We’ll be missing ASU-GSV this week and have an acute sense of FOMO! Also, my wife pointed out that our newsletter constantly has typos. I replied that it’s our signature look. Kind of like a watermark that lets you know ChatGPT didn’t write anyt
What’s Happening in the Market
The EdTech slump in India (the 3rd largest market, behind China and the US) showed further signs of worsening. PhysicsWallah, a test-prep unicorn valued at over $1B USD, announced layoffs back in March. Scaler, an upskilling platform valued at over $700M, just announced a 10% headcount reduction a few days ago.
What We’re Talking About
Applications for financial aid in Florida are down 33%, and down 40% at the poorest schools. Far from helping students access financial aid, the new FAFSA rollout is proving to be a debacle for everyone involved.
A 300-page report released by the DOE last week (and co-authored by CUNY) has re-ignited criticism of mayoral control. It highlights a lack of continuity between mayors (especially since Bloomberg’s 3-terms), a lack of checks and balances, and frustration of families and educators in having their voices heard.
One Big Idea: Removing Mayoral Control
In 2002, then-Mayor Bloomberg instituted mayoral control over NYC’s public educational system and abolished the Board of Education. The mayor elects the school chancellor and a majority of the members of the Panel for Educational Policy (PEP), which votes on major proposals and contracts. Mayoral control has been extended ever since. This is a weird centralization of power. Most public schools are governed by elected school boards and superintendents.
Now, though, Eric Adams’ mayoral control is in jeopardy.
Adams, in defending mayoral control, asked to be judged on outcomes: NYC’s graduation rate went from 50% under Bloomberg to 80% under his tenure (even though, as we’ve written before, graduation rates is not necessarily a proxy for quality).
Fighting Low Graduation Rates
School chancellor David Banks said he’d resign if mayoral control was removed. Banks and Adams argue that the country’s largest public school system requires centralization. When Bloomberg first abolished the Board of Education (which had been established during the civil rights movement in 1969 to give locals a say over their schools), he cited their total ineffectiveness and corruption (see an EdWeek from 2002).
He wasn’t wrong. From 1992 to 2002, NYC had an average graduation rate of 49 - 50%. By 2008, it had increased to 66%.
Source: NYC DOE
In 2023, it was 83.7% (compared to Syracuse’s 69%, Buffalo’s 79%, and Albany’s 77%). The graduation gap between races was also closed between white and Black students: From nearly 20 points in 2008 to 10 points in 2023.
But while graduation rates have increased dramatically, the achievement gap remains persistent. 34% of Black students were rated as proficient on the Regents exam, versus 70% for white students. The gap did close by 2% over the past two years, which is not insignificant—it’s just not enough.
What do we want? We don’t know!
Funnily enough, not many people are advocating for a return to the pre-2002 School Board free for all (32 different school districts!). The DOE report makes pretty reasonable recommendations, such as empowering Community Education Councils and changes to the composition of PEP to reduce mayoral control. Far from being a policy-generating forum, PEP rubber stamps the sitting mayor’s recommendations.
The DOE report did avoid the broader question of whether mayoral control is good or bad. NYC’s history has been a cycle of centralization and decentralization, repeating over and over again. Graduation rates are certainly up, but mayoral control seems to anger an important constituent: Parents, especially vocal (and white) parents. And those parents will take their kids out of school systems. Despite making up 35% of the residents of NYC, white students only account for 15% of public school enrollment. And just look at charter schools, which were really started under Bloomberg’s tenure and now seem like some way for families to flee to an alternate school system.
While centralization might be good for ensuring 32 school districts have uniform results, it does inhibit the collaboration and input that a large, multi-stakeholder system requires. And without that way to vent energy, the system itself might implode in the form of withering enrollment (which we are watching now with stunned immobility).