Archives for the year of: 2015

Ex-Governor Ted Strickland of Ohio wrote a blistering letter to Arne Duncan to complain about the $71 million awarded to Ohio’s floundering charter sector. Strickland is now running for the seat of Republican Senator Rob Portman. Strickland was joined by other high-ranking Democrats. Also joining in: U.S. Rep Tim Ryan, the Democratic caucus of the Ohio Senate, state school board member Mary Rose Oakar and State Rep. Teresa Fedor, the ranking democrat on the House Education Committee.

Duncan’s gift went to a sector that has been under fire in the Ohio media for scandals, corruption, and political payoffs.

Here is Ted Strickland’s letter:

The Honorable Ame Duncan

Secretary, U.S. Department of Education Lyndon Baines Johnson (LBJ) Department of Education Building

400 Maryland Ave, SW Washington, DC 20202

October 5, 2015

Dear Mr. Secretary,

I write to add my name to the growing chorus of disbelief and disappointment with your recent recommended award of $71 million for charter schools in Ohio. As we have discussed many times, I am not against all charter schools and am certainly not opposed to high quality, not-for­ profit school choice. But too many of Ohio’s charter schools are an embarrassment. Those who care about kids are ashamed that these failing schools are being funded by the taxpayers, and that Ohio is still allowing kids to be educated at these clearly ineffective institutions.

And it has only gotten worse. Less than a year ago, the very same organization whose research the Department cites in its press release (Stanford University’s Center for Research on Education Outcomes) found that, “On average, students in Ohio ‘s traditional public schools learned significantly more than students in charter schools in both reading and mathematics.” The Center also finds, “The disadvantage for charter students is 14 fewer days of learning in a school year in reading and 43 fewer days of learning in math for the same time period .”

Why is the Department rewarding this unacceptable behavior? Not only are these poor performing charter schools undeserving of millions of additional funds, this grant to charters comes at a time when many of Ohio’s traditional public schools are facing significant cuts and are being asked to do more with less. Surely this money could be better invested in public schools that have a proven track record of better serving Ohio students.

And if dismal charter school performance isn ‘t enough, we now know that Ohio’s State Department of Education was illegally propping them up. In July, Ohio’s chief charter school oversight officer-the very person who filled out Ohio ‘s application for your grant money-resigned when it was discovered that he deliberately tampered with charter school sponsor evaluations to mask just how horrible charter schools are actually performing. You just awarded $71 million in taxpayer dollars to a state department of education that has been rigging the books. The Department should go back over Ohio’s grant application and see whether it was rigged as well.

It’s not only me, or the Democrats in Ohio, or the editorial boards that are concerned about what is happening with charters. This charter situation in Ohio is so bad that even the Republican Auditor of State, a supporter of charter schools himself, said he was shocked to learn of your award. This is because in a recent audit he concluded that Ohio has a, “broken” system of charter schools.

Secretary Duncan, you need to be concerned when a state’s auditor and a supporter of charter schools has this type of reaction to your grant announcement.

All of these things have been widely publicized , and I cannot for the life of me understand why the Department awarded a state whose charter school office is riddled in scandal the largest sum of money of any state.

I fear ideology has clouded good judgement in this decision, and I urge to you go back and look at the hard data. If you do, I am confident you will reconsider. There is no way this award is justified , and what bothers me the most is that it is Ohio’s children that will suffer.

Sincerely,

Ted Strickland

Former Ohio Governor

The latest from Ohio: parents and educators take a stand against the destruction of their public schools:

“Ohio now has Public Education Partners – a new 401(c)3 that aims to act as an “umbrella” advocacy group that unites all the many grassroots parent/teacher/community groups in Ohio that are fighting corporate “reform,” including charters. We don’t have the money that Lager, Brennan, et al have, but we do have the power of our voices & our votes. Our Board includes current & retired teachers, local school board members, and such notables as Bill Phillis – executive director of Ohio Coalition for Equity & Adequacy in Public Education Funding (Diane has posted his blog entries several times), among others.

“Our inaugural “Summit” is being held on 10/17 in Dublin, OH. Stephen Dyer of Innovation Ohio is our keynote – he has been relentless in writing about charter abuses. We will be having breakout sessions on Youngstown, Charters, Opt Outs, Parent Advocacy groups, etc. Tom Dunn, Superintendent of Miami County ESC is rounding out the day by helping us “connect the dots” and determine the next steps in our fight. It should be a great networking opportunity for those in Ohio who truly want to save our public schools. Cost is a modest $15 which includes lunch. Message me through this site if you would like registration information – I would love to meet you Chiara, Deb, drakestraw and other Ohio frequent commenters!! “

Vince Guerrieri is a Youngstown native and a writer. He tells the history of Youngstown, Ohio, in this post. Governor John Kasich has targeted Youngstown as a school system that will be taken over by the state, with the assumption that its public schools will eventually be turned over to privately managed charters.

But as Guerrieri shows, the problems of Youngstown do not come from the schools. They are the problems of what was once a thriving city that lost industries, jobs, and population. As industries moved elsewhere, as jobs were outsourced, the population shrank and grew poorer.

He writes:

But the district – and the city – kept hemorrhaging people. The city population, which once peaked around 160,000 and was 100,000 as recently as 1980, is now down to 65,000. With a median household income around $25,000, the city is the poorest in the state and one of the poorest in the country. There are actually a higher percentage of adults in the city without a high school diploma (20 percent) than there are with at least a bachelor’s degree (16 percent). The problems in the city schools go deeper than the board and administration – although they don’t help.

The Youngstown story is a variation of the Detroit story, and a variation of the experience of many other American cities that experienced deindustrialization, loss of population, and a steady deterioration in the economy and in the quality of life.

Politicians think they can cure these deep social and economic problems by privatizing the schools. This is like putting a band-aid on cancer. It makes non sense but they will do it anyway. They will do it because they know how to open charter schools, but they don’t know how to revive cities that lack the resources to provide decent jobs. They will do it because it shows they are doing something. They will do it even though Ohio’s charter schools are among the worst in the nation. They will do it because they lack vision.

The Common Core visionaries dreamed of a world where every student across the nation would have the same standards, a curriculum aligned with the standards, and all students taking one of two tests aligned with the standards. Everything would be RIGORous, we would find out how woefully bad our schools are, teachers would stop “lying” to students, and parents would flee to charters and voucher schools. Best of all, according to Secretary Duncan, parents in Oregon could compare their child with children in other states.

According to this story in the Néw York Times by Motoko Rich, the dream is falling apart.

Several states have adjusted their passing score to avoid telling 70% of the state’s students that they failed.

“The Common Core has been bedeviled by controversy almost from the start; because of the backlash, a few states have already abandoned the Common Core. Fewer than half of the 40 that adopted it originally are using tests from either of the testing consortia that develop the exams, making it difficult to equate results from different states.”

The bad news is that Arne blew away $360 milion on the tests, and the states have wasted hundreds of millions more to prepare for the tests, to buy new technology for the tests, and to change instruction to fit the tests.

The good news is that we don’t need either of the Common Core tests to know how students in Oregon or Maine compare to students in other states. For that purpose, we have the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), which compares states, measures achievement gaps. NAEP provides all the data anyone needs. I have yet to meet a parent who wanted to know how their child compared to children in other states. They want to know if they are getting along with other children, if they are doing the work that is right for their grade, if they are good citizens in school.

Education Reform Now is the political action arm of Democrats for Education Reform. DFER is privatization, financed by hedge fund managers. It supports charters, high-stakes testing, evaluation of teachers by test scores, and is in general opposed to public education and not friendly to teachers or to unions.

Here is their side by side on Hillary and Bernie.

While the mainstream media, mostly owned by six corporations, reports on politics as a horse race or personality show, David Sirota follows the money, without fear or favor.

Here is his news:

http://davidsirota.com/

** October 6, 2015

Friends:

http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital

It’s been a while since I last emailed, but I wanted to pass on some exciting news in my world – I’ve just been named editor-in-chief of International Business Times’ new blog/website POLITICAL CAPITAL (http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital) . Our team will be using the new site to intensify our investigative money-in-politics coverage in advance of the 2016 election. I hope you will check it out – and pass this email on to anyone else you think might be interested.

Find Political Capital by clicking here (http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital)

Follow Political Capital’s Twitter feed here (https://twitter.com/Poli_Capital) (it is @Poli_Capital (https://twitter.com/Poli_Capital) )

Read the press release about the project here (http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/international-business-times-launches-political-capital-300153990.html)

As IBT Global Editor in Chief Peter S. Goodman put it: “Political Capital is obsessed with exposing the full stories behind the political headlines, with special focus on the moneyed interests seeking to influence policy.”

In the first 24 hours since launch, we’ve already broken big stories on Chris Christie’s email private address (http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/chris-christie-had-two-private-email-accounts-nj-governor-blocks-release-any) , Bernie Sanders’ GOP alliances
(http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/bernie-sanders-gop-ally-opposing-export-import-bank-2125378) , Jeb Bush’s old firm being under investigation (http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/sec-probe-jeb-bushs-old-firm-may-have-intensified-report-2125557?rel=most_read3) , and the economist targeted by Elizabeth Warren (http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/economist-targeted-elizabeth-warren-had-long-history-corporate-sponsored-reports) . I hope you’ll check out Political Capital, follow its Twitter feed (https://twitter.com/Poli_Capital) — and, of course, send me any ideas you may have for our ongoing coverage.

Rock the boat,

David

Investigative reporters David Sirota and Matthew Cunningham-Cook, writing in the International Business Times, detail Vice-President Joe Biden’s role in making it harder for college students to reduce their debts.

Jennifer Ryan did not love the idea of taking on debt, but she figured she was investing in her future. Eager to further her teaching career, she took out loans to gain certification and later pursued an advanced degree. But her studies came at a massive cost, leaving her confronting $192,000 in student loan debt.

“It’s overwhelming,” Ryan told International Business Times of her debts. “I can’t pay it back on the schedule the lenders have demanded.”

In the past, debtors in her position could have used bankruptcy court to shield them from some of their creditors. But a provision slipped into federal law in 2005 effectively bars most Americans from accessing bankruptcy protections for their private student loans.

In recent months, Democrats have touted legislation to roll back that law, as Americans now face more than $1.2 trillion in total outstanding debt from their government and private student loans. The bill is a crucial component of the party’s pro-middle-class economic message heading into 2016. Yet one of the lawmakers most responsible for limiting the legal options of Ryan and students like her is the man who some Democrats hope will be their party’s standard-bearer in 2016: Vice President Joe Biden.

As a senator from Delaware — a corporate tax haven where the financial industry is one of the state’s largest employers — Biden was one of the key proponents of the 2005 legislation that is now bearing down on students like Ryan. That bill effectively prevents the $150 billion worth of private student debt from being discharged, rescheduled or renegotiated as other debt can be in bankruptcy court.

Biden’s efforts in 2005 were no anomaly. Though the vice president has long portrayed himself as a champion of the struggling middle class — a man who famously commutes on Amtrak and mixes enthusiastically with blue-collar workers — the Delaware lawmaker has played a consistent and pivotal role in the financial industry’s four-decade campaign to make it harder for students to shield themselves and their families from creditors, according to an IBT review of bankruptcy legislation going back to the 1970s.

Biden’s political fortunes rose in tandem with the financial industry’s. At 29, he won the first of seven elections to the U.S. Senate, rising to chairman of the powerful Judiciary Committee, which vets bankruptcy legislation. On that committee, Biden helped lenders make it more difficult for Americans to reduce debt through bankruptcy — a trend that experts say encouraged banks to loan more freely with less fear that courts could erase their customers’ repayment obligations. At the same time, with more debtors barred from bankruptcy protections, the average American’s debt load went up by two-thirds over the last 40 years. Today, there is more than $10,000 of personal debt for every person in the country, as compared to roughly $6,000 in the early 1970s.

That increase — and its attendant interest payments — have generated huge profits for a financial industry that delivered more than $1.9 million of campaign contributions to Biden over his career, according to data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.

Student debt, which grew as Biden climbed the Senate ladder and helped lenders tighten bankruptcy laws, spiked from $24 billion issued annually in 1990-91 to $110 billion in 2012-13, according to data from the Pew Research Center.

According to the Institute for College Access and Success, as of 2012, roughly one-fifth of recent graduates’ student debt was from private loans that “are typically more costly” than government loans.

Consequently, every major Democratic presidential candidate has introduced his or her own plan to reduce college debt. Biden himself has spotlighted the issue as he has publicly pondered a White House bid. Earlier this month he attended an event to discuss student debt at community colleges, telling students at Miami-Dade College: “I doubt there were many of you who could sit down and write a check for $6,000 in tuition without worrying about it.” His comments amplified his rhetoric from the 2012 election, when he decried the fact that “two-thirds of all the students who attend college take out loans to pay for school.” He said that the accumulated debt means that when the typical student graduates, “you get a diploma and you get stapled to it a $25,000 bill.”

But advocates for stronger protections for debtors argue that Biden was a driving force in creating the laws that made the problem worse.

“Joe Biden bears a large amount of responsibility for passage of the bankruptcy bill,” Ed Boltz, president of the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys, said in an interview with IBT.

That legislation created a crisis, said Northeastern University law professor Daniel Austin. Federal Reserve data show that about 1.1 million people face student debt loans of $100,000 or more, and roughly 167,000 face student loans of $200,000 or more.

The New York Times reported a new study showing the value of union membership in boosting academic achievement.

Not only does union membership raise the wages of working people, which means a better standard of living for children, but it leads to policies that help schools and children.

It is well established that unions provide benefits to workers — that they raise wages for their members (and even for nonmembers). They can help reduce inequality.

A new study suggests that unions may also help children move up the economic ladder.

Researchers at Harvard, Wellesley and the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank, released a paper Wednesday showing that children born to low-income families typically ascend to higher incomes in metropolitan areas where union membership is higher….


Their most interesting explanation is that unions are effective at pushing the political system to deliver policies — like a higher minimum wage and greater spending on schools and other government programs — that broadly benefit workers. Perhaps not surprisingly, three cities that appear to reflect the union effect — San Francisco, Seattle and New York — are all jurisdictions where the minimum wage is rising substantially (though for New York it is only for workers in fast-food chains.)….

It’s important to emphasize that the study does not establish causality — the authors can’t prove that unions are driving the improvement in mobility. For that matter, they don’t attempt to. The finding establishes only that, in their words, “mobility thrives in areas where unions thrive….”

And that, in turn, suggests something potentially important, though equally speculative, about the effects of unions more broadly: Higher rates of unionization may give rise to certain norms that instill a greater sense of agency in workers.

For example, people who belong to unions are generally aware that they have certain rights in the workplace and are encouraged to speak up if they believe they’ve been mistreated. It’s the kind of norm that could leach out into a broader population — to both union members and their nonunion peers — if unions are sufficiently visible and active, which could in turn help boost economic mobility.

Los Angeles parent activist Karen Wolfe went to a meeting of the Associsted Administrators of Los Angeles, which was held at the Cathedral of Our Lady of Angels. As she listened to LAUSD members speak, she thought she heard a faint rumble, growing louder by the minute. She wondered if she really was hearing them speak truth to power, unafraid of the biggest bully in the city.

Is it possible?

Arthur Goldstein, a veteran high school teacher in the Néw York City public schools and a master blogger, does not agree with Beltway insider Andrew Rotherham that it is too soon to judge Arne Duncan’s tenure as Secretary of Education.

Goldstein does not agree. Goldstein judges Duncan to be not just a failure but a public official who inflicted harm on students, teachers, principals, and public schools.

“Wow. I wish I agreed with that. But with the entire country embracing Race to the Top, Gun to the Head policies like Common Core, I’m not feeling the love. The high-stakes testing and developmentally inappropriate tasks for our children (and not his, or Duncan’s, or Obama’s) are intolerable. That’s not to mention the junk-science teacher ratings that have been foisted upon us, rejected by none other than the American Statistical Association.”

Duncan brought us the “education wars,” with newly energized “reformers” opposing unions, tenure, and public schools, while boasting about the superiority of privately managed charters, especially those that demand robotic compliance by students and teachers.

Goldstein writes:

“I’m not sure the education debate can get any nastier. For one thing, our unions are under attack, and SCOTUS may reduce us to virtual “Right to Work” status. For another, accomplished though King may be, I’ve seen precious little evidence of thoughfulness from him, Diane Ravitch goes so far as to call him “brilliant” based on his academic credentials. But King is remarkably thin-skinned and unable to deal with criticism. He thinks it’s beyond the pale when people comment that his signature programs, Common Core and junk science, are not good enough for his own children, in private schools.

“Furthermore, John King shows little evidence of being able to play well with others. He actually canceled a series of public meetings when people dared disagree with him. In fact, he went so far as to call teachers and parents special interests. That’s what we get for advocating for the kids we love, I guess. In Spanish, they say, “Tiene doctorado pero no es educado.” This means, roughly, he has a doctorate but he isn’t educated. In Spanish, being educated means not simply sitting through some classes, but rather behaving well. King’s been to Harvard but treats the people he ostensibly serves with a sorely limited scope ranging from indifference to outright contempt.”

Just for the record, I said that King was “brilliant” based on his remarkable ability to earn simultaneous degrees from Harvard Law School and a doctorate from Teachers College, while apparently working at an Uncommon Schools charter in Massachusetts. Maybe I should have said “astonishing,” “amazing,” or “incredible.”

The fact is that John King managed to antagonize more parents and educators than any of his predecessors. He moved fast and furiously and created a tidal wave of opposition. He was widely viewed as arrogant and hostile to those he was hired to serve. There was no question he believed in his mission of testing and rating; he did not think that listening was part of his job.