City OF NEW BEDFORD JONATHAN F. MITCHELL, MAYOR November 8, 2018 Joffrey C. Riley ‘Commissioner, Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Commonwealth of Massachusetts 75 Pleasant Street Malden, MA 02148 Re: Cit ill} iford's Application for. ewal Dear Commissioner Riley: L write to oppose City on a Hill-New Bedford's ("COAH-New Bedford's") application to renew its charter, which the Board of Blementary end Secondary Education will soon take under consideration. I believe COAH-New Bedford has failed to deliver the quality of educational services that would justify the continued imposition of the schoo!'s signifieght cost to the City of New Bedford. ’ In 2012, Boston-based City on a Hill approached me with the idea of establishing a state- chartered high school of some 280 students. Although I did not then -- nor now ~ object categorically to charter schools, as I believe under the right circumstance charter schools can serve a valuable role in incubating innovation in education, I voiced my opposition to COAH's application in a letter to then-Commissioner Mitchell Chester (attached hereto). As set forth in the letter, I expressed grave concer about City on a Hill-Boston's track record, especially its staggering student attrition rate of 55%. In my view, the fact that less than half of the school’s freshman made it to their senior year belied City on a Hill-Boston's contention that its MCAS. scores and four year graduation rate were a mark of success. Equally disturbing was the evidence of college readiness of City on a Hill-Boston graduates, who had an Advanced Placement test passing rate of a paltry 1.7%, Despite these concems, as well as the potential financial imposition on the City of a new cherter school and a dearth of community support, the Board allowed COAH-New Bedford's application. ‘After four years of operation, COAH!'s performance in New Bedford has turned out to be worse than feared, Last Spring, the school graduated its first class of seniors. The class began with 88 students in 2014-15, and a mere 25 graduated, representing an attrition rate of 71%. As the chart below indicates, this wasn't just a first year glitch. The next year’s class lost some 60% of its students before their junior year, and the following year's class lost nearly 42% by their Crry HALL + 133 WILLIAM STREET + NEW BEDFORD, MA 02740 + TEL! (508) 979-1410 + FAX: (508) 991-6189sophomore year. After leaving COAH-New Bedford, voluntarily or otherwise, many, if not most of these students became the responsibility of New Bedford High School. City on a Hill - New Bedford Enrollment School Year Grade9 [Grade10_| Grade ti | Grade 12 2014-15 0 0 0 2015-16 0 0 2016-17 0 2017-18 107 cain ‘The data collected by DESE on student discipline at COAH-New Bedford tends to affirm aneedotal evidence that the school is engaged in a practice of pushing students with disciplinary problems out the door. Of the school’s student body, the percentage of students disciplined is 18.5%, compared with about 0.5% at New Bedford Public Schools (and 11% at New Bedford High School). Perhaps more alarmingly, the school ranks seventh highest statewide in the percentage of students suspended out of school (14%). ‘One would presume that with the significant attrition of lower performing students, the school's overall performance would be artificially higher. Remarkably, this has not been the case, Most notably, City on a Hill-New Bedford's performance, as measured by DESE’s new accountability index, ranked in the fourth percentile statewide, the /owest among high schools in New Bedford. Consider also the school’s latest MCAS scores, which across key categories pre either on par ‘with or below that of New Bedford High School, a comprehensive high setigol of more than two. thousand students that has a higher percentage of English Language Leamets and special education students than COAH-New Bedford. F ‘When COAH-New Bedford originally applied for its charter, one could have colorably argued that a new charter high school would be in the Citys interest ~- despite the significant financial burden that would come with it -- because the district's schools had yet to demonstrate that they could make progress on their own. DESE had placed the district under monitoring in 2011 after numerous warnings over many years. Although I made clear when I came into office in 2012 that we would push forward with school reform, there simply had not been a long enough opportunity for me and our school committee to demonstrate the seriousness of our commitment by the time COAH's-New Bedford's charter application came before the Board. The same cannot be said today. Any casual observer of the education scene in New Bedford the last five years would have to acknowledge that we meant what we said. The school committee and I have pushed reform in New Bedford in ways and to a degree of intensity unlike anything before. After COAH-New Bedford's charter was issued, the district hired an established "tumaround” superintendent, whose aggressive reform efforts the committee and I backed, often in the face of considerable political pushback. Every facet of the district has been reformed, and a strong foundation has been laid for continued progress. Asa result, the district has made undeniable progress, including in significant growth in MCAS, AP testing, and the four year graduation rate. ‘The progress led DESE last year to remove thedistrict monitor, a momentous step given the state ofthe district in 2011. In explaining its decision, DESE noted the district’s “culture of inquiry, accountability, and support reaches well beyond the superintendent's office into the schools and key departments,” with school principals and other instructional leaders acting as “authors and leaders of many of the important initiatives contained in the plan." The report also acknowledged how the district has successfully responded to significant challenges the district has faced, including the influx of English Learners, which. now comprise 29.8% of the district's population. DESE's assessment of the district's dramatic progress was punctuated by Laura Richane, the Department's supervisor of district reviews and monitoring, in her presentation to the New Bedford School Committee on August 24, 2017. She noted that the district’s progress “stands in marked contrast to the concerns raised in the Department's 2011 district review report,” with “the last report six years ago deseribfing] an exiremely different district than you have now... [W]e are seeing things operate much more effectively, we're seeing decisions made in the best interests of kids, resources are being used more: effectively, much more: coordination, supervision, and support. I can’t emphasize this enough, there has becn a huge, huge step forward here and I hope you'll really be proud of that progress.” (emphasis added). The School Committee has emphatically reaffirmed its commitment to reform this year by hiring anew cuporintendent with a track record of success to carry on the effort. What may have made sense five years ago, does not make sense now. City on a Hill's foray into New Bedford has not worked out. The schoo! has not produced results, despite its apparent practice of weeding out lower performing students. Nor has it engendered anything resembling strong community support, while the district, in the Department's estimation, ‘has'made a "a huge, huge step forward." Given the significant financial cost -of the school to a city that has struggled even to meet its net school spending obligations, and the lost opportunity of its students who have attended COAH-New Bedford, | believe it is in the best interest of the City and its children, not to renew the charter. Adcration. ‘Thank you for Wh (vio attachment): New Bedford School Committee ‘Thomas Anderson, Superintendent Linda Morad, President, New Bedford City Council New Bedford State Legislative Delegation Kevin Taylor, City on a Hill Public Charter Schoo