Establishing a "Teflon Chancellor"-type situation for himself while not really tacking the tough problems: his department's failure to meet state mandates on library and gym; parent's extreme disgust at the condescension inherent in establishing a parent academy; the 1st graders in Corona who have lunch at 9:30 in the morning, the extreme emotional and physical distress over over-stressed kindergartners; the DOE's trashing of books from the rooms that hold test-prep computers (formerly known as libraries).

With questions like what was Walcott's biggest achievement in his first year, how can SchoolBook claim to be anything other than a cheerleader for the DOE? Come on. Journalism: skepticism, critical thinking, listening to a wide variety of voices. Why does SchoolBook not know that A) parents think the DOE's current system and plans for the future do not under any circumstances constitute an "excellent" education, and B) those parents are not crazies, they are well-educated, reasonable people, the majority in fact.

First, Mr. Walcott is not legally Chancellor, in my opinion - and I am not a lawyer. But I can read Education Law Section 2590-h, which states: "Powers and duties of chancellor. The office of chancellor of the city district is hereby continued. Such chancellor shall serve at the pleasure of and be employed by the mayor of the city of New York by contract. The length of such contract shall not exceed by more than two years the term of office of the mayor authorizing such contract." ....And Walcott has no contract. No one gives him a performance review, and he cannot be fired for any reason except by the Mayor. How is this good or even adequate public policy? Can we say that his 'rule' of the DOE is performed in bad faith because he will not permit a democratic vote on policy or his job?
Second, I do not know who Ms. Phillips and the pollsters are talking to, but over the past year, talking to everyone -parents, teachers, principals, superintendents, lawyers and arbitrators, dislike Mr. Walcott with a passion, not only in the way he seems to be arrogant as he delivers bad news, but in the fact that he stomps out dissent with a big stick, the Mayor's total control.

Biggest accomplishment? Providing a kinder, gentler face for the failed education policies (increasing class sizes; closing schools; privatizing public education...) of the Bloomberg administration.

I was genuinely fascinated by this question. My initial reaction? Umm, he wasn't Cathie Black, a Top Two Disaster of the Bloomberg administration on par with that 12/26 "surprise" blizzard that shut down even only semi-outlying areas of the city for upwards of a week? Chancellor Walcott seems like a lovely man, a devoted parent and grandparent, and yes, a cheerleader. Really, can anyone ever succeed in this job? What goes on in the NYC public schools is so far afield from common sense at this point, it would be laughable...except for the fact that kids are involved. Kindergarten has been ruined. Hours and hours and hours of useless tests for 8-year-olds, after months of useless prep? Stop. The. Madness. Anyone? Anyone?

Wait! That's a trick question, right ??? When we all KNOW that Walcott did absolutely NOTHING ... he was not supposed to do anything and that's what he did (and continues to do)... NOTHING. He is a 'survivor' of the Tweed organization, a bureaucrat with no particular reason to be Chancellor of the USA's largest public school system, and he is there to do NOTHING so that the "Billionaires Boys Club" -- Bloomberg & Co (thank you, Diane Ravitch for the perfectly suited terminology) .. can do as they please... dismantle the public school system, further segregating the nearly 50% of students and their families that are struggling and barely getting by (much less getting well educated in the poorest and most poorly maintained schools. "Wolcott WHO ?", we will all say the moment he is gone.... for he is gone already since he has never 'arrived' at all to do ANYTHING we may need.