Boston’s Citizens for Public Schools show how a powerful group of parents, teachers, and concerned citizens can inform the public and keep the heat on legislators. I was unable to repost all the links; there were so many! Go to their website to find them all.
Here is their latest update:
CPS writes:
What a fascinating week it’s been for education news! First, there was the spectacle of leading charter school proponents busting their gaskets at the slow pace of legislative action on lifting the charter cap. Then there was the jaw-dropping statement from a state education official that the state will not force families to participate in PARCC field tests (after an earlier statement that parents had no right to opt their children out of state testing). Scroll down to read about these stories and more. We rely on our members (your voices, your actions and your membership contributions) to keep going, so if you have not yet become an official part of the CPS family, join today by clicking here!
Best regards,
Lisa Guisbond
CPS Executive Director, lisa.guisbond@gmail.com
News You Can Use About Our Schools
The Charter Cap Battle Boils Over
Tempers flared and fingers stabbed out vitriolic editorials at the news that the Joint Education Committee wanted time to hear from voters and think about proposed charter cap and school turnaround legislation.
Sen. Chang-Diaz
First, Senator Sonia Chang-Diaz released a statement announcing the one-week extension. The statement was posted at the Blue Mass Group blog, prompting an interesting series of comments, including an excellent post by CPS member Shirley Kressel.
Sen. Jehlen
The Boston Herald then printed a vicious editorial attack on Senators Chang-Diaz and Jehlen, saying there should be “a special place in hell reserved for those who would deprive children of a way out of a failing school.” On behalf of CPS, my letter to the editor points out, “It takes courage to resist and not kowtow to deep-pocketed charter proponents. Parents see how charter school growth has constricted resources available for basics like art and music, gym and social workers. Lifting the cap will make this bad situation worse.”
Meanwhile, tempers flared at the Pioneer Institute, which launched this public attack on Secretary of Education Matt Malone, saying his views on charters are “characterized by bigotry and demonization.”
Some groups kept their decorum and stuck to the issues, including the Black Educators Alliance Massachusetts (BEAM), which wrote this letter on lifting the charter cap. It says, in part, “The state should not lift the cap on charter schools without addressing the funding inequities imposed on districts such as Boston and the disproportionately lower number of English language learners and students with disabilities enrolled in charter schools.”
Finally, we got a needed dose of delicious satire from EduShyster, who wrote, “a funny thing happened on the way to the charter cap-lifting fête. Lawmakers began to hear from some actual constituents-upon whom they actually depend for actual re-election-about devastated public school budgets, the loss of local control and a growing fear that more charters means dual, and dueling, school systems that educate very different students.” A tip of my cap to you, EduShyster!
Don’t forget that the State Auditor’s Office is close to completing a comprehensive audit of charter school finances and practices. We remain convinced that it would make sense for legislators to read that report before considering changing the charter school cap.
Meanwhile, if you want to add your voice to the fray, here’s a petition from the Boston parent group Quest, seeking investments in Boston public schools and maintaining the cap on charter school growth. And don’t forget to sign on to the Boston Truth Coalition’s Principles of Unity, which include this: “We believe in investing in public schools, which serve the majority of students in Boston, and we oppose lifting the cap on charters, which drain resources from district schools and don’t serve ALL students and their diverse needs.”
_____________________________________________
Breaking PARCC News: Parents & Students Have Rights!
The PARCC test controversy continues to rage, with state officials reversing themselves on whether parents have the right to opt their children out of the field tests this spring. Recall that a Feb. 20 letter to the Worcester School Committee from the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) said state law did not permit parents to opt their children out of state testing and therefore “participation in the PARCC assessment field test is mandatory.” But this week, at a Framingham forum on PARCC testing, the message was different. In answer to a question, Bob Bickerton, senior associate commissioner at DESE, said “common sense” will prevail, and “We’re not going to force the kids to take the test.”
Meanwhile, add Tantasqua to the list of school committees voting to allow parents to opt out of PARCC field testing.
Todd Gazda
And in Ludlow, MA, Superintendent Todd Gazda wrote a blog post titled, “Enough is Enough!” In it, he decries the top-down imposition of “national standards, increased regulations, standardized testing, and mandates regarding what and how our children should be taught.” He says that assessments are an essential part of education. “However, standardized tests whose scores take months to arrive, often after the student has moved on to another teacher, have a limited utility for shaping the educational environment. I am concerned that we are creating students who will excel in taking multiple choice tests. Unfortunately, life is not a multiple choice test. Enough is enough!”
Boston Globe writer Scot Lehigh interviewed U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan during his Massachusetts visit to plug his favored corporate reforms. To back up his claim that students’ lack of preparedness for college is a state and national emergency, Duncan said that 40% of Massachusetts high school students require remedial coursework in college. This is not true. Thanks to award-winning New York principal Carol Burris for her Answer Sheet blog holding Duncan and the Globe accountable for their misuse of statistics to promote Common Core testing and more charter schools. Burris insisted that Lehigh and the Globe run a “clarification” (at the end of another Lehigh oped) that set the record straight by acknowledging that just 21% of students who attend four-year universities in Mass. take at least one remedial course.
Don’t forget about CPS’s fact sheet: What we know about PARCC test refusal. And we’re keeping track of school committee resolutions on opting out, here. Please let us know if we’ve missed any.
And read all about a successful Take the PARCC test event in Somerville, then think about planning one in your community.
_____________________________________________
Reforms We Can Believe In: Equity, Restorative Justice, Diversity
How different from current U.S. school reforms is a system based on equity? In an interview published in the Atlantic, Finnish education chief Krista Kiuru describes a vision close to CPS’s heart, of a whole child education: “Academics isn’t all kids need. Kids need so much more. School should be where we teach the meaning of life; where kids learn they are needed; where they can learn community skills. We like to think that school is also important for developing a good self-image, a strong sensitivity to other people’s feelings … and understanding it matters to take care of others. We definitely want to incorporate all those things in education.”
In the interest of equitable and adequate school funding, public education advocates including the Mass. Teachers Association and the American Federation of Teachers Massachusetts, along with the Mass. Association of School Superintendents, the Mass. Association of School Committees and others are calling for a commission to re-examine the state’s Foundation Budget (required amount that public schools must spend on education). The budget formula, part of the state’s Chapter 70 education aid law, was passed to ensure adequate funding to meet the education needs of all students. However, the formula has not been updated in 21 years. Read this fact sheet about a bill to establish such a commission.
The Opportunity to Learn Campaign offers a tool kit and illustration of zero tolerance versus restorative justice.
The goal of diverse and inclusive public schools seems to have fallen off the agenda of our political leaders and policymakers. In this report, the author recommends that “policymakers address race-conscious policies, practices and conditions that perpetuate segregation and inequality while simultaneously tapping into the changing racial attitudes of Americans by supporting racially diverse schools.”
_____________________________________________
For and About Teachers
Watch this video from Educators for a Democratic Union and listen to these teachers describe the way testing is getting in the way of teaching students the best way they know how.
Inspiration from Seattle teachers in this article about their successful test boycott and plans for more action.
_____________________________________________
Upcoming Events of Interest
Charters, Publics, Pilots & Everything In Between
How are the Differences in Schools Affecting Equity in Boston? Monday, March 31 from 5-7 PM at Spontaneous Celebrations, 45 Danforth St in Jamaica Plain.
Citizens for Public Schools, Inc. | 18 Tremont St., Suite 320 | Boston | MA | 02108
Boston is one place where there is overwhelming evidence that charter schools are providing better education to urban kids.
If anyone is a “deformer” it isn’t the people trying to give urban kids better options.
Please supply links and documentation to the “overwhelming evidence”, that charter schools are providing better education to urban kids. Your statement doesn’t make it so, but I am interested in looking at any evidence that you might have.
As a long time Boston resident (Jamaica Plain) and retired special education administrator and special education specialist at the former Mass. Dept. Of Education, I sincerely doubt that you have the foggiest notion of either the presumed efficacy of charter schools, their discriminatory exclusionary enrollment practices viz a viz ELL students or students with special education needs, or finally, their elevated suspension rates for students who are deemed to be initially appropriate.
The BPS is – as are all true public schools, unlike pseudo public charters – mandated to educate ALL school age children, rather than skimming students from schools and siphoning off public funds in the process.
WT you are misinformed and misinforming! Charter Schools are the new segregation academies in Boston! One criteria for making AYP (Adequate Yearly Progress) in Massachusetts is high school graduation in 4-years. The 4 year Boston charter school graduation rate is dismal!
– Academy of the Pacific Rim started out in 2009 with 62 freshmen graduated 41 students in 2012 = 66.12% 4-year Graduation Rate
– Boston Collegiate Charter started out in 2009 with 52 freshmen graduated 23 seniors in 2012 = 44.23% 4-year Graduation Rate
– Boston Preparatory Charter started out in 2009 with 32 freshmen graduated 20 seniors in 2012 = 62.5% 4-year Graduation Rate
– City on a Hill Charter started out in 2009 with 99 freshmen graduated 31 seniors in 2012 = 31.31% 4-year Graduation Rate
– Codman Academy Charter started out in 2009 with 40 freshmen graduated 15 seniors in 2012 = 37.5% 4-year Graduation Rate
– Match Charter started out in 2009 with 94 freshmen graduated 30 seniors in 2012 = 31.9% 4-year Graduation Rate
After being set-up by the Boston Public School District for failure and turnaround, The English High School, the first public high school in America, was taken over by the state and given to the Blueprint Schools Network because their 4 year graduation rate was 65%! So why are these charter schools with rates lower than EHS allowed to remain open!
Charter schools giving “better options” to Boston’s urban kids! Hell no! There is a lifetime cost to a student who has to repeat a year in school. Think about it, why can’t a charter school with a longer day and longer year and cherry picked population of students, able to graduate a student in 4 years with their class? Boston charter schools do not backfill students, the “overwhelming evidence” is that charter schools are forward filling students.
Thanks for providing the stats. Charter schools are educational vampires, sucking the life blood – kids and funds- from the public sector. I am not a polite ameliorist: drive a stake through their hearts.
In this report, several renowned economists found that Boston charter schools had a particularly large positive effect on non-white and poor students’ reading and math scores. These findings came from randomized lotteries, so it is a “gold standard” comparison — which means that the charter kids are being compared to identical kids elsewhere. gse.harvard.edu/~pfpie/pdf/Student_Achievement_in_MA_Charter_Schools_2011.pdf
Then in 2013, a similar team of renowned economists found that Boston charter high schools increase the passage rate on Massachusetts’ exit exam, improve SAT scores, improve the number of AP classes and exams taken, and increase enrollment in 4-year colleges. Again, these findings come from randomized lotteries, so again it is bogus to start complaining that the charter kids were somehow different from the comparison group.
economics.mit.edu/files/8981
(PS: Jshore, you don’t know how to calculate graduation rates. Given the high mobility in Boston public schools, you simply do not calculate graduation rates that way. What matters is how many of the kids graduate from high school somewhere; it doesn’t matter if they stick to the same charter high school for all 4 years.)
It does matter, as that is the claim made by charter operators and their supporters.
THEY educate the “uneducable ones” Boston public does not.
Ed Harris: you are correct.
This year is proving rich in candidates for the 2014 What Is It With You People In Rheephorm Awards, given to the best [worst?] examples of tortured logic and inane assertions made in defense of charters and privatization.
A viable candidate from above:
“What matters is how many of the kids graduate from high school somewhere; it doesn’t matter if they stick to the same charter high school for all 4 years.”
😜
Only to be matched by a strong contender for 2014’s Most Pathetic Straw Man Argument for $tudent $ucce$$, made by Secretary of Education Arne Duncan during a recent visit to Los Angeles:
“He added that he constantly fights assertions that impoverished children cannot succeed, and said that giving them the intensive academic support, enrichment activities and social services common among their more affluent peers will prove otherwise.”
Link: http://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-0320-duncan-visit-20140320,0,5703752.story#axzz2wje5MkVq
Although don’t rule out the possibility that they are under doctor’s orders to give us a chuckle or two:
“A day without laughter is a day wasted.”
¿? Charlie Chaplin, of course, PhD in Laughology.
😎
WT, I see your initials stand for wasting time. Did the successful Boston charters have the same demographics as he public schools? Did they enroll ELLs or Students with disabilities? Just wondering.
How is that relevant?
You realize that this is a randomized trial, right? It’s not comparing charter school kids to public school kids (which might be apples to oranges, as you are suggesting).
Instead, it is comparing kids who all signed up for the charter schools, and were then randomly picked in a lottery to either be in or out. So it DOESN’T MATTER if the charter school supposedly has fewer ELL kids — even if it has zero ELL kids, those non-ELL kids are being compared exclusively to the non-ELL kids who lost the charter school lottery.
But the conclusion of the study is that the urban charters that bring up the scores are “no excuses”, use a credit/demerit system, uniforms, parent contracts, and spend larger portions of each day on math and reading.
That isn’t true of nonurban charters, and nonurban charters actually underperform ordinary public schools in the study.
So what’s the plan? If they can get better math and reading scores with the charter recipe, does that mean all urban schools should be no excuses charter schools? If you’re going to hit public schools as not performing as well as charters, isn’t that where you’ll end up?
Close all the urban public schools and replace them with no excuses charter schools?
How can public schools possibly win this argument? If all the public schools do this, if they all do “double blocks” of math and reading and uniforms and parent contracts and merit/demerit systems then (according to the study) they’ll bring up math and reading scores, but then there will be only one flavor of “effective” public schools for low income urban students.
Berating them for not being no excuses charter schools seems to run against “choice” and “options” doesn’t it? Seems to me if I’m a public school and I want to stay open and I read the Harvard study I better become just like a no excuses charter school, pronto.
Well, as long as students are selected based on lottery, it’s pretty much normal to assume that schools will likely give those who are lucky enough to set their own without any socio-economic hardships or physical/mental disabilities. Charters want to make good records for making money, and these lucky ones are the best fit for the grand-stand objectives.
They wanted to compare all the charter schools, and not all the charter schools are “overenrolled” and not all the schools keep accurate records of the lottery, so they had to use a second method, observation, to fudge and get to the “apples to apples” comparison.
Renowned economists are like good statisticians – they can ‘prove’ anything if the price is right.
“Despite what the charter lobby says, charter schools in DOE buildings get a significant subsidy, on the order of $2000 per student, by not contributing to the operating costs of the buildings they occupy. Charter students have every right to space in these buildings, because their families support the city’s capital budget just like non-charter students. But under Bloomberg, charters did not pay operating costs like heating, electrical, security, food services, and janitorial. There’s a legitimate debate as to whether this is a good subsidy. On the one hand, charters serve low income communities (even if they have fewer students with disabilities and English language learners), and so if there’s a subsidy to give out, maybe they should get it. On the other hand, there are plenty of other schools who serve similar and more challenging populations, so why don’t they get a subsidy?”
http://horacemanifesto.tumblr.com/post/80396504281/the-unabashed-classism-and-racism-of-diane-ravitch
Wow, 2000 more per student at Success Academy than for the public school students in the same building.
You won’t hear that on Morning Joe, that’s for sure.
This is also true for charter school students in the Detroit EAA, by the way, a subsidy. Public school students contribute 600 per kid per year to Detroit’s debt. Charter school students (within the EAA, anyway) do not.
http://michigancitizen.com/eaa-uses-dps-to-survive/
Yep. You don’t mess with BPS (Boston Public Schools) for doing good.
They deserve reward for their excellence under current educational climate.
this is another group that is working to get the information out to the public. would you consider signing their petition?
Integrity in Education (Sabrina Stevens, administration)
quoting from their petition: ”
“Many American moms and dads look to channels like Animal Planet, HGTV and The Family Channel for trustworthy, family-friendly programming. That’s why it’s disturbing to see organizations like Jeb Bush’s Foundation for’Excellence’ in Education (FEE) abusing that trust, by running misleading ads promoting misguided policies that could hurt their children’s opportunities to learn at school.
In an ad campaign launched this week, FEE makes a number of unsubstantiated claims as part of an effort to promote high-stakes testing and Common Core. In particular, they claim that testing helped Florida become a “top ten state” according to the U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics (NCES).
But NCES doesn’t even rank states in this manner, and Florida’s mediocre scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress wouldn’t push them to the top of the rankings if they did.
Tell the networks to pull this ad!
The truth is, officials promoting test-and-punish education policies have hurt students in Florida and nationwide, by pressuring schools to teach to the test at the expense of critical thinking. Meanwhile, testing companies like Pearson, McGraw-Hill and ETS continue to profit off of kids and taxpayers, while funding FEE and other groups that promote more testing.
Don’t let FEE continue to mislead families. Please tell the networks: “Don’t run this deceptive commercial.”Tell the networks to pull this ad!”