Joel I. Klein – Fordham Now

Fordham Advocates Mayoral Control of City Public Schools

Bob Howe — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 16:43:54 +0000

On March 20, 2009, Thomas A. Dunne, Fordham’s vice president for government relations and urban affairs testified before the New York State Assembly Education Committee on behalf of the University in favor of mayoral control of New York City public schools.

“It was not long ago that our schools were a dismal failure and no one wanted to be held accountable,” Dunne told legislators. “New York City public officials abdicated their responsibility and created 32 local school boards. No one person or authority took responsibility for our schools. There was political infighting, confusion, some school boards became patronage mills and as a result the children suffered. Education was no longer a priority.”

The 2002 law that gives the mayor control over public schools in the city expires on June 30, 2009. Last week the Education Committee held a public hearing on whether to renew the law. Chancellor Joel I. Klein testified in favor of mayoral control before the same committee in February.

Among other issues, Dunne said that advocates for educational reform had no place to go to address some of the problems in city schools because the educational bureaucracy at 110 Livingston Street, former headquarters of the New York City Department of Education, was “monumental” and unresponsive. He added that by giving control of public schools to the city’s mayor, the State Assembly had put in place clear accountability and stable leadership.

Six years after mayoral control was put in place, test scores and graduation rates have improved (up by 22 percent since 2002); teacher salaries are higher; and schools are smaller with fewer in-school crimes.

“A key ingredient in improving school performance is accountability,” said Joseph M. McShane, S.J., president of Fordham. “Having the ultimate responsibility for the city’s public schools rest with the mayor insures that schools are judged according to a uniform standard, and that education receives the attention and resources it merits. We owe the schoolchildren of New York City at least that much.”

Study Critical of Inequitable Resources in NYC Schools

Fordham News — Thu, 30 Oct 2003 15:51:15 +0000

NEW YORK (Oct. 30, 2003) —New York City’s Department of Education distributes its resources inequitably along race and poverty lines, directly affecting student behavior and administrative actions against students, according to a study released today by Fordham University’s National Center for Schools and Communities (NCSC).
The study, “Equity or Exclusion: The Dynamics of Resources in New York City Public Schools,”is the first analysis and documentation of a close connection between educational resources and behavioral indicators, such as attendance and suspensions, in the New York City Public Schools. The results where shared during a news conference at the Lincoln Center campus.
The study “provides yet another confirmation of the fact that we are still a long way from having public schools that offer students an equal chance for a good education,” said John M. Beam, executive director of the NCSC. He added, “The growing weight of this evidence will reach a tipping point at which the court of public opinion, if not the Supreme Court, will rule that allowing the continued maldistribution of the essentials of good education is an intentional assault on the rights of those students.”
After Michael Eskenazi, the principal investigator for the study, outlined the report’s results during the news conference, advocates for education reform, including New York City Councilwoman Gale Brewer, offered real-life examples of the problems depicted in the study.
The study found that, in general, schools with higher enrollments of black, Hispanic, and free-lunch eligible children have fewer library and computer resources, less qualified teachers, and fewer course and enrichment offerings. Schools with inadequate
resources are more likely to have higher suspension and absentee rates and they are more likely to have more black and Hispanic students. Schools with greater resources and higher concentrations of white and Asian students experience lower percentages of suspensions, across all racial groups.
“What this all comes down to is a question of the carrot versus the stick,” Eskenazi said. “Are we going to invest in resources that engage students and encourage them to come to school, or are we going to try to solve all of the public schools’ problems with security guards and metal detectors?”
Jill Chaifetz, the executive director of Advocates for Children, said a majority of her clients are black and Hispanic males. Many of her clients are also children with disabilities, a group that receives a disturbingly disproportionate number of school suspensions. In the 1999-2000 school year, children receiving special education services represented approximately 43 percent of all superintendent suspensions, which could last as long as one year, yet they only account for approximately 11 percent of the student register in the New York City school system.
“Even when we get the suspensions dismissed, these students have already been out of school for days and they are behind,” Chaifetz said. “It’s a downward spiral. … This issue needs to be addressed as the systemic problem that it is.”
The study, which was delivered to New York City Schools Chancellor Joel I. Klein, includes a number of recommendations for tracking and publicizing both discipline patterns and resource distribution in the public schools. The complete study is posted on the NCSC website at www.NCSCatFordham.org.
The National Center for Schools and Communities is a policy advocacy institute co-sponsored by the Fordham University Graduate Schools of Education and Social Services. The NCSC provides policy and data analysis to parent and community organizations working for public school reform.

Antitrust Crack Down On Cartels

Fordham News — Thu, 09 Dec 1999 19:49:18 +0000

NEW YORK – Lawyers from around the world came to Fordham Law School to learn about the United State’s government’s crack down on international trade cartels, which have flourished in the rapidly changing world economic system. “These cartels are the equivalent of theft by well-dressed thieves, and they deserve unequivocal condemnation,– said Joel I. Klein, assistant attorney general for the Justice Department’s antitrust division, who addressed the 26th annual Conference on International Antitrust Law & Policy, sponsored by the Fordham Corporate Law Institute. About 300 attorneys from around the world attended the event. International trade cartels increasingly have made headlines as U.S. officials have lifted national trade barriers. This year alone, the U.S. Justice Department fined corporations more than $1.1 billion and sent several executives, including some from other countries, to prison for fixing prices around the world. Earlier this year, the department levied the largest antitrust fine ever – $500 million – against Hoffman-LaRoche for allegedly fixing prices on vitamins around the world. The Fordham conference also focused on antitrust issues that have arisen in the European Community, as European nations strive to build a common economic system. One seminar examined the competitive marketplace for professional sports in Europe and the United States, while another dealt with regulatory issues surrounding mergers between companies from different countries. In addition to Klein, speakers at the conference included Karel van Miert, commissioner of the European Commission in Brussels, Belgium, and Robert Pitofsky, chairman of the U.S. Federal Trade Commission. Klein said federal investigators have found widespread price-fixing around the globe, with American firms typically consorting with three or four competitors that are market leaders in Europe, Asia and throughout the world. They agree on dividing up a territory to reduce competition, then allegedly raise prices there to boost profits. Such corporate actions require an international response by antitrust prosecutors, many conference participants said. “This is a situation where we’re all getting hurt, so we must work together,– Klein told the attorneys. “In other words, the conspirators are working globally, so antitrust enforcers must do so as well.” 11/99