Archives for the month of: May, 2016

Jeannie Kaplan was twice elected to the Denver Board of Education and is well qualified to review the claims made about that city’s schools. Due to an infusion of reformer cash from across the nation starting in 2009, Denver’s elected school board is now completely dominated by supporters of choice and high-stakes testing (i.e. corporate reformers). These “reformers” have a 7-0 grip on the city’s schools and its publicity machine, thanks to national corporate reform-minded groups like Stand for Children and Democrats for Education Reform (DFER). Their claims are repeated in the reformer media, including at Gates-funded and rightwing think tanks and publications. Jeannie is a very kind and compassionate person, and she is tired of having to refute the claims, again and again. But she comes once more to the front, to explain why Denver is a hoax, not a model.

 

In this post, she reviews the latest phony claims about “reform” in Denver.

 

She writes:

 

 

Let’s do a quick refresher course before we delve into this faux success story.

 

 

The main goals of “education reform” are:

 

Expanding charter schools, which as the state of Washington has determined are not common (public) schools;
Improving graduation rates. The most recent DPS strategic plan, Denver Plan 2020, calls for graduation rates for African American and Latino students of 89% by 2020, 90% for students who start in DPS in ninth grade;
Reducing or eliminating the achievement gap, that is, the gap between children living in poverty and those not. Another goal of Denver Plan 2020.
Eliminating the union protected workers in the public school system which can be exacerbated by closing “failing” schools and replacing them with either charter schools or innovation schools both of which are for the most part non-union;
Evaluating teachers based on test scores with all the concomitant issues around high stakes testing.

 

 

Reformers try to reach these results through something called a portfolio strategy, a business model used by Wall Street that simply put is predicated on constant churn. As Osborne writes, a portfolio strategy works “to replicate successful schools and replace failing ones.” The problem with such a strategy is students and teachers and parents and communities are neither commodities to be bought and sold nor should they be characterized as winners and losers. Denver has seen up close and personal how the chaos and churn this model brings.

 

 

Kaplan devotes the bulk of her post to debunking false claims of Denver’s success made in an article by David Osborne in the Hoover Institution-sponsored publication Education Next. EdNext cheerleads for charters, vouchers, and all forms of school choice. Osborne reliably concludes that “reform” has been a great success in Denver and that the day is in sight when most families will choose charters or other choice schools, thus obliterating neighborhood schools. Kaplan goes point by point through his article to correct him, though she notes that he provides no documentation for his statements.

 

She shows that at the present rate of change, Denver has no chance of reaching its “reform” goals by 2020. It is always dangerous for reformers to set concrete dates as predictions of their total success. This was done in Tennessee by Chris Barbic and the Achievement School District. He predicted in 2012 that the schools in the bottom 5% statewide would reach the top 25% in only five years. None of them has even managed to exceed the bottom 10% thus far and most remain in the bottom 5%.

 

Probably reformers should promise to reach their ambitious goals by 2050, a date so far removed that they won’t be held accountable in the meanwhile.

 

Kaplan concludes:

 

Denver has become a national leader for its implementation of “education reform.” This has been relatively easy to accomplish with the help of the national media who continuously bolster the “education reform” agenda of chaos and churn. “Education reformers” in Denver have all the elements in place to continue to push a failing education model. Be afraid, Denver. Be very afraid.

 

Why the hatred of neighborhood public schools? I don’t know.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gary Rubinstein, a critical friend of Teach for America, noticed something strange on Twitter: he saw tweets from Educatuon Week that boasted of TFA successes. Seemed strange. After a bit of digging, he realized that the tweets were actually sponsored advertisements, paid for by TFA.

 

Who is at fault here? TFA for paying for plugs? Or Education Week, for renting out its name and brand?

Mark Dynarski of the Brookings Institution has published a research review in which he concluded that public schools definitely have the advantage over private schools that receive vouchers. This is especially good news because rightwing ideologues continue to argue the (non-existent) benefits of vouchers, and because Brookings had become an advocacy platform for school choice since the appointment of George W. Bush’s education research director, Grover Whitehurst to run its education center  (Whitehurst no longer runs the Brown center program at Brookings).

 

Here is the executive summary. Open the link to read the full study.

 

 

Recent research on statewide voucher programs in Louisiana and Indiana has found that public school students that received vouchers to attend private schools subsequently scored lower on reading and math tests compared to similar students that remained in public schools. The magnitudes of the negative impacts were large. These studies used rigorous research designs that allow for strong causal conclusions. And they showed that the results were not explained by the particular tests that were used or the possibility that students receiving vouchers transferred out of above-average public schools.

 

 

Another explanation is that our historical understanding of the superior performance of private schools is no longer accurate. Since the nineties, public schools have been under heavy pressure to improve test scores. Private schools were exempt from these accountability requirements. A recent study showed that public schools closed the score gap with private schools. That study did not look specifically at Louisiana and Indiana, but trends in scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress for public school students in those states are similar to national trends.

 

 

In education as in medicine, ‘first, do no harm’ is a powerful guiding principle. A case to use taxpayer funds to send children of low-income parents to private schools is based on an expectation that the outcome will be positive. These recent findings point in the other direction. More needs to be known about long-term outcomes from these recently implemented voucher programs to make the case that they are a good investment of public funds. As well, we need to know if private schools would up their game in a scenario in which their performance with voucher students is reported publicly and subject to both regulatory and market accountability.

 

 

The next time you hear boastful claims about “reform,” think Chicago.

 

Poor Chicago! Arne Duncan launched his version of reform there in 2001, with Gates funding. School closings, test scores above all, new schools, charter schools. And what is left now: a public school system struggling to survive. The results of Arne’s reforms: zilch.

 

Then Obama named his basketball buddy as Secretary of Education and the reforms that failed in Chicago were imposed on the nation by the ill-fated Race to the Too, where everyone is a loser.

 

So, Mike Klonsky tells us, reform is business as usual. The Chicago way. Those that have, get more. Those that have not, get ignored.

 

Fifteen years of reform. Think Chicago. Where Democratic leaders pander to billionaires and strangle the public schools.

Elizabeth Warren has emerged as the fiercest critic of Donald Trump, totally unafraid of his derision, his sarcasm, and his Twitter attacks.

 

In a speech to the Center for Popular Democracy, Warren tore into Trump as a selfish, narcissistic, insincere, insecure, “money-grubber” who cares not a bit for the travails of ordinary working people.

 

If you read nothing else today, read Marty Rudoy’s brilliantly illustrated version of Warren’s speech, which appeared on Huffington Post.

 

Both articles linked here contain a link to the 10-minute video of the speech in which she dismantles The Donald and as Rudoy says, singes off his hair with her fiery rhetoric.

 

Rudoy concludes:

 

Senator Warren would make an excellent vice presidential candidate in 2016. But she’d be an even better President. That won’t happen in 2016, but life is long, and she has the brains, the passion and the ability to communicate that the progressive-liberal base salivates over.

 

 


Peter Greene reliably reads all the studies, think tank reports, foundation proclamations, and other stuff that pours forth from the Think About Education Industry.

 

In this post, he is thinking about something else, something very important: his 18-month-old grandson.

 

This is a young man with a long list of studies, reports, and policy briefs. Well, diapers, not so much briefs.

 

As Peter writes:

 

He is, at 18 months, a Man of Adventure. He knows many exciting activities, such as Putting One Thing Inside of Another Thing, or Stomping Vigorously Upon the Ground. He knows the word “dog” and is involved extensive survey of just how many dogs there are in the world, which also involves working out which survey items are dogs, and which are not. In the photo above, you can gauge his mastery of Spoon Technique as applied to Ice Cream. This is part of his extensive study on What Can Be Safely and Enjoyably Eaten.

 

 While outdoors he devotes his time to Running Studies, by which I don’t mean the management of studies, but the study of actual running. A popular game– Walking Up The Top of the Hill, followed by the sequel, Running to the Bottom of the Hill (“Hill” here defined as “Stretch of mildly tilted ground”). This dovetails with another one of his spirited experiments on the question of When Is It a Good Time To Applaud and Cheer? (The complete answer has not yet been compiled, but it clearly includes “after you have made it to the top of the hill” and “after you have run down.”)

 

Peter knows that somewhere there are people with Very Important Titles trying to figure out ways to determine whether this child is improving. What test should be devised? How should he be measured? Will he ever amount to anything if he doesn’t have a battery of tests to rate him, rank him, and enable comparison to children of the same age in other states and nations?

Over the past couple of weeks, there have been many articles about PARCC deleting blogs and tweets. In every case, PARCC complains that the offending blogger and Tweeter has infringed on its copyright.

 

But Mercedes asks an overlooked question: Does PARCC Inc. actually own the copyright to the PARCC tests?

 

Mercedes seeks the answer directly from Laura Glover, the executive of PARCC Inc.

 

If they own the PARCC, let the world see the evidence.

Class Size Matters will hold its annual “Skinny Awards” (the opposite of the Broad awards) in New York City on June 9. Unlike the Broad awards, which come with a prize of $1 million or so, the Skinny awards are accompanied by a lucite figure and the priceless gratitude of many. Class Size Matters fights for smaller classes, research-based practices, and student privacy.

 

You are invited!

 

Please click on the link to reserve your seat for this wonderful event.

 

 

I will be there, along with Leonie Haimson and other friends and allies who fight for better schools for all.

 

 

 

 

Class Size Matters Annual

 

“Skinny” Awards Dinner

 

 

When: Thursday, June 9 at 6:30 PM
Where: Il Bastardo/Bocca Di Bacco
191 7th Ave (21st St)
New York, NY 10011

 

 
A fundraiser for Class Size Matters

Please join us to honor

investigative reporter Juan Gonzalez

with a Lifetime “Skinny”award

and

former Bronx member of the Panel for Educational Policy

Robert Powell

 

 

An opportunity to enjoy a four course dinner with wine

 

 

Tickets: $250 – Defender of Public Education

 

$150 – Patron

 

$75 – Supporter

 

A new study based on publicly available data on the state’s website finds that the state has wasted millions of federal dollars designated for charter schools. Of the state’s federally funded charter schools, 37% either never opened or were among the state’s lowest performing schools. Only recently, the U.S. Department of Education decided to award another $71 million to expand the charter industry in Ohio, but the new funding has been delayed because of outrage over scandals in the state’s charters. The study was conducted by the Ohio Charter School Accountability Project.

 

 
New Study Shows Millions Intended for High-Performing Charter Schools
Went to Some of Ohio’s Worst – and Others That Never Even Opened

 

 

For Immediate Release: May 26, 2106

 

 

COLUMBUS – The federal government has sent more money to Ohio to expand “high-performing” charter schools than all but two other states, but Ohio spent millions on some of the lowest-performing schools. And nearly $4 million went to schools that never opened, according to a new analysis.

 

 

The Ohio Charter School Accountability Project did the analysis to determine how a state with so many of America’s worst-performing charter schools could be in line for so much federal money intended to help the best ones.

 

 

Ohio ranks third nationally in total money received during the program’s 21-year history. During that time, the U.S. Department of Education did just one assessment of the grants’ success in Ohio. Although it raised serious questions about the Ohio Department of Education’s ability to properly distribute the money, nothing appears to have changed as a result.

 

 

“As Ohio takes steps to make charter school sponsors more accountable under the reform law passed last year, it’s important that policy makers understand the past,” said OEA President Becky Higgins. “Together with our colleagues at Innovation Ohio and ProgressOhio, we examined how these Charter School Program (CSP) grants have been awarded, and tried to identify the shortfalls along the way. Ohio cannot afford to waste money on failing charter schools. It needs to invest in the good ones.’’

 

 

The new analysis, Belly Up: A Review of Federal Charter School Grants, shows how state and federal education departments ignored warning signs, systemically wasted tax dollars and made learning more difficult for many Ohio students.

 

 

Among the main findings:

 

 

· Of the 292 Ohio charter schools that have received federal CSP funding since 2006, 108 (37 percent) have closed or never opened, totaling nearly $30 million. Meanwhile, barely 2 percent of all companies nationwide that have received any federal grants or incentives since 2000 have failed.

 

 

· The Ohio tally includes 26 charter schools that received nearly $4 million in CSP funding but never opened. There are no records to indicate whether any of these public funds was returned.

 

 

· Ohio charters that received past CSP funding and State Report Card grades in the 2014-2015 school year had a median Performance Index score that was lower than all but 15 of Ohio’s 613 school districts.

 

 

· Since the federal grant program began 21 years ago, its lone assessment – conducted by WestEd – identified material weaknesses that appear to have been ignored by federal grant makers. In one instance, a potential grant reviewer even told the Ohio Department of Education that she was unqualified for the job and asked to be excluded from its reviewers’ list. Instead, the department thanked her for “agreeing to participate as a community school grant reader.”

 

 

· Paolo DeMaria, recently appointed Ohio Superintendent of Public Instruction, was Associate Superintendent of Finance and School Options at the time WestEd raised concerns about Ohio’s processes for distributing the federal money to charter schools.

 

 

Of the 44 Ohio charter schools where State Auditor David Yost conducted surprise attendance audits recently, 17 had received federal CSP funding. One of them – the London Academy – only had 10 of the 270 students ODE thought it had in attendance the day Yost’s investigators showed up. All told, these audited schools received about $6.6 million in federal funding.
Last September, federal officials stunned education experts by announcing that Ohio would receive $71 million in CSP grants – more than any other state. Ohio’s large award came in spite of its reputation as one the worst charter states in the country, according to national charter advocates. The swift and severe criticism that followed prompted USDOE to put Ohio’s award on hold.

 

 

“We urge federal regulators to revamp the way in which it makes grants so that the money goes to the best performing charter schools,” said Innovation Ohio President Keary McCarthy. “The mistakes of the past should not be repeated in the awarding of future grants.”

 

 

Those mistakes include giving millions to the state’s most notorious charter school scofflaws, including:

 

 

· Horizon Science Academies and Noble Academies: Total CSP Grants: 7.6 million

 

 

Linked to a Muslim cleric exiled in Pennsylvania, the chain is the subject of an ongoing FBI investigation, and WikiLeaks revealed cables showing the U.S. State Department notified the CIA about suspicious visas for teachers and administrators. In June 2014, 19 of its schools were raided by the FBI, including four in Ohio. The Ohio schools also have been dogged by allegations of test-tampering, teachers using racial slurs in the classroom, unqualified teachers, sexual misconduct in the classroom. ODE investigated allegations raised by teachers who witnessed the problems but found no wrongdoing.

 

 

· Imagine Schools: Total CSP Grants: $5.9 million

 

 

The chain has been under fire nationally for saddling schools with exorbitant leases paid to its subsidiary, SchoolHouse Finance. Imagine recently lost lawsuits in Indiana and Missouri over the same type of abusive leases seen in Ohio. A federal judge in Missouri ordered Imagine to pay $1 million and called the lease arrangement “self-dealing.’’ One of the chain’s worst-performing Ohio schools, Romig Road in Akron, is among the charters that closed – but received federal grant money. All of Imagine’s Ohio schools received a D or F on the most recent state report cards.

 

 

· White Hat Management: Total CSP Grants: $1.4 million
Owner David Brennan has been the most powerful and influential of Ohio’s charter school operators since state money started flowing to them. Brennan’s schools also are routinely among the lowest performing. While Ohio’s historically lax regulations make it difficult to close even the worst schools, several of Brennan’s schools have been shut down for academic reasons or contractual non-compliance. Staffers for GOP state Auditor David Yost made surprise visits to charters to see if they are padding attendance records and concluded that White Hat’s dropout recovery schools were among the worst.

 

 

It’s been well documented that ODE’s grant application for the $71 million was inaccurate and misleading, prompting state officials to revise the number of poor-performing charter schools in Ohio from six on its initial application to 57 – a tenfold increase. The author of the application, David Hansen, was forced to resign as head of ODE’s office of school choice and community schools after getting caught illegally cooking the state’s accountability system to benefit Ohio’s politically connected eSchool operators.

 

 

It is unclear when or if federal regulators will release the $71 million.

 

 

The Ohio Charter School Accountability Project is a joint venture of the Ohio Education Association, Innovation Ohio and ProgressOhio. OEA and IO host the website, knowyourcharter.com, which provides data from the Ohio Department of Education on how the state’s charter schools are faring compared to local public schools.

 

 

For More Information, contact:

 

 

Stephen Dyer, Innovation Ohio Education Fellow, 330-338-1486
Keary McCarthy, Innovation Ohio President, 614-425-9163

A group of parents in Texas has filed suit against the state education agency to stop the use of this year’s scores to punish students and schools.

 

The legislature passed a law requiring the tests to be shortened, but the state education agency did not comply.

 

Its failure to abide by the law invalidates the tests, the parents believe.

 

Commissioner Mike Morath does not agree and intends to use the test results for accountability purposes, continuing the test obsession in Texas.