEW 1220. Views are those of the producer Labor Beat. For info: mail@laborbeat.orgwww.laborbeat.org. 312-226-3330. For other Labor Beat videos, visit Google Video, YouTube, or blip.tv and search "Labor Beat".

Labor Beat has regular cable slots in Chicago, Evanston, Rockford, Urbana, IL; St. Louis, MO; Philadelphia, PA; Princeton, NJ; and Rochester, NY. For more detailed information, send us a request at mail@laborbeat.org

About Labor Beat and how you can help:

Visit Labor Beat's YouTube Channel:

Visit Labor Beat's facebook page:

To order this dvd from Labor Beat (Committee for Labor Access):
(Put title of DVD, "HWC Community Roundtable on Reinvention" in Description box. Put $15 in Unit Price box. $20 for Canada, and $25 for other countries outside the U.S. NTSC format only.)

Saturday, September 10, 2011

Federal Data System Used By CCC to Justify Reinvention Full of Holes

The journal Inside Higher Education reported that the federal Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) is full of gaps that give an incomplete picture of the performance of community colleges.  This is the same data system that the CCC administration used as its main source to declare the CCC system a failure, providing it with the cover to go ahead with the whirlwind of Reinvention. No wonder that, while the faculty and staff have worked hard for years to help students advance academically, they have felt betrayed and offended by the branding of their efforts as a failure.

As revealing as this report is, the comments entered by people from various colleges around the country provide an even deeper insight into how short IPEDS falls in reflecting the actual positive educational consequences of the work carried out by community colleges. We reproduced some of these comments below the article.

PEARL




Success by Another Name

September 7, 2011
WASHINGTON – A committee tasked by the Education Department with strengthening how the government measures the success of community colleges last week issued its draft report of recommendations, which will be discussed here today at the committee's finalmeeting.
The 20-page report from the Committee on Measures of Student Success calls for community colleges and states to collect and disclose more information about graduation rates, student learning and employment. This reporting should include more voluntarily released data, the committee said, as well as more thorough compliance with current federal disclosure requirements.
“Measures of student success need to more accurately reflect the comprehensive mission of two-year institutions and the diversity of students that these institutions serve,” the report said. “For example, current graduation rates do not adequately reflect these institutions’ multiple missions and diverse populations.”
Key recommendations include a call for part-time, degree-seeking students at community colleges to be counted toward federally reported graduation and transfer rates (they currently are not), and for more precise counting of students who transfer out of community colleges, such as lateral transfers to other two-year institutions. The current federal rate counts only first-time, full-time students -- a population that excludes the majority of students at many community colleges and significant numbers of students at most community colleges.
Another recommendation of the panel is that the federal definition take better account of remedial students.
The 14-member panel, which includes community college leaders and independent higher education policy experts, had internal disagreements as it worked to finish the report in previous meetings, which were open to the public. Those debates reflected broader discussions over measuring quality at community colleges, with committee members from colleges pushing back on what they see as burdensome reporting requirements while policy researchers called for more complete data.
The report gives a nod to worries about more red tape, noting that the “need for more information must be balanced by an understanding of the potential administrative and financial burdens” of collecting such data. And in many instances the report calls for the Education Department to lend a helping hand or do most of the work itself.
For example, the committee says the department should offer technical support to community colleges to help them meet disclosure requirements. It should also seek improved coordination between existing national and state databases to improve a “fragmented, incomplete picture of student success.”
Comparable Measures
Community colleges face tremendous political pressure to increase their graduation rates and better measure academic quality, most notably from the Obama administration and the Lumina and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundations. The colleges are also struggling with tight state budgets and, at most campuses, increasing enrollments.
The national graduation rate of community colleges, using current federal definitions, is 32 percent. But while community colleges are often criticized for this low number, the report said it is also a misleading, incomplete measure that does not account for the complex flow of students into and out of institutions.
The committee’s recommendations seek to create a fuller, more accurate view of graduation rates. That requires building upon data that are already reported by community colleges, according to the report, and the development of new and alternative methods of measuring student success.
Joshua Wyner of the Aspen Institute College Excellence Program, which is creating a list of what it considers top community colleges, praised the committee’s efforts. “We need comparable measures of student success to understand what is working on community college campuses,” Wyner said.
The institute has worked extensively with graduation rates and other data in the federal Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. Wyner said the information from community colleges in the system can be “spotty,” with many institutions not entering accurate data about transfer rates. Better self-reporting is needed, Wyner said, and the committee’s report will help better define success at community colleges.
“We’ve had so little conversation about that in concrete ways,” he says.


Comments on Success by Another Name

  • what is success at a community college
  • Posted by Mary Scott , Professor Anatomy and Physiology at Labette Community College on September 7, 2011 at 8:15am EDT
  • I have heard this before and internally we have discussed trying to keep track of our students and encouraging them to leave here with a degree. However, the wide scope of the community college is being missed. How do you count the part-time students who may be retired or already have a degree but looking for enrichment? A 65 year old who comes to take an art class and creates beautiful work has no plans to seek an art degree. Yet, there has been a positive outcome. Workers come to take computer classes to upgrade skills. Some may eventually decide on a return to college; but yet again, a provided service is being ignored. Students do not like a local university's teachers and feel they get a stronger background here. So they drive 30-60 minutes to take chemistry or anatomy and physiology needed to apply for nursing programs and medical schools. Their successful graduation and reaching of terminal degrees is due in part to the community college. How are you going to credit that. My daughter worked as a workstudy one year in a local nursing school. She was shocked to find so many of the students recognized her and asked if I was her mother. A significant portion of the class had taken my A&P class although their first choice was a different nursing program. How do you give my college the credit for that?
  • A good idea, but not just for community colleges
  • Posted by LatinoProf on September 7, 2011 at 8:31am EDT
  • This report shows the weakness in the current IPEDS reporting, which counts only those students with no other college experience than the college in the report. Transfer students (a significant population at community colleges, and at for-profit and non-profit colleges and universities) are ignored by IPEDS. These recommendations should apply equally to all sectors of higher education, be they community colleges, public universities, for-profit colleges & unviersities or non-profit private colleges and universities.
  • Transfer Reporting is 4 year Responsibility, not CC
  • Posted by Dan Nannini , Transfer Center Director at Santa Monica College on September 7, 2011 at 12:30pm EDT
  • To share the reporting responsiblity as it relates to transfer, the receiving institution, not the transferring institution, should be charged with this information. Only then will you have a better idea of where students go and know what they are doing. And those reports need to be generated each term. And baccalaureatte recipients that have any community college units should be reported. Any institution receing federal funds should be required to provide this data. All of these data points will give a better measure on how community colleges contribute to degree advancement. We need to quit trying to define everything as "transfer" or "not transfer."
  • Success?
  • Posted by DocV on September 7, 2011 at 1:00pm EDT
  • @Mary Scott - I agree with you that a definition needs to be placed on "success" which in this case would primarily and simply be completion of a degree and gainful employment based on the education. Many of the students that you describe - the 65 year old..., the transient student, the student seeking to improve skills, etc. - would not be included because they would be counted as "non-degree seekers" or one-time/term only enrollees. This information is captured during the admission phase to help differentiate the students and to determine eligibility for federal funds.

    Essentially, your school would not get credit for these because (1) the student's intent is NOT to earn a degree; and (2) if they are enrolled at another college it should be counted in the home school's numbers so as not to double-count from both schools and skew the data.

    The goal appears to be to determine if the government is getting back what it pays for through federal funds and to make sure schools that are training students are creating an educated and stable workforce.

    If one accepts the goal of having "5 million more community college GRADUATES by the year 2020" the data must be collected to support this endeavor.
  • progress
  • Posted by arthur m cohen , emeritus professor of education at ucla on September 7, 2011 at 2:30pm EDT
  • Slowly, gradually, haltingly, the system moves toward understanding what the community colleges contribute to American education. This has been a decades-long process, and it's not over yet. But any progress is certainly welcome.
  • Funding is a complicating factor
  • Posted by John , Associate Professor, Higher Education at Widener University on September 7, 2011 at 4:45pm EDT
  • Funding may inadvertently contribute to the problem of which students to "count" for the purposes of success. Some community colleges, which are funded on an FTE basis of students enrolled in degree programs, are compelled to place all students in a program, regardless of the student's intent to graduate or transfer (the 65 year old example from above might be placed into an art program or liberal studies program). Colleges may be reluctant to have students in a non-degree or non-matriculated status since this may hurt their funding. Therefore, in some states, the funding formula for community colleges may need to change to enhance better accounting for "success".

Monday, September 5, 2011

Reinvention: Local Case of the National Scheme to Degrade Community Colleges

Back in early June, a significant piece of news was lost in the midst of all the commotion created by the naming of the new colleges’ presidents. On June 8, The Chicago Tribune reported about a group of Chicago business notables who were appointed to the board of President Obama’s Skills for America’s Future (SAF). (http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-06-08/business/chibrkbus-obama-picks-notable-chicago-execs-for-board-of-employment-program-20110608_1_manufacturing-jobs-manufacturing-sector-execs) SAF is part of a plan of the Obama administration to radically shift the focus of community colleges to perform direct training of students for an alleged abundant supply of “high-skills” manufacturing jobs that will materialize in the future. The Obama administration insists on calling this training higher education.

What is notable about these Chicago business notables is that half of them are part of the “Civic Leaders” who are the real directors (as in who really chooses the priorities) of the Reinvention. By picking these folks for his SAF board Obama has confirmed (as if we needed more confirmation) that Chicago is the laboratory for his administration’s schemes regarding education, and other critical social and labor issues.
The transformation of Community Colleges into the servants of industry
The SAF is really the brainchild of the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM). According to My San Antonio.com (http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/politics/article/More-work-training-urged-for-community-colleges-1416027.php), during a speech at the Northern Virginia Community College “Obama announced Wednesday [June 8, 2011] that the National Association of Manufacturers will help 500,000 students get post-secondary certificates in the next five years to help them find work in the manufacturing sector.” (emphasis ours.) Notice how the terms switch to post-secondary education, which is acquiring the meaning of anything you do after obtaining your high school diploma, and not necessarily higher education, which is traditionally associated with the completion of bachelor’s and graduate degrees.
Furthermore, on June 30th, the American Association of Community Colleges (AACC) announced the formation of the 21st-Century Commission on the Future of Community Colleges (http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/new-national-commission-to-help-reshape-the-future-of-community-colleges-124771478.html). According to PRNewswire, this is only the third time in the 110-year history of community colleges that their mission has been reevaluated with the intention of radically changing its direction. The previous two times were when,
“the Truman Commission (1947) challenged higher education to provide universal access based on its belief that then-junior colleges could broaden and further democratize their mission by becoming community colleges. Four decades later, the AACC Futures Commission (1988) set forward a reform agenda designed to strengthen the comprehensive mission the Truman Commission originally proposed.”
Thus in 1947, and then with increased emphasis in 1988 the community colleges mission was transformed to increase the accessibility of students to (democratize) higher education. The objectives of this third change in mission of the community colleges reverts these longstanding goals. It attempts to redirect the goals of the student body to narrowly tailored job skills to fit within the schemes of what remains in the U.S. of the manufacturing industry. PRNewswire reported that
“Over the next 10 months, the 21st-Century Commission will meet in person and virtually to examine the community college mission in light of current economic realities. President Obama has challenged community colleges to educate an additional 5 million students with degrees, certificates or other credentials by 2020.”
And that AACC President Walter G. Bumphus said “We do not intend to be timid or superficial in confronting the hard choices and need for innovative thinking our leaders face in the coming decades…”
The hard choices are the restructuring of the traditional mission of the community colleges into one that redirects students away from higher education into job training programs. The reader doesn’t need to take our word for it. The June 6th, 2011 issue of the Wall Street Journal (http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10001424052702304563104576355230583773702-lMyQjAxMTAxMDAwNjEwNDYyWj.html) transparently describes NAM’s agenda:
“The National Association of Manufacturers is leading a drive, partly funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation [that selfless Reinvention “partner”], to establish standardized curricula at community colleges across the U.S. with the goal of preparing students to qualify for certification in industrial skills ranging from welding to cutting metal and plastics. The association isn't pushing for an end to liberal-arts education, but has said bright students should be encouraged to consider alternatives that lead directly to jobs.(emphasis ours)
The business-oriented model infecting all of Higher Education
One could consider Obama’s and his business partners’ plans for community colleges ominous enough. However, this destruction of the humanistic and humane values and priorities of education is battling its way into four-year colleges and universities. For example, the flagship institution of higher education in Texas, the University of Texas at Austin (UTA) is under direct attack by Gov. Rick Perry. Perry wants to subject UTA and other Texas state universities to a business regime in which all aspects of education are treated as commodities or business costs. In an article titled “U. of Texas Adopts Plan to Publish Performance Data on Professors and Campuses,” The Chronicle of Higher Education describes the following (http://chronicle.com/article/article-content/128800/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+chronicle%2Fnews+%28The+Chronicle%3A+Top+Stories%29):
1. “The plan unveiled on Thursday designates money to create a "dashboard"—an interactive, online database—to give students, parents, and legislators access to detailed measures of departments' and colleges' productivity and efficiency. Data on individual professors will probably also be included.
2. Florida's governor, Rick Scott, recently expressed support for Governor Perry's push for a more business-oriented model of higher education that would require more emphasis on faculty productivity.” (emphasis ours)
Just like our Reinvention mavericks, the proponents of the plan claim that the process is “data driven.” So in which direction will the masters of Reinvention take us? Well, on the first day of the District Faculty Development Week, Chancellor Hyman derided the critics of Reinvention by saying that we are claiming that she wants to turn the City Colleges into trade schools. For the record, she was taking pot shots at a straw man. PEARL has never, nor has any other serious critic, made this claim. Even in the NAM statement quoted above, the NAM officers don’t dare to declare the end of liberal arts education. It is the tiers of students that will be generated (some will move on to four year schools, while many others will be herded into job training schemes), the amount of funding that will be diverted and the demotion of the city colleges’ mission that is worrisome and unfair.
To claim that a welding certificate is the equivalent of a higher education degree is not only dishonest, but very harmful to our communities. There is nothing wrong with getting trained in the trades. These are honorable jobs. These are indeed important jobs in our society that have been decimated by the greedy rush of corporations to outsource manufacturing to countries whose governments were happy to oversee cheap-labor, poor-regulation business practices. But there is a historical path to access this training that has for the most part remained outside the purview and priorities of community colleges since the 1947 Truman Commission proceeded to expand liberal education after WWII.
Furthermore, there is one key aspect that is frequently ignored in this race to please businesses’ demands. That is the attempt by corporations to transfer of the cost of training their own workers, which industry has always undertaken, and placing it on the shoulders of public education institutions and of the students themselves. Now corporations do not want to pay to train their own workers, the way they refuse to pay taxes. Remember the revelations in the past year that huge and very rich corporations like GE and Bank of America do not pay federal taxes, or that two thirds of corporations in Illinois pay no state taxes at all, as acknowledged by members of the Illinois state legislature during the summer. The catering to the rich corporations and the establishment of a full-blown business model in the administration of public higher education institutions has become the current mantra among education bureaucrats and politicians. And under the heavy burden of high unemployment rates, it is being used as a form of blackmail under the pretext of job creation while at the end of the day what will be mostly created are increasing fortunes that the corporations will take laughing all the way to the bank.
What is the hidden truth about Reinvention that they are afraid to tell?
How far will the CCC administration go down the path of making the City Colleges subservient to the short term interests of corporations is something that they have not been willing to be candid about with the public. Well, the first and foremost goal of Reinvention comes to mind: the generation of “degrees” with “economic value.” Add this to the whining of the Chancellor during her address at the Faculty Development Week alluded to above, regarding the CCC being turned into trade schools (whose inconsistencies we also set straight above), and combine it with the email, reproduced below, that was sent by the “Reinvention Team” (???) to all faculty members just 11 days before the Chancellor’s remarks, and the fishy smell begins to feel like if you live next to a tuna factory:
July 29, 2011
Dear Faculty Members:

As part of Reinvention, we have researched some of our occupational programs; we are trying to understand how successful our students will be after they complete our programs.  We, specifically our task force members, have done early research through interviews with some of you, industry groups, and employers.  Some of you may have seen the early work of the task force, but you will be hearing much more in the coming weeks and months.

We conducted these early analyses in five major areas:
1. Computer Science
2. Child Development
3. Manufacturing
4. Health Care Practioners
5. Health Care Technicians

There is a great deal of work yet to be completed: we want to work with you to discuss and vet our findings to date, to develop the underlying credentials and courses and to get them approved by the faculty councils and by ICCB. 

We would like your help!  Now that we have this initial information collected, we are looking for volunteers to help us complete the work above.  We believe that we will not be successful in the work above unless it is led by faculty.

Some of the qualities we think will be important for the individuals leading the efforts above include:
* Expertise in the subject matter and with curriculum and program development
* Familiarity with relevant industrial certification/licensing processes
* Strong relationships with industry/employers, associations, and community based organizations in related fields
* Familiarity with clinical/internship opportunities for students
* Understanding of job market trends
* Willingness to learn/experience with use of economic and job market data
* Familiarity with any relevant government regulations

Please let us know if you are interested by emailing reinvention@ccc.edu by 8/4/11 and indicating your area of interest from the five listed above. 

Thank you so much for your help.  We are looking forward to working with you!

The Reinvention Team (underlined emphasis ours)
The development of credentials and courses, especially as concerned with the major emphasis on manufacturing and job market trends is very revealing. Also the role of the Illinois Community Colleges Board (ICCB), whose approval will be required, is very significant. This is particularly true now that another of Arnie Duncan’s basketball buddies, the bankster Alexi Gioannoulias, has been appointed as the chairman of the ICCB (http://www.suntimes.com/news/education/6973641-418/gov.-taps-alexi-giannoulias-to-head-state-community-college-board). Arnie was so ecstatic that the Sun Times quoted him as saying:
“I want to commend Gov. Quinn for choosing Alexi Giannoulias for this critically important job. Alexi is a passionate believer in public education, and I’m confident that his leadership will help the community colleges of Illinois do a better job of preparing young people to compete in the global economy.”
As you may remember, PEARL reported back on March 31st that Giannoulias was being considered by Emanuel to become the Chairman of the Board of the CCC. But in the end Giannoulias turned out to be more useful at the helm of the ICCB to guarantee that the “new credentials and courses,” especially those of “economic value” (i.e., narrowly designed job-training programs) are expediently approved by the ICCB, and to extend the Reinvention logic to the rest of the state’s community colleges.
So what are the new credentials (degrees, certificates) that will be created, and which existing ones will be sacrificed in the name of “economic value”?
PEARL

Sunday, August 7, 2011

The Reader Exposes Reinvention Inconsistencies

http://m.chicagoreader.com/gyrobase/city-colleges-of-chicago-cheryl-hyman-vocational-school-intellectual-inquiry/Content?oid=4360284&showFullText=true

The 7 percent solution 

Chancellor Cheryl Hyman promises student success at her—"reinvented"—alma mater, the City Colleges. Can she deliver?

On April Fool's Day 2010, Cheryl L. Hyman—Mayor Richard M. Daley's controversial choice for chancellor at the City Colleges of Chicago—stepped into her new job. A 41-year-old Commonwealth Edison executive, Hyman had never been a college teacher and her experience as an academic administrator was zero. Her most striking qualification for the top job at the huge, seven-college institution seemed to be the fact that she was an up-by-the-bootstraps product of the system she would now rule. A onetime high school dropout, Hyman graduated from Olive-Harvey College and the Illinois Institute of Technology, then earned two master's degrees (from North Park and Northwestern) while fast-tracking through the ranks at ComEd, where she wound up as vice president of operational strategy and business intelligence. Daley gave her the job with a mandate for serious change. It may turn out to be a good thing, but it hasn't been totally welcome.
Blame Obama. And his education czar, former CPS head Arne Duncan. With other countries outstripping the U.S. in the number of college graduates among their citizens (the U.S. ranked 12th in one 2010 study), they're campaigning to get us back into first place. In 2009, noting that the majority of community college students wind up as degree-less dropouts with nothing to show for their college experience but student loan debt, Obama declared "The American Graduation Initiative." He promised to fund programs that will strengthen the nation by keeping students on track. The bulk of the funding never came through, but Daley got the message that "a skilled workforce is necessary to compete in the global economy" and challenged Hyman to turn the City Colleges—Harold Washington, Harry S. Truman, Kennedy-King, Malcolm X, Olive-Harvey, Richard J. Daley, and Wilbur Wright—into "an economic engine for the city." Mayor Rahm Emanuel has kept her on, regularly praises her efforts, and refers to the City Colleges as the "front line of our new economy."
And that's what's making some people nervous. "Economic engine" seems to run counter to the long-time mission of the City Colleges of Chicago, which will celebrate its hundredth birthday this year and has been, since its founding, a gateway not just to a job but to broad educational and intellectual opportunity, regardless of social or economic status.
The question of whether the "People's College" (its original name) should be a vocational school was chewed over at its birth by the likes of Jane Addams and William Rainey Harper—and discarded. In America, and in Chicago, city colleges would ensure a democracy of the mind. Vocational training was eventually added without changing that principle, at least in theory. But there's a new, results-oriented trend in education that looks like it could turn community colleges into glorified job-training centers, providing a skilled workforce but "tracking" low-income students into dead-end jobs. These institutions would be run like businesses, with the decision-making power in the hands of executives rather than academics and an emphasis on efficiency. Serendipitous intellectual inquiry and academic autonomy would be luxuries and scarce.
There are logical reasons for this trend, including the ever-higher costs of higher ed, and a flurry of studies supporting it—among them, a November 2010 report by McKinsey & Company, a Washington-based consulting firm that's playing a major role in the changes at City Colleges. Titled "Winning by Degrees," it tells how to "improve productivity in higher education's core process of transforming freshmen into degree-holders."
The five practices the McKinsey report promotes for building "degree productivity" include "redesigning the delivery of instruction" (by, for example, "substituting full-time faculty with part-time faculty") and "reducing non-productive credits," which "may give students extra educational benefit," but add to the cost. If these strategies are fully and widely adopted, the report says, "the nation could produce a million more degrees by 2020" without spending any more money.
CHERYL HYMAN HAS A COOLLY COMPOSED veneer and a reputation for being forceful—qualities that likely helped her survive a punishing Chicago childhood. She was born and grew up on the city's west side, mostly in public housing at the Henry Horner Homes. An only child whose parents were drug addicts (she says they're both recovered now), she left an unbearable home at the age of 16, dropping out of high school and taking a job at Kentucky Fried Chicken to support herself before concluding that fast food wasn't a great career route for somebody pining for high tech. She returned to high school and graduated, and then made what she says is a common mistake for a young person.
"Sometimes, when you're growing up and you're faced with very tough circumstances, like I was, you look for those quick fixes: How can I quickly get educated and just get a job? That was the mind-set I was in, and I went to a six-month trade school. After six months the school closed, and I was left with a student loan and no job to pay it back."
Hyman says she promptly came to the realization that "there are no short cuts in life."
Moving in with her grandmother, she enrolled at the City Colleges's far-south-side campus, Olive-Harvey, where a math teacher and a counselor helped her carve a path to a computer science major at IIT. She joined ComEd in 1996. She's now riding herd on a City Colleges budget (for 2012) of $651 million.
Hyman says she was "humbled" by her appointment and did need some time to visit the colleges and learn about them. She was assisted by consultants from McKinsey & Company and the Civic Consulting Alliance (the consulting arm of the Commercial Club of Chicago) who worked, initially pro bono, to "dig into the metrics" with her. By midsummer she'd hired former McKinsey consultant (and Renaissance 2010 Fund official) Alvin Bisarya as vice chancellor of strategy and institutional intelligence. In March 2011, Donald Laackman, a principal at the Civic Consulting Alliance, was installed as president of Harold Washington College. And last January, McKinsey was awarded a half-million-dollar contract for work on City Colleges changes this year.
More consultants were hired to help Hyman craft her vision, and at a November 18, 2010, press conference with Daley and new board president Martin Cabrera Jr. (appointed to the board a month earlier), the trio rolled out the plan, branded in current business jargon as "the Reinvention." City Colleges, previously focused on access, would now be focused on something more elusive: student success.
The reinvention had four broad goals:
(1) More students earning college credentials of economic value.
(2) More students transferring to four-year schools after graduating from City Colleges.
(3) Drastic improvement in remediation outcomes.
(4) More students in GED, ESL, and basic skill classes moving into college-level courses.
To achieve these goals, a "collaborative" process was set up: task forces managed by Bisarya's office and made up of appointed (and paid) constituents from the college community (faculty, staff, and students) would spend a semester studying one of eight predetermined areas. By the end of the semester they would come up with recommendations that would, according to a slick, 44-page "Reinvention" brochure, be evaluated by "CCC leadership." Sixty task force members were selected from 300 volunteers; each task force worked with an external "advisory council" made up primarily of businesspeople.
The four goals quickly became a mantra, though no numerical targets were attached to them. What was spelled out in hard numbers was a case for change that made it clear that the City Colleges—at least in recent years—have been stupendous failures. One of the biggest community college systems in the country, CCC has 120,000 students on seven campuses and seven satellite locations. But, according to data cited by Hyman, very few CCC students who are seeking a degree or certificate actually get it. The City Colleges graduation rate, calculated by following first-time, full-time students for three years, is just 7 percent.
That's the most controversial figure in the reinvention story, but it's not the only bad news CCC's been spreading about itself. A video on the official reinvention website, backed by a bouncy score, notes that more than half of first-year students drop out during or after their first semester. The reinvention brochure points out, among many statistics it cites, that only 16 percent of CCC students manage to transfer to a four-year university and a mere 4 or 5 percent wind up with a bachelor's degree.
And then there's the stat that explains a lot of those dismal numbers: more than 90 percent of CCC students require remedial work. Among those coming from Chicago Public Schools, it's 97 percent.
Every faculty member I spoke with took issue with the way the graduation rate, cited frequently by both the chancellor and the mayor, was calculated. They say limiting the group to first-time full-time students, with a deadline of three years, can't be representative of schools where the majority of students are part-timers, holding down jobs and/or juggling families, and where many (at CCC about half) are in noncredit classes, not necessarily aiming for an associate's degree. And they say claims of declining enrollment, also prominently cited in the arguments for reinvention, are misleading and "erroneous," tilted by huge programs that have been phased out (including one on military bases that served 32,000 students). On the contrary, they say, relevant enrollment actually increased between 2006 and 2010 by more than 13,000 students.
One of those pissed-off profs is Wright College humanities department chair Sheldon Liebman, who notes that the same district research office that put out the 7 percent figure conducted a six-year study concluded in 2008 that had CCC's graduation rate at about double Hyman's figure: 13.3 percent. (When Hyman's team, in response to this argument, lengthened the time span to six years, they got 13 percent as well.)
"Here we are, working hard, in many cases for half the salary of university professors, teaching five courses instead of three, an earnest, dedicated staff," Liebman says. "I'm afraid that when you bring in businesspeople, they just don't understand it. There's a real disconnect between the dedication and seriousness and ability on one side, and a kind of distrust and lack of experience on the other." Meanwhile, Liebman says, "decisions that have been made supposedly in the interest of improving education have been wrongheaded."
Among them, a corporate-style push for centralization that, among other things, replaced individual graduations this spring with one unwieldy combined ceremony at the UIC Pavilion, and an expensive rebranding effort, including an arbitrary change in each school's logo and colors that many perceive as an attempt to diminish the individual identities of the colleges. Then there was the new zero-based budgeting, introduced with a nearly zero time frame.
But the most startling was the simultaneous dumping of four of the seven college presidents. (Only Laackman and another relatively recent hire, Daley College president Jose Aybar, were given a pass; the former head of internal audit at the district office is serving as interim president at Kennedy-King.) Told in February that they'd need to reapply for their jobs because of a "new job description," they were all replaced in June.
Hyman says she saved $30 million by making cuts this year. She laid off 225 "non-instructional" employees (about 40 from the district office) and is adding advisers, financial aid counselors, and 66 full-time faculty. But she's also added to the upper echelons of her staff. The Central District Office operating budget for 2012 is nearly $62 million, about the same as the budget for Truman College or Wright. And Hyman's top officials now include nine vice chancellors, a chief of staff, a chief operating officer, and a "chief advisor to the board of trustees," all drawing $100,000-plus salaries.
"Meanwhile," says Liebman, "we have classrooms of 35 to 40. And the average ACT score is 17. Reading levels are [often] fourth, fifth, or sixth grade. As far as we're concerned, we're quite successful when somebody comes back the next year."
At the June meeting of the board, with the discarded presidents lined up in front of the trustees like so many sitting ducks, All-College Faculty Council president Polly Hoover reported on the "profound disappointment of the faculty" about the process of the presidents' replacements and the "erosion" of shared governance. "We support the goals of reinvention if they reflect a nuanced understanding of the complexities of the issues," Hoover said, noting that "the faculty have been here before; we've undergone waves of reforms with little substantive change. Consequently, we are profoundly skeptical and cautious. We hope this is a brave new world. We fear it is Huxley's brave new world."
A new provost, Kojo Quartey, was hired last month without input from the faculty. Quartey is an economist and former dean of the business school at Davenport University, a private, nonprofit institution in Michigan with an enrollment of about 13,000 students. At press time, the list of task force recommendations had not yet been posted, but it's a safe bet that the reinvention will show positive results. From the baseline that's been drawn, there's nowhere to go but up. Whether the numbers will be meaningful for students is another question. Hoover says, for example, that students who are transferring to a four-year college don't really need everything that's required for the two-year degree, which is why many of them haven't bothered with it. The graduation rate went up this year, she says, "simply because we were out there pushing it."
And if those fears of colleges being turned into factories, cranking out degrees like so many widgets—faster, faster, cheaper, cheaper—seem overblown, consider the remarkable new tutoring program developed under Aybar at Daley College that's said to be doubling pass rates for remedial courses.
Its official acronym is CASH-to-ROI. 

Thursday, June 9, 2011

CTU Calls for Major Rally to Defend Public Education and Demand that the Rich & the Corporations Take Responsibility for Fleecing the Rest of US

Dear CORE Friends and Activists:
 
For weeks, CPS has been talking about their budget woes, preparing to demand concessions from our union and looking for new ways to pit teachers and parents against each other, while taking from both.

Next Tuesday two things will happen:

1.       The new Board of Education will meet and decide whether CPS can “afford” our contractual 4% raise.
 
2.       At the same time, the CFOs of some of the largest and most profitable corporations in the region will be meeting downtown at an invite-only summit hosted by the Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber was a major supporter of “Performance Counts,” the meeting is being held at new School Board member Penny Pritzker’s Hyatt, and many of the attendees are recipients of the corporate tax loopholes, TIF dollars, and predatory bank deals that are the real causes of our schools’ budget struggles.
We are joining a protest alongside community organizations, parent groups, labor unions and activists targeting this event. These corporate cronies, bankers and billionaires have crashed our economy and taken trillions in bailout money.  They have taken homes and jobs from millions of people; and now they dodge paying taxes themselves while demanding that teachers, students and other workers take cuts to balance the budget. We are demanding that they GIVE IT BACK.
 
Details:
Tuesday, June 14th, 2011,  gather between 3:00 and 4:15 p.m.
City Front Plaza--Downtown
on Illinois Street, 1 block east of Michigan Avenue, Chicago, IL 60611
March will begin at 4:15 p.m.

We expect thousands people to be at this event telling the real story of why our schools are broke and what has happened to our economy. Parents, housing activists and other unions are ready to be there in our defense. This is the type of event that can show how CORE wants to build a different type of union in our schools and in our community- but we have to stand up and make this happen in a big way. Three things you can do:

1.       TURNOUT:
Please spread the word far and wide in your school and to your friends and community. If there are any materials you need, just let us know. People can let us know they are coming online at https://afl.salsalabs.com/o/4013/c/468/p/salsa/event/common/public/?event_KEY=2984  Any school that can sign up at least 25 to attend (including parents and allies) can have bus expenses reimbursed by the union. Email carolynfulton@ctulocal1.com for more info.
 
2.       MARSHALS:
This is going to be an exciting action with three marches and thousands of people converging on Michigan Ave. There is a planned civil disobedience and exciting visuals to really capture the imagination and press attention. We need people to help organize and lead the event. We need at least 20 marshals to help make all of this happen! Attend a training led by experienced action planners this Saturday from 10am to 12 noon. We will get prepared for Tuesday, learn about running a major event and end by running a short CTU action at a Bank of America branch to get some hands-on experience!  To attend the marshal training, email matthewluskin@ctulocal1.com.
 
3.       ART TEACHERS AND CREATIVE MINDS NEEDED!
Help with sign/puppet/banner making – get our message out! Meet on Saturday, June 11th from 10a-2p at the UE Hall at 37 S. Ashland.  If you have any questions, email Caleb Jennings at caleb.jennings@seiu.org.  People will be making puppets and signs most of the day Saturday and Sunday.
  
Our raises, jobs, homes, and schools are on the line. We need to turn the tide on the corporate forces that put their profits before our students and our schools.
Please call if you need more info: 312-329-6226.
 
 
Rally sponsors:
Action Now * Albany Park Neighborhood Council * Arise Chicago * Brighton Park Neighborhood Council * Chicago ADAPT * Chicago Coalition for the Homeless * Chicago Jobs With Justice * Chicago Teachers Union * Grassroots Collaborative * Illinois Hunger Coalition * Kenwood Oakland Community Organization * Lakeview Action Coalition * Service Employees International Union * South Austin Coalition Community Council * Stand Up! Chicago * United Electrical Workers * Warehouse Workers for Justice