Jan Resseger served for many years as program director for education justice of the United Church of Christ. She is a woman with a strong social conscience, who is devoted to the well-being of all children. She lives in Ohio. When I first visited Cleveland, I had the privilege of being escorted by Jan, who showed me the stark disparities between the affluent suburbs and the downtrodden inner-city.
Jan Resseger writes here of the calamities imposed on our nation’s education system by Arne Duncan, who changed the national education goal from equality of educational opportunity for all to a “race to the top” for the few. He shifted our sights from equal opportunity and equitable funding to test scores; he pretended that poverty was unimportant and could be solved by closing public schools and turning children over to private entrepreneurs who had little supervision.
Read Jan’s entire piece: Duncan was a disaster as a molder of education policy. He ignored segregation and it grew more intense on his watch. His successor, John King, was a clone of Duncan in New York state. He too thinks that test scores are the measure of education quality, despite the fact that what they measure best is family income. He too, a founder of charter schools, prefers charters over public education. His hurried implementation of the Common Core standards and tests in New York were universally considered disastrous, even by Governor Cuomo; John King, more than anyone else, ignited the parent opt out movement in New York. And his role model was Arne Duncan.
Jan Resseger writes:
School policy ripped out of time and history: in many ways that is Arne Duncan’s gift to us — school policy focused on disparities in test scores instead of disparities in opportunity — a Department of Education obsessed with data-driven accountability for teachers, but for itself an obsession with “game-changing” innovation and inadequate attention to oversight — the substitution of the consultant driven, win-lose methodology of philanthropy for formula-driven government policy — school policy that favors social innovation, one charter at a time. Such policies are definitely a break from the past. Whether they promise better opportunity for the mass of our nation’s children, and especially our poorest children, is a very different question.
School policy focused on disparities in test scores instead of disparities in opportunity: Here is what a Congressional Equity and Excellence Commission charged in 2013, five years into Duncan’s tenure as Education Secretary: “The common situation in America is that schools in poor communities spend less per pupil—and often many thousands of dollars less per pupil—than schools in nearby affluent communities… This is arguably the most important equity-related variable in American schooling today. Let’s be honest: We are also an outlier in how many of our children are growing up in poverty. Our poverty rate for school-age children—currently more than 22 percent—is twice the OECD average and nearly four times that of leading countries such as Finland.” Arne Duncan’s signature policies ignore these realities. While many of Duncan’s programs have conditioned receipt of federal dollars on states’ complying with Duncan’s favored policies, none of Duncan’s conditions involved closing opportunity gaps. To qualify for a Race to the Top grant, a state had to remove any statutory cap on the authorization of new charter schools, and to win a No Child Left Behind waiver, a state had to agree to evaluate teachers based on students’ test scores, but Duncan’s policies never conditioned receipt of federal dollars on states’ remedying school funding inequity. Even programs like School Improvement Grants for the lowest scoring 5 percent of American schools have emphasized school closure and privatization but have not addressed the root problem of poverty in the communities where children’s scores are low.
A Department of Education obsessed with data-driven accountability for teachers, but for itself an obsession with “game-changing” innovation and inadequate attention to oversight: The nation faces an epidemic of teacher shortages and despair among professionals who feel devalued as states rush to implement the teacher-rating policies they adopted to win their No Child Left Behind waivers from the federal government. Even as evidence continues to demonstrate that students’ test scores correlate more closely with family income than any other factor, and as scholars declare that students’ test scores are unreliable for evaluating teachers, Duncan’s policies have unrelentingly driven state governments to create policy that has contributed to widespread blaming of the teachers who serve in our nation’s poorest communities.
However, Duncan’s Department of Education has been far less attentive to accountability for its own programs. In June, the Alliance to Reclaim Our Schools, a coalition of national organizations made up of the American Federation of Teachers, Alliance for Educational Justice, Annenberg Institute for School Reform at Brown University, Center for Popular Democracy, Gamaliel, Journey for Justice Alliance, National Education Association, National Opportunity to Learn Campaign, and Service Employees International Union, asked Secretary Duncan to establish a moratorium on federal support for new charter schools until the Department improves its own oversight of the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Innovation and Improvement, which is responsible for the federal Charter School Program. The Alliance to Reclaim our Schools cites formal audits from 2010 and 2012 in which the Department of Education’s own Office of Inspector General (OIG), “raised concerns about transparency and competency in the administration of the federal Charter Schools Program.” The OIG’s 2012 audit, the members of the Alliance explain, discovered that the Department of Education’s Office of Innovation and Improvement, which administers the Charter Schools Program, and the State Education Agencies, which disburse the majority of the federal funds, are ill equipped to keep adequate records or put in place even minimal oversight.
Most recently, just last week, the Department of Education awarded $249 million to seven states and the District of Columbia for expanding charter schools, with the largest of those grants, $71 million, awarded to Ohio, despite that protracted Ohio legislative debate all year has failed to produce regulations for an out-of-control, for-profit group of online charter schools or to improve Ohio’s oversight of what are too often unethical or incompetent charter school sponsors. The U.S. Department of Education made its grant last week despite that Ohio’s legislature is known to have been influenced by political contributions from the owners of for-profit charter schools.
Is there a link to this piece (just so it can be shared easily). ?
https://janresseger.wordpress.com/2015/10/05/arne-duncans-misguided-policies/
My mistake!
Race to the Top is no more than an extortion practice from Duncan and Obama to entice states to adopt their failed test and punish agenda. The main goal is to hasten the proliferation of charters, which are less efficient, effective and more costly than public education. RTTT has been a huge failure, but they refuse to accept reality. This is not the role of the federal government.
Hi Diane – LA Times wrote this editorial about charters and traditionals in LAUSD. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-lausd-charter-expansion-20151002-story.html
This sentence: “They have legitimate reason to worry: Charters draw more-motivated and higher-achieving students, so they often leave traditional schools worse off, with less money to serve more students with behavioral problems and disabilities.” is surprising from the editorial board. I think (could be wrong) this is the first time the LA Times has acknowledged this.
Educator: I have read many of the LA Times editorials on charters. They are almost always pro-charter. But a while back, the Times had an editorial questioning the value of the Parent Trigger, one of the more egregious charter efforts to get rid of public schools. Glad to see that someone who writes editorials there understands that every charter that opens is another dagger in the heart of public education, unless they are charters that serve kids with high needs, the original intention of charters.
I think it’s real progress than anyone is discussing the effects on public schools at all, quite frankly.
Reblogged this on Crazy Normal – the Classroom Exposé and commented:
Arne Duncan changed the national education goal from equality of educational opportunity for all to a “race to the top” for the few, and President Obama did nothing to stop him.
Don’t forget that President Obama appointed Duncan and then did nothing to stop him. The Congress also did nothing to stop Duncan. Talking about it in Congress is not the same as doing something. Doing something is stopping this crime.
“The Maestro”
Arne played the first VAMbone
But Maestro was Obama
Who hired the band and set the tone
For corporatic drama
TAGO!
😎
Chetty picked his VAMdoline
At Nobel winning speeds
John king played the hubcap rim
And Rhee, she played the Rheeds
VAMdolin
sorry
Are all branches of government this dis-functional?
We need an oversight committee to examine the DOE’s actions.
To your first question: YES! For example, remember the VA hospital nightmare?
I think all government entities have been infected by this obsession over metrics to the exclusion of all else.
No, not at all, but then again “all the branches of government” encompasses quite a lot of different things from local schools, police, firefighters, etc. . . to state department’s of transportation, health, etc. . . to the federal national park service, EPA, Department of War, etc. . . .
My example when someone says something to the effect that “gubmint is worse than worthless”, I point out to our state Conservation Department which is one of the best in the WORLD and has been since the mid 1930s when Missourians voted on a constitutional amendment authorizing it and keeping the dedicated tax out of the hands of the legislators. And then we Show Me Staters voted another tax in the mid 70s to provide more funds, again the politicos can’t touch.
So The answer to your question flos56 is no!
I TOTALLY agree that Duncan has been a disaster. In all honesty I voted for Obama but deeply regret his decision to back Duncan.
However I HOPE that this will not discourage people from voting Democratic in the next election. I wrote in another blog that the next president will likely appoint 4 new judges for the Supreme Court, a VITALLY important thing to consider when voting. The HORRIFIC decisions by the Roberts court has resulted not only in the DISASTROUS “Citizens United” but in about 9 other major decisions weakening the power of the people against the corporate interests. These were mostly passed by a 5 – 4 decision, ergo the importance of the new appointees. PLEASE do not JUST consider the appointment of Duncan as the sole reason for your next vote.
Just another liberal willing to sell out the students of America for a social agenda. Ironic that modern liberalism is anything but generous.
Is it selling out our students to provide for a better America? Is there only one item that affects them? If being a liberal it is meant that I believe in the totality of looking at a problem, I plead guilty. I fail to see your logic.
I want to suggest a correction: neo-liberal instead of liberal
Most Americans who have been tagged as liberals are really progressives (and they are not socialists) and there is a difference. Neo-liberals (an element of the Democratic Party) and neo-conservatives (an element of the GOP) are razor sharp splinters left over from the Nationalist Socialist German Workers’ Party (Nazi Party).
I agree that charter schools discriminate against the poor. Duncan has been a disaster to education and his successor will do the same. There is too much testing now and to tie teacher evaluations to test scores is criminal.
Thank you for giving Jan Resseger the attention and praise she deserves in your blog today. Jan writes powerfully and tirelessly on behalf of public education and all the children of our nation.
Concur!
Ohio lawmakers are now on Month Ten of an exclusive focus on charter schools.
93% of the kids in this state attend public schools, but no matter! Every legislative session revolves around either charter schools or vouchers.
I’m torn, though. It might actually be better for public schools if they just continue to ignore the unfashionable “public sector” schools completely. Risk getting some new crackpot scheme or gimmick or just lay low and hope they continue to focus exclusively on charter and private schools? It’s a tough call.
http://www.ohio.com/news/break-news/lawmakers-question-private-scoring-process-for-federal-charter-school-grant-1.629609#.VhKcHyqRvYk.twitter
With this information, is there any hope?