Massachusetts voters will decide whether to increase the number of privately managed charter schools in a referendum in November. Question Two will determine whether the state adds 12 new charter schools every year, using money subtracted from public schools.
Advocates for privatization have launched a $2.3 million advertising budget with a deceptive ad, calling on voters to vote YES for “stronger public schools.” The ad refers to privately managed, unaccountable charter schools as “public schools,” which they are not.
Public schools are under democratic control, not private and corporate management. Public schools are financially transparent; charter schools are not. Public schools must comply with all federal and state laws relating to children with disabilities and English language learners; charter schools are not. Public schools are required to comply with state laws related to student discipline, suspension, and expulsion; charter schools are not.
The ad does not acknowledge that more money for charter schools means less money for public schools. The tiny percentage of children in charters will benefit as the great majority of children in public schools get larger classes and fewer programs.
Wake up, citizens of Massachusetts! Voting yes on Question a Two will WEAKEN YOUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
A former Obama staffer wrote on Twitter that the goal was to “supplant public schools with charters”
Hey- did the President and his team have a duty to tell the public that? Just wondering.
If they’re so confident that privatizing public schools is the way to go, why do they never run on that?
How hostile WAS the Obama Administration to public schools the last 8 years if the goal was to “supplant” them?
It explains a lot, doesn’t it? It explains why public schools have fared so poorly under ed reform.
The President should have told voters. He had a duty.
https://twitter.com/PCunningham57
Does the special charter law have anything at all to offer public schools, or is this another complete rip-off for the unfashionable public sector schools?
Lawmakers in Ohio don’t even mention the 93% of students who attend public schools anymore. That will happen in Massachusetts too.
“The ad does not acknowledge that more money for charter schools means less money for public schools. ”
As recently discussed in this thread:
https://dianeravitch.net/2016/08/07/steven-thomas-how-a-no-excuses-charter-school-nearly-ruined-his-life/#comment-2583522
“Here in Massachusetts, I think there may be the most generous payments anywhere in the country to traditional public schools for increased loss of students to public charter schools. This is what was planned: http://www.doe.mass.edu/charter/finance/tuition/Reimbursements.html
But there have been occasional shortfalls that may in recent times push the total under 200% of a year’s tuition per newly emptied seat.”
and
“This is just to assist during transitional phases. In Massachusetts the plan was for the traditional public school system to be paid 100% full tuition for the emptied seats the first year and then 25% for each of the next 5 years. If you scroll down to the last chart here you’ll see the amount by which the “reimbursement” has been underfunded in some recent years.”
http://www.massbudget.org/report_window.php?loc=Charter-School-Funding,-Explained.html
Stephen,
I call phony. In Ohio, public school districts are sending invoices to the state for the millions taken from their public schools to subsidize charters. And the traditional public schools are higher performing than the charters, even in cities. Fraud. Greed. Lies.
Diane, my understanding is that more students in Massachusetts charter schools results in:
1) more funding for public schools
(The state kicks in more funding and the public charter schools are relatively successful at bringing in additional donated dollars)
3) less total funding for traditional public schools but more funding per student at such schools
Do you disagree that that is the impact?
If not, please feel welcome to shift the focus to Ohio charter school deficiencies. Seems plausible that there are many.
Far from perfect here in Massachusetts, but a torrent of the criticisms I’m seeing lately are erroneous.
Steve….you either need better information or your promoting Massachusetts charters.
Stephen, obviously charter schools in Massachusetts, the way you describe them, create an enormous waste of taxpayer monies. Reimbursement of public schools for charter infection is wasteful and inefficient. Your response was, But it’s only temporary. Temporary waste is still waste, Mr. Ronan.
Then you claim the wasteful dual payments are worth it because charters are so like totally awesome. Not true, but if it were true, then again, you’ve just reinforced the concept of the dual systems. Your arguments are twisting upon one another.
There is a better way, but it involves democracy and fairness — something the 1/10th of 1% and their armies of lawyers and public relations used car salesmen do not comprehend, and never will.
LeftCoastTeacher: “There is a better way, but it involves democracy and fairness ”
In thinking about that, you may find the “Why Charters are More Democratic” posting here provocative.
https://natmortonblog.wordpress.com/
Nat Morton wrote a very flawed and ignorant Op Ed piece that equates democracy with choice. and what is that choice this ignorant fool is talking about?
A.
Send your children to a community based, democratic, transparent, non-profit, traditional public school where parents have an elected school board that will listen to their concerns, if they have any, in open monthly meetings in a state that often outperforms most of the countries that take the international PISA test. If a majority of parents don’t like a school board, they have the choice of electing a new representatives that represent them every year. If parents don’t like a teacher, they ave a choice to request their child be moved to another class with another teacher.
B.
The other choice is to send their children to an autocratic, opaque, often fraudulent and inferior, child abusing, segregated by ability, class and/or race, publicly funded, private sector corporate charter school that worships test scores that allegedly determine college workplace readiness over the importance of developing the whole child, and the CEO and his/her appointed board if there is one answers to no parent but only to management that has one main goal, turn a profit and/or pay high wages to management.
The United States is a Constitutional Democracy, a system of government based on popular sovereignty in which the structures, powers, and limits of government are set forth in a constitution that protects the people from the abuses of govenrment but not the abuses of powerful corporations run by autocrats that think like Donald Trump, Bill Gates, the Walmart Walton family, Eli Broad, etc.
Choice is not the foundation of the U.S. Constitution. The 1st Amendment ensure freedom of religious choice and freedom of speech, and that is it.
Read the U.S. Constitution. It does not say that the U.S. is a free country. We are not free to do whatever we want to do. That means we do not have total freedom of choice and never have. That is a myth created by the Koch brothers’ (ALEC) funded libertarian tea party movement by two billionaire brothers that resent the restrictions that U.S. Constitution and the laws of this country put on them so they can’t pollute the environment to boost their profits, wealth and power.
Read your Constitution:
http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html
The corporate charter school industry is misleading people to think that choice should include the choices between A & B above, and then that industry uses misleading, often lying ads to trick people into making a choice that will end up making money for the liars, and that choice takes away the power of parents to use the democratic process to correct problems in their community based traditional public schools when they happen.
Once the public schools are gone, parents will be faced with corporate schools that are run the same way Walmart is, but there will be no choice, because once the community based, democratic, transparent public schools are gone, that alleged choice will go with them, and then there will only be the local Walmart corporate charter school with no public democratic process to correct the system when it goes wrong. And if your child doesn’t fit the profile the corporation is willing to teach, out that child goes with no other choice for the parents to make (it has already happened in New Orleans, thousand of children unaccounted for after they are dumped by the corporate charters).
Then the streets become the child’s school and that lack of choice comes with high risks: drugs, an early death, prison and poverty.
Stephen,
Charter schools are not democratic. Did you read the article by Carol Burris that I posted recently? How is it “democratic” when billionaires comprise the board of a charter school in Harlem? If a parent has an issue, who do they call? Ghostbusters?
I didn’t think about that.
Calling Ghostbusters, if they were real, would be a good idea because I think all the corporate charter school CEO’s are possessed by demons. The other choice is to contact the local Catholic exorcist.
http://www.catholicworldreport.com/Item/3800/the_return_of_the_exorcists.aspx
Provocative, perhaps. Correct, not.
Let me ask you something, Stepen. You seem like an interesting fellow. Who are you? What do you do for a living?
Diane and Lloyd,
They could try calling Puff Daddy or Andre Agassi. Or maybe there’s a customer service hotline so they can speak with a recording or an outsourced telemarketing rep in India.
The YouTube video of Netflix CEO, Reed Hastings (partnered in the Aspire charter school chain), in which he calls for an end to democratically elected school boards, says it all.
Diane: “If a parent has an issue, who do they call? Ghostbusters?”
In New York City, I don’t know precisely who would be best to call. Here in Boston, when a friend’s kids’ charter school was slated to be closed earlier this year (as it barely exceeded local traditional schools on many measures of import to the authorities), I located an extremely capable Associate Commissioner of the state Department of Elementary and Secondary Education who was able to respond rapidly to any questions/concerns/advice. That’s who I’d likely recommend the parent contact if they were here and needed to go above and beyond the school’s administration.
And yes I read the Burris article. Interesting. Thanks!
LeftCoastTeacher: “Who are you? What do you do for a living?”
I assume that Tony Schwartz is itching to author my autobiography… you know, make amends and all that. So I am wary of providing too many details, myself, in my own flat prose. Better to wait on him. Meanwhile, keep a close eye on the NY Times best seller list. “Start of the Meal” is one title under current consideration.
Ha! I won’t hold my breath. Delusions of personal grandeur, elected accountability and financial transparency all in one afternoon are enough for me.
It’s a sign of cowardice when a war is not declared. WHERE’S the FTC’s CONDEMNATION and SANCTIONING for FALSE ADVERTISING? Where’s the Massachusetts Attorney General? Speculative answer: In the plutocratic pockets.
They’ve always done this though, Linda. This is how they sold ed reform in Ohio 15 years ago.
They sold it “as improving public schools”
They did that because they wouldn’t have gotten elected with “supplanting public schools”.
It’s only after 15 years of looking at “results” that people realized this has nothing whatever to do with “improving public schools”.
You’re right, the language is ratcheting up from “parallel schools”.
Those intent on ripping off America for personal gain, see that their plot is unraveling. It makes them mean like cornered rodents.
Maura Healey is our AG…. She is getting death threats because of the stand she took on gun control. The DNC wanted the information but ever since the people in the state who are Amendment2 (and NRA in particular) have been threatening her. There are powerful forces and a lot of money in politics here. The parents collected signatures to get the ballot question about testing and common core on the November voting and the influential powers and expensive lawyers knocked it off the ballot. There are powerful people in the state and a lot of money. One of the former Commissioners — Antonucci took the side against the parents. I am not saying he is complicit (in the fraud that stole $35 million ) but he was on the BOARD of the organization that siphoned off $35 million from a “special” school with the funds designated for special education. That is what worries me about these “Boards” because they are hand selected and are not overseen by our local school committee
The former AG (Coakley) had boxes and boxes of data on the special investigation of the “special school” but the statue of limitations has run out on that one — it is getting worse with a republican governor in the state now. The Boston Globe said that Governor Baker could have stopped Trump in MA (with power/influence/money) and he did nothing so he is a “Paul Ryan” type …. I don’t blame Coakley or Healey for this mess we are in right now but it is an uphill battle and every hand and volunteer is welcomed.
MA Commonwealth Charter school laws give us Taxation without Representation is its rawest form. The appointed, not elected Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE) autonomously decide what towns will have Commonwealth charter schools thrust upon them. Tax payers and all of their elected officials have absolutely no say in the matter and no power of oversight. On BESE member said after meeting with hundreds of Brockton citizens who argued against a charter that the BESE is not supposed to consider the impact charter schools have on communities.
They only consider the written application! Brockton schools are not failing. In fact they have made dramatic gains in the past several years. Many of the programs that have contributed to that success will have to be cut to pay for the charter school.
Taxation Without Representation in the city that dumped the tea!
Mary
The Broad Foundation has re-branded too. They have a new website where they claim they “support public education”
Nary a mention of the laser-like exclusive focus on “supplanting public schools”.
Do these folks coordinate these echo chamber political campaigns? I ask since they all move in and out of the ed reform revolving door. I ask since it’s the same 150 people hiring and promoting one another.
http://broadfoundation.org/
Poor Massachusetts. It’s just starting for them. Once they open the schools then it’s time for Round Two, which is “reform funding” to funnel more public funding to charters.
After that it’s time to roll out vouchers and The Portfolio System!
Some political hack somewhere is working on voucher marketing as we speak and they’ve probably already identified the “portfolio” target cities.
Fraud, greed, lies; and plenty of out-of-town money to spread around.
What does Donald Trump and the autocratic, opaque, often fraudulent and inferior, publicly funded, private sector corporate charter school industry have in common?
A. Donald Trump breaks the record for telling lies.
B. Donald Trump made most of his money using public funds (tax payer funded subsidies) to build many of his projects.
C. Donald Trump is a bully
D. Donald Trump has a long racist record supporting segregation by not renting to blacks.
E. Donald Trump is a Fraud.
F. Donald Trump is an incompetent businessman who often does not pay his bills and is known to give himself raises as CEO while managing companies he owns that are going bankrupt.
G. Donald Trump worships at the alter of avarice.
H Donald Trump lies to students.
I (for idiot) All of the above
I was very proud of the Mayor in Haverhill MA (and school committee resolution and talking with city council on this issue)
quote: ”
Marc Kenen, executive director of the charter school association, and Mayor James J. Fiorentini (Haverhill mayor) at last night’s Haverhill School Committee discussion of a resolution against lifting the cap. [The meeting tape is online. ]
Kenan: [2:09:00]:
We don’t have a traditional school committee like you. Our board of trustees is not elected, like you. It’s an innovative model. It’s a different model, we’re trying something different. [He went on to describe it as similar to the way non-profit boards are chosen.]
Mayor Fiorentini: [2:28:10]:
The gentleman that spoke said, “We don’t have an election, we have a new and innovative way of choosing people to run our schools.” Well, we have an innovative way of running them. It’s called “democracy.”
I wrote and thanked Mayor Fiorentini; we are doing telephone calls and canvassing with door hangers in Haverhill MA two or more days a week if anyone has any time; check your local area; I know Brockton MA has a team also SAVEOURPUBLICSCHOOLSMA.com
Haverhill loses 2.7 million in these funds that go to charter; the state of MA loses 400 million (there is a city by city of how much is being drawn off)…. Yes, the ad is deceptive when they say there is “more “money for public schools.
Jean,
Send us the mayor’s email and I will personally thank him for his defense of public schools.
Thanks for all you do, Jean! (happy face emoticon)
cross posted this orwellian moment at
http://www.opednews.com/Quicklink/Massachusetts-Charter-Adv-in-Best_Web_OpEds-Advertising_Charter-Schools_Deceptive-Business-Practices_Diane-Ravitch-160810-942.html#comment612037
Reblogged this on Mary Ellen Redmond and commented:
Mandatory reading for all Massachusetts Public School teachers.
thanks for all you do to get this word out; people are uninformed and then the ads are deceptive ; a friend from NH called me after seeing the ads and she understands how misleading it is when they promote these charter schools. Also, in Brockton I have been in touch with Sue Doherty who works with MA libraries and she works on a team there. Thanks for Christine L. and others who help to get this message out.
http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com/render?m=1101367976522&ca=0a97ef2d-a676-489f-a615-fe37c3def4d2 Lawrence is in our region as well ; if you see the chart comparing Haverhill and Lawrence I am not certain that the bar graph shows all the state money that has poured into the city (but at least you can get a comparison). There is another chart I sent to Brockton team to show how their city compares with Lynn, Revere, Everett in terms of the poverty of the schools and the serious under-funding.
If you are following MA look at the blog by Tracy O’Connell Novick (she has commented here for years) and she does exceptionally well gathering data and presenting it with school committees.
Does Massachusetts have unions, industrial, public sector? Are they engaged in this battle? They should be. They are contributing to GDP, unlike the financial sector, which is behind most of this plot to destroy public education. It’s the union salaries that pay for the schools and, it’s their kids that attend the schools.
On the ground in Massachusetts, we’re doing all we can to keep our schools public. We’re using social media, phone banks, canvassing, and door knocking. The charter industry has hired out its media to the same PR group responsible for the Swift Boat ads against John Kerry in his presidential race. Out-of-staters post lies about charter performance, Peter Cunningham has weighed in on The 74. The lack of knowledge of our communities shows – one tweet praising charters actually cited a Boston Public School as an exemplar of charterdom!
Here’s a reading list:
Destroying the mythology the charter industry promotes (i.e. calling out the lies)
http://www.getcharterfactsma.org
Charters aren’t near their cap – so why must we have more?
http://www.gazettenet.com/Opinion/Columns/Max-Page—Eve-Weinbaum-No-reason-to-lift-charter-school-cap-1140117?utm_content=bufferc85d8&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
Tracking the dark money behind the ballot question
http://blogs.wgbh.org/masspoliticsprofs/2016/8/2/hidden-money-behind-great-schools-strategic-grant-partners/
Jennifer Berkshire interviews Maurice Cunningham, author of the dark money article
http://edushyster.com/family-affair/
Website for public schools and against lifting the cap on charters
http://saveourpublicschoolsma.com
If you’re on social media such as Twitter or Facebook, please consider lending a hand! If you live in Massachusetts, it’s easy to get involved IRL.
http://saveourpublicschoolsma.com/join-our-team/#volunteer
jimfior02@aol.com, this is email for Jim Fiorentini Mayor of Haverhill MA
I will also post his official “Mayor’s ” website
Thanks Christine and others here who are helping to get this information to the public.
From Ohio, thanks for all you are doing. We have valiant fighters like Denis Smith and Maureen Reedy, in our state.
And you have the Lion in Winter in Ohio: Bill Phillis and the Ohio Coalition for Equity and Adequacy.
Here’s that tweet – and commentary.
They’ve called a public school a charter.
They’ve misspelled the name – twice.
They’ve identified the quoted party as a parent – she’s a graduate, and
even the grammar is poor.
Also, thanks for all you do, Christine! (smiley emoticon face)
Major memory lapse for me to have missed Bill Phillis. Thanks.
On the media front, Plunderbund is great.
Bill Phillis is really good; also Jan Resseger https://janresseger.wordpress.com/2016/08/12/research-summarizes-the-public-school-advantage/ and of course EduShyster
Q 2
Supporters of lifting the cap are claiming that charters bring more money to public schools. Obscene amounts of money do come from the out-of-state organizations and billionaires but it goes exclusively to charters. It is that money that lets one charter school, Mystic Valley Regional, have an Olympic size swimming pool and sports facility that tax payers are not allowed to use.
I think tax payers should get a refund of their money in the amount donated by their corporate and billionaire “philanthropists.” Over 70 communities, the state PTA and national NAACP publicly oppose this ballot question #2. They are obviously not aware of the money charters are supposed to be bringing in to public schools.
Mary
Mary,
There is not an unlimited supply of money for schools. You can be sure that the charters will lobby to cut funding for public schools and divert it to charters.
I wish more people would pay attention to the evidence, like Sarah Cohodes of Teachers College. In this series of tweets, she explains how she went from being “anti-charter” to thinking that “the urban charters schools in MA have one of the most impressive track records of success ever recorded for any type of school ever.”
In her closing words: “There are many policies in the world lacking evidence to make good decisions about them. Charter schools in MA is not one of them.”
twitter.com/SarahCohodes/status/761969196469215236
If charters in Mass are so awesome, how come the billionaires are spending $6.5 million to sell them to the public.
I don’t know Ms. Chooses or her history, whether she was ever anti-charter. It is difficult to see the damage charters do to public schools and think they are a good thing.
Sarah Cohodes is funded by The Boston Foundation (motto: Undermining Public Schools for Years Before Anyone Else Even Considered It).
Click to access Charter%20School%20Demand%20and%20EffectivenessOctober2013.pdf
Thanks, Christine. So the professor has been funded by the charter industry for at least three years. That answers WT. you have to work overtime to catch the charter lies. And rely on allies like you
Cohoes’ paper was also funded by New Schools Venture Fund, whose managing partner used to be James Peyser. Peyser then had a turn as director of Families for Excellent Schools and was appointed MA Secretary of Education by our pro-charter governor, while still wearing his FES chapeau. It’s a very chummy little circle of reformistas, don’t you agree, WT?
http://edushyster.com/all-in-the-family/
Christine Langhoff; the League of Women Voters is doing a “consensus” study in the local leagues to get comments and opinions from League Members. I joined in order to stay on top of the consensus study on “charter schools”… they are doing other position statements as well for their annual meeting. Are you a mamber of the League? If not, i would like to send you a copy of the 11 questions. I was appointed as co-chair of our city group and we are having a meeting on January 14th in order to get the city comment sin to the state league by Feb 1st. There are several other leagues doing the same thing… (jean sanders jeanhaverhill@aol.com ) also thank you Christine for your comments in the Lowell Sun every little bit helps
If Boston charters are awesome, as numerous studies from Harvard and MIT have shown, it still takes some ads and messaging to overcome the propaganda against them.
Sarah Cohodes is not a liar. She says this in her tweets:
“Finally, a personal note, in case anyone cares. I come from a family with a tradition of unions and working in public schools.
“When I started research on charters in 2007, I was anti-charter, due to this background & readings from my college ed pol classes.”
You have no basis for saying that her history of opposing charters in 2007 (until she did the research) is a lie. You shouldn’t smear good scholars like that.
She is funded by charter industry
Diane: “She is funded by charter industry”
I am curious as to whether you are similarly dismissive of the research results obtained by anyone who has received any funding from the Mass Teachers Association?
Stephen,
The test scores for an autocratic, opaque, publicly funded, private sector, corporate charter school does not reveal the whole story. There is so much more often hidden behind that opaque wall. Every time that wall has breached, the evidence revealed makes me want to wage all out war against the autocrats and their minions.
The Communist Revoluiton in Russia was a reform movement. The Nazis in Germany was a reform movement. We all know what happened with those reform movements.
When a reform movement is funded by autocrats based on a foundation of lies and deceit starting with President Reagan’s misleading and fraudulent “A Nation at Risk” report in 1983, everything that follows is based on that corruption and fraud, because the United States never needed to reform its community based, democratic, transparent, non-profit traditional public schools and turn our children over to dictators and tyrants who often mentally and physically abuse them.
While there may actually be a few successful charter schools (notice the word ‘corporate’ is missing) that do not base their success on teaching to the test and treating children like they have been sent to the Soviet’s Gulag in Siberia, those few publicly funded private sector charter schools that hopefully treat our children with humanity is not enough to destroy an education system that helped build the most powerful country on the planet that is ranked the 4th most educated on Earth with almost three college graduates for every job that requires a college degree.
Traditional public schools have been so incredibly successful for so long that the U.S. publishing industry is the largest in the world generating almost $21 billion in annual revenue. That could not have happened without many Americans loving to read.
Second place is China (with almost five times the people), and its publishing industry is less than half the size of the U.S. Germany is in third place with less than a quarter of net revenue.
If the tradition public schools were so bad that they have to be replaced, how did all that happen?
It is depressing to me that some folks have so little interest in what is good for children, and so little ability to read even the most prestigious scholarship with anything resembling an open mind.
WT and Stephan Ronan –
Thanks for playing the concern troll game! But people on this blog are seasoned and we know the gig. Bye for now!
I’m sure that y’all care about children too, but the depressing thing is that you’re so sure you’re right about everything that you are completely incapable of entertaining the best scholarship without just scoffing at it like a Trump follower would scoff at climate science.
we just disagree on who is “the best” and what is “scholarship” I don’t call hyper–marketing studies “research” and I have made comments on this blog and on other blogs that cite who are some of the very best researchers who have not sold out to corporate influences and “marketing studies”.
incapable of entertaining the best scholarship
jeanhaverhill@aol.com
Lloyd: “The test scores for an autocratic, opaque, publicly funded, private sector, corporate charter school does not reveal the whole story. There is so much more often hidden behind that opaque wall. Every time that wall has breached, the evidence revealed makes me want to wage all out war against the autocrats and their minions.”
I haven’t spent much time in charter schools. But for me, this book was to some degree a wall-breaching event that left me with an especially positive impression of local charter schools that include intensive one-to-one, or small group, tutoring by diligent, highly motivated paraprofessionals: “Inside Urban Charter Schools”.
http://hepg.org/hep-home/books/inside-urban-charter-schools
And I’ve chatted with a whole bunch of kids who attend a wide variety of charter schools around here (tutored some of them), and to some of their parents. And been left with a generally positive impression. That’s true of some traditional public schools also… been more impressed with the math homework I’ve seen assigned at the Thomas Edison K-8 traditional district school than what I saw coming home with kids from a recently-defunct charter.
I retain a healthy skepticism about charter schools nationwide, particularly those operated for profit. But in virtual environments like this one, and during in-person discussions hereabouts, I get distracted by the ceaseless torrent of erroneous information attacking charter schools that is propagated by the teachers’ unions, their supporters and allies.
I’d expect that if the streams of information arriving here were more effectively cleared up of such pollution, there’s lots that you and I and Diane and others here could agree on. Such as much of what Ponderosa had to say here:
https://dianeravitch.net/2016/08/03/bill-honig-a-good-site-for-wisdom-about-schools/comment-page-1/#comment-2582475
We would agree, I think, on the vitally important role of facilitating a love of reading. And that practices in both traditional and charter public schools may be falling short of what we would hope to see in that regard.
Don’t attempt to trap me with your flawed logic.
One book that you read does not prove that a corporate charter is better than public schools that rank 1st in the country in Math and Reading and rank high on the international PISA test when compared to other countries. I suspect that book is nothing but a long Op-Ed using cherry picked facts that leaves out a lot of information. And no, I’m not going to buy it and read it. I refuse to waste my time on more corporate crap propaganda designed to mislead fools.
The autocratic, opaque, often fraudulent and inferior, publicly funded, private sector charter school industry is a direct result of a misleading report that President Reagan released in 1983 and that by itself causes this movement that profit off of our Children to lose all credibility.
In addition, there are many books and studies that prove the corporate carter school movement is a abject failure.
The most recent study was recently released that says, “NCLB Has Failed USA Kids”
“No Child Left Behind-driven policies have left the United States ‘overwhelmingly under prepared to succeed in the 21st century economy”
http://commondreams.org/news/2016/08/10/bipartisan-panel-state-lawmakers-agree-nclb-has-failed-us-kids
And a large part of those policies that increased with RTTT and the Common Core Crap and its high stakes testing doubled and then tripled down on those destructive policies that include turning over public school labeled failures by flawed and questionable tests are part of the damage.
In China, for instance, that doesn’t happen. Schools that do not perform well are not closed and the children are not turned over to publicly funded, private sector corporate charter schools. Instead, in China, teams of teachers and administrators from highly successful pbulic school are sent to help improve the education environment in the schools that need the help most.
The report from the Bipartisan Panel of State Lawmakers (link above) points out that the most successful public education systems in the world are in countries that treat their teachers with respect, supports them, and pays them what they deserve — these do not close their public schools, fire the teachers and then hire replacements that are not highly trained professions while corporations skim off profits from the public dollar.
quote: “I retain a healthy skepticism about charter schools nationwide, particularly those operated for profit.”
that is what Massachusetts will have if the “cap ” is raised. There is currently a cap … if that is raised then proliferation will begin like in FL, OH etc…. and the scandals about “special ” schools will multiply (like John Barranco’s special school in Chelmsford that siphoned off over 35 million from the neediest population — the special education students in 4 or 5 towns in his area).
Real estate/rents and “technology” have become major ways to siphon off the funds and when the state legislature thinks they have locked the barn after Barranco’s manipulations of funds and appointing his own “board” they are sadly mistaken because the proliferation of charters , scams and schemes will prevail.
The state department does not have staff to do oversight; in 25 years at an outfit in Worcester County we were audited by the State Department only once). Suzanne Bump will need a lot more staff and resources to do the full accountability thing of “charters”…. and they are looking to find every loophole that they can already. That is their whole purpose and intent.
I retain a healthy skepticism about charter schools nationwide, particularly those operated for profit.
jeanhaverhill@aol.com
Christine — “seasoned” maybe, but not smart enough to refute any of the ample scholarship on Massachusetts charter schools.
The comments by WT and Stephen Ronan illustrate why charter schools are so terrible.
When your supporters have to exaggerate and mislead in order to promote their schools, it is always because they know that the public won’t support them if they made the truthful argument, which is as follows:
Hey, there are some failing public schools that are nearly 100% at-risk kids who have to take every child who walks in the door. But we don’t! We promise to use our money on the worthy students instead of wasting it on the many, many unworthy ones who don’t deserve it. So if you are worthy, come to our charter school where we aren’t afraid to suspend the 5 year olds whose mere presence is offensive to your child. If your child performs at grade level or above, and behaves well, and won’t cost us a dime more than we want to spend, we welcome you with open arms and promise to use some of our savings to give your child some of the extras that the public schools who get our most expensive cast-offs can never do. And because our ultimate goal is to undermine public education, we promise that some right wing billionaires will happily donate millions to subsidize your child’s education. But only if he is worthy.
If he isn’t worthy, then WT and Stephen don’t actually care about your child. He deserves whatever leftovers are available once we get our rightful share — which of course includes high salaries for us and lots of marketing money to attract the kids we really want. If you happen to have one of them, come to our charter. If you don’t, well just try to come and we will give him some of our patented “your child is a miserable violent creature who has no business being in a class with normal children.”
If the people who ran charters weren’t such greedy, unethical people, they would have been using their political power to open schools that were part of the public school system instead of “compete” with them. But of course, since getting rid of unwanted kids is a feature, not a bug, in the top performing charter schools, they need to be somewhere where people don’t ask any questions.
Thanks for sharing your views so forthrightly, New York City public school parent.
I’m wondering whether I should regard these as faith-based beliefs, supported by intuition and anecdote?
Or is there anything here where you think your opinions contradict mine and also think that convincing verifiable evidence supports your point of view?
As this thread is about the Massachusetts ballot question, if there are points of disagreement could we at first confine our discussion to the reality of Commonwealth charter schools in Massachusetts?
Or do you feel like you don’t know enough about them? There are so many different types of schools here, it can be a bit confusing. We had a city council education committee meeting not so long ago organized in tight collaboration with the Mass Teachers Association where one of the speakers spoke passionately about how many times her 5-year old had been suspended. But it kind of slipped by a lot of folks, likely including those who brought her, that the school her child attended was not a Commonwealth charter school, or for that matter a Horace Mann charter, but instead an in-district turnaround school, part of the Boston Public Schools with a public charity nonprofit playing an management role, and union teachers.
I can certainly point to written statements by core opponents of lifting the charter school cap that I think are demonstrably false.
Can you point to written statements by core supporters of raising the cap that you think are demonstrably false? Note: If all else fails perhaps you could allude to the size of charter school waiting lists.
Do you feel like there’d be any significant disagreement between us regarding the funding impacts of the ballot question passing? More $ overall for public school students? More $ per student at traditional public schools, but eventually fewer total $ if and when their enrollments substantially decline? That’s my impression though it’s not an area where I claim expertise. If I’m wrong, please don’t be shy to let me know.
Stephen,
I searched for you online, but couldn’t find you. I found a very distinguished Doctor inCalifornia, none in Mass
Stephen,
You have stepped into the middle of a very long conversation. Have you read EduShyster? Did you read the MA report that found that charters have much higher suspension rates than public schools? I’m too busy to fill in on your ignorance.
Did you read the Dobbie-Fryer report last week on this blog?
Stephen Ronan wrote:
“Or do you feel like you don’t know enough about them? There are so many different types of schools here, it can be a bit confusing. We had a city council education committee meeting not so long ago organized in tight collaboration with the Mass Teachers Association where one of the speakers spoke passionately about how many times her 5-year old had been suspended. But it kind of slipped by a lot of folks, likely including those who brought her, that the school her child attended was not a Commonwealth charter school, or for that matter a Horace Mann charter, but instead an in-district turnaround school, part of the Boston Public Schools with a public charity nonprofit playing an management role, and union teachers.”
Aside from the patronizing tone, here, Stephen, you do realize that a half truth is still a lie, right?
No one needed to “bring” that parent, whom I know, to any meeting. It did indeed “slip” by many that her school wasn’t a traditional public school, until she tried to bring a complaint about the number of times her child had been suspended from his kindergarten classroom – 16 times formally and countless other occasions (without paperwork) when his mother was called or received a text and told to come and get him.
The parent had made no choice to remove her son from a traditional public school. The child had been assigned to a zoned public school, which was turned over by the MA Department of Elementary and Secondary Education to be run by a charter management organization called UP Academy. Though the school remains a BPS school in name (and its scores are attributed to the public system, not to a charter) it does not follow district practices and the parent had no recourse through the usual channels available were the school under the auspices of the public system.
When the situation was brought to light by reporting from one of Boston’s public radio stations, MA DESE claimed to be unaware that 68 kindergarteners had been suspended from the school it had taken over because DESE determined that under the auspices of the public system it performed poorly on standardized tests. In simple terms, DESE relinquished oversight to the charter management organization it hired.
See:
http://learninglab.legacy.wbur.org/2016/02/03/mass-had-hundreds-of-suspensions-last-year-in-kindergarten-and-pre-k/
http://learninglab.legacy.wbur.org/2016/03/09/what-discipline-looks-like-at-a-boston-school-with-325-suspensions/
http://edushyster.com/tag/up-academy-holland/
As for the child, since his transfer to a tradtional Boston Public school, he is thriving – which could perhaps be why his mother has become an advocate for keeping the cap on charter schools.
I don’t doubt you know the facts of this case, Stephen. I post them here for those readers who may have missed this bit of scandal from the charter world.
You also commented: “Christine — ‘seasoned’ maybe, but not smart enough to refute any of the ample scholarship on Massachusetts charter schools.”
There it is again, Stephen – barely disguised contempt for the people who do the real work of educating our most vulnerable children when we dare to challenge our “betters” in service to our students.
Sorry! Mixed up my trolls! It was WT who said I wasn’t smart enough, not Stephen Ronan.
Stephen Ronan,
Unlike the pro-charter folks, I don’t do faith-based beliefs.
I look at why so many students disappear from the TOP charter schools. And I don’t pay faux “researchers” to compare that shockingly high attrition rate to the worst failing schools and make the kinds of conclusions that YOU make, which are racist and disgusting.
According to the “faith-based” beliefs of the pro-charter movement, the reason that SO MANY low-income minority parents who desperately wanted a seat for their child in a high-performing charter school decide a month, or a year, or 3 years later to return their child to a public school is because low-income minority parents hate high-performing charter schools.
Oddly, those same low-income minority parents don’t seem to hate the non-high performing charter schools nearly as much as they hate high-performing ones. But hey, let’s not talk about that. Because that would raise all kinds of questions that racists who don’t question a charter school operator who claims that over 20% of the at-risk 5 year olds in her school are violent children who need to be suspended to curb their extremely violent tendencies.
No doubt you believe that as well, Stephen. Because your “faith-based belief” tells you that if a child is an at-risk minority, there is no reason to doubt a charter operator’s insistence that so many of them are violent at age 5 and that suspending them is absolutely necessary and not a ploy to get them out of their school.
That is the kind of “faith-based belief” that the racists that just “know” that police shootings of unarmed African-American teens are always justified. No doubt you are among them, given how “faith-based” your beliefs are.
THANK you Christine Langhoff.
Your reply so aptly demonstrates my point that the pro-charter folks are about as dishonest as they come. And if you can’t make honest arguments for supporting charter schools, no doubt there are no honest arguments to be made.
😉👊🏼
Diane: “I searched for you online, but couldn’t find you.”
I can assure you my fame stretches all up and down this block, several houses in either direction. Not all know my name, but the bicycle is familiar.
Diane: “Have you read EduShyster?”
If you have a moment, I would be grateful if you were to read my comments in response to Jennifer’s article on Michigan and the Massachusetts ballot question:
http://edushyster.com/the-cost-of-choice/
“Did you read the MA report that found that charters have much higher suspension rates than public schools? ”
I recall reading it, perhaps not every word. It’s an important issue where charter school opponents have done very valuable work. I applaud them for that. Here are are a few notes I submitted to the Boston City Council after a co-author of the report, Matt Cregor, testified before the Council’s Education Committee at the hearing I referenced above:
—
“In respect to Matt Cregor’s presentation, it wasn’t clear to me why, in December 2015, he would stress data from 2012-2013 when the data for two years later, 2014-2015, is readily available on the DESE web site: http://profiles.doe.mass.edu/state_report/ssdr.aspx
“The shockingly high 2012-2013 Roxbury Prep out-of-school suspension rate that Cregor cited was 50% higher than what the more recent data demonstrates. The more recent data does, nevertheless, still seems to reflect a problem well worth addressing.
“In respect to in-school suspension, my understanding is that there are major differences in impact between programs that are designed and implemented wisely and those that are not. This article especially shapes my view on that: http://www.educationworld.com/a_admin/admin/admin329.shtml.
“That article cites a set of characteristics of the better systems that includes: ‘Professionals to staff the program, such as a teacher who can assess students for unidentified learning difficulties, assist in assignment completion, and by a counselor who can explore root causes of problems, refer students to community services, and engage with parents’.
“I am hopeful that any future Education Committee hearing intended to examine discipline practices in charter schools will include much focus on how in-school suspensions are implemented, not just on how frequently. I’d also hope to learn much more about the school discipline reform that Carlos Rojas et al have helped engineer in BPS systems.”
—
I would be glad to send you, Diane, or anyone else here, the full 6-page text of my comments (although they reveal, in passing, some intimate details about my early schooling that I have striven to keep under wraps in this environment). The first few paragraphs are fairly lively, but it’s all downhill from there. Where’s Tony Schwartz when I need him?
“I’m too busy to fill in on your ignorance.”
I am extremely busy also. But I continue to make filling in your (obviously rare and minor) areas of ignorance a high priority. As you may have noticed.
You are a highly influential person, and I would like you to be well-informed. I fear you lack the time to dig into the details of much of the material you cite, verifying it before passing it on and all that. Would you like assistance at pre-screening before publishing?
“Did you read the Dobbie-Fryer report last week on this blog?”
Indeed. I read the main body of the research itself, though the appendices were a bit too abstruse for me.
Obviously, it is of at least some minor interest that “no-excuses” charter school students seemed to earn a little more ($1,200/year for those who attended charter in grades 1-12?) at ages 24-26 than their peers, even when you consider: 1) that their rate of 4-year college attendance is increased (which would shift labor market activity later, especially if it took them more than 4 years to graduate) and (2) that all data for earnings outside the state of Texas itself was ignored as not readily obtainable. Hopefully, some stuck around here after picking up a graduate degree in Boston at age 25.7.
And it was of interest that attendees of religious charter schools fared substantially worse on the authors’ measures of success than those at College Prep or “No Excuses” charters, dragging down average results of “kids will be kids” charters. Not sure if you’ve focused much on those, but if not this seems a good place to start: http://www.dallasnews.com/news/community-news/dallas/headlines/20101122-charter-schools-with-ties-to-religious-groups-raise-fears-about-state-funds_use.ece
In the same overall context, in addition to Dobbie/Fryer, I also looked at Lovenheim/Willén “The Long-run Effect of Teachers Unions on Educational Attainment and Earnings”: “Taken together, our results suggest laws that support collective bargaining for teachers have adverse long-term labor market consequences for students.”
Click to access LR%20Union%20Effects%20-%20AEFP.pdf
And briefly considered Kevin Booker et al “Charter High Schools’ Effects on Long-Term Attainment and Earnings
“Using data from Chicago and Florida, we find evidence that charter high schools may have substantial positive effects on persistence in college as well as high-school graduation and college entry. In Florida, where we can link students to workforce data in adulthood, we also find evidence that charter high schools produce large positive effects on subsequent earnings.”
Click to access charter_high_school_effects_on_attainment_and_earnings.pdf
Frankly, add it all up and my response doesn’t deviate far from: Meh
My all-time (necessarily abbreviated) favorite comment by Christine Langhoff:
“And there we have it, folks! Education is not for developing a child’s interests, talents, curiosity or skills. The only focus is on what skills are important for labor markets…. real teachers ask what students need; Economists “Two-Tier” Fryer and Dobbie and their ilk ask what the markets need.”
Stephen,
I know you will not care, but international research shows that choice systems encourage segregation. I care because I grew up in Houston when the schools were segregated. It was called a dual school system.
Given my own background, and my studies, I believe that the government should not encourage a dual school system. Public education is a government function that should not be outsourced.
I believe in school choice, so long as parents pay for alternatives. I do not believe that the government should subsidize private choices.
Charter schools are not public schools. When challenged in court, their defense is that they are private contractors, not state actors.
I oppose the privatization of public education. Privatization of public functions always leads to inequitable outcomes. The more you argue that charters have high scores, the more you prove that they cherry pick their students and exclude the most expensive and difficult to educate.
You will never convince me that privatization is a good thing.
Hat tip to Julian Vasquez Helig:
Thanks, Christine, and I apologize if anyone was offended. In retrospect, perhaps recruited to attend would have been a more appropriate way to phrase it than “brought”. Perhaps even that isn’t quite right. Not sure. I was, myself, recruited by a teachers union organizer to attend some of the early organizing meetings that led to that Education Committee hearing. Think I may perhaps have seen you, not long into the process, at one or more of the meetings on the first floor of the Bolling building. But my facial recognition skills are weak.
Would you agree that the hearing was largely framed to indict Commonwealth charter schools by as many means as humanly possible? And much of the data presented there was faulty?
As you may recall, the parent we’re referring to, in her powerfully persuasive testimony, explicitly referred to the Holland as a charter school (e.g., “Up Academy Holland Charter School”), as well as as a turnaround school, and said at the end of her testimony that thankfully her child was returning to a school in the Boston Public School (BPS) system. As you do seem to know, the Holland has remained part of BPS all along and has never been a charter school of any sort.
You make, perhaps better than I can, one of the points I keep trying to make to Diane.
Diane likes to think in respect to a sharp divide, a clear distinction, between the two parts of a “dual school system”.
For me, it’s much more complicated… kids here in Boston may attend exam schools, pilot schools, Commonwealth Charter Schools, turnaround schools, suburban METCO schools, in-district Horace Mann charter schools, traditional district schools, turnaround schools and, god forbid, the Robert F. Kennedy school.
I would guess that Diane’s sharp separation would distinguish between all BPS schools and METCO schools on the one hand, and Commonwealth Charter schools, which are outside BPS, on the other (perhaps question whether the RFK is a school).
That divide would place the Holland School with its, at least brief, period of suspending 5-year-olds, on the good, the truly public, public school, side. You would agree, or you discard her framework? You think it’s helpful to approach these issues in terms of a dual school system?
One question that has long intrigued me is how those here who so vigorously attack charter schools feel about exam schools. Christine? Diane? New York City public school parent? Others?
Stephen, so much choice in Massachusetts. What exactly is the purpose of so many choices? Mass. is already the highest performing state in the nation. Maybe you should give it a rest, stop the disruption, and let teachers do their jobs. They seem to know what they are doing.
You know, Diane, I’m beginning to wonder what we’re seeing is a new strategy to remove public schools from their systems and turn them over to charter organizations by stealth. And once taken from the public system, are they ever returned? A takeover by means of attrition.
That’s what happened in the UP Holland case I’ve mentioned above – parents weren’t aware they no longer had recourse to BPS when things went wrong until it was too late.
In January, Peg Robertson posted a disturbing blog – in English and in Spanish – about a similar stealth takeover of an Aurora, Colorado elementary school – by Relay “Graduate School of Education”.
http://www.pegwithpen.com/2016/01/a-parent-speaks-up-at-turnaround-school.html
Today, at the Busted Pencils blog, she posted about a truly inhumane pratice at Jewell – forcing children to eat their breakfast while sitting on the floor in a hallway. It’s hard to imagine a more disrespectful scenario for young children.
https://t.co/m0JH6YKC2b
NYC public school parent: “I look at why so many students disappear from the TOP charter schools. And I don’t pay faux ‘researchers’ to compare that shockingly high attrition rate to the worst failing schools and make the kinds of conclusions that YOU make.”
Oh, dear, I had hoped that yours was a just different pseudonym for parent010203 with whom I engaged in cordial dialog while at Merrow’s blog. Guess not.
https://themerrowreport.com/2016/03/18/evas-offensive/
In that thread, we discussed the specific issue you raise here in great detail, and I think your arguments may be bolstered by reviewing the arguments that he/she made. But if you look carefully at Boston data, you’ll have difficulty making that support your opinion.
Meanwhile, let’s both keep the faith.
Diane says: “You will never convince me that privatization is a good thing.”
It’s no wonder that you don’t mention the actual scholarship on Massachusetts schools. Why bother? You say right here that your mind is forever closed, impervious to any evidence.
WT,
If kids got higher scores by the strategic use of torture, I would not approve it no matter what their test scores are.
If you told me that kids in a dictatorship get higher test scores, I would not trade democracy for dictatorship.
If you told me that schools fashioned by Walmart are superior to local public schools, I would disagree.
You cannot save the village by destroying it.
Stephen Ronan,
The bottom line is that a high performing charter school should have the LOWEST attrition rate of at-risk kids when compared to charters serving a similar population that perform far worse on standardized tests. I think you will agree with me that if there is a charter school that is an outlier in having high percentages of students who are proficient, but it is losing a significantly higher number of students than other charter schools that perform much worst on standardized tests, then that is a HUGE red flag. There are only two ways to account for that:
1. The charter school that is high performing but mysteriously loses more kids than low performing charter schools is actively weeding low performing students out.
2. Parents who purposely choose charters to give their children a better education dislike high performing charter schools much more than they dislike mediocre performing charter schools.
One of these explanations is plausible and one of these explanations is something only a racist would believe.
So which explanation do you claim is correct?
I wouldn’t want kids to be subjected to torture and dictatorship either, but perhaps those are overheated analogies. We needn’t conduct discussions over education as if we were Trump talking about Mexicans or Muslims.
No one in a charter school is forced to be there, and if any family ever experiences anything resembling torture or dictatorship, they are always free to go back to the regular public schools that you think are so wonderful.
Perhaps if you ever visited charter schools in Massachusetts, however, it would be harder to use such irresponsible rhetoric about the choices that poor urban families make.
WT says:
“No one in a charter school is forced to be there, and if any family ever experiences anything resembling torture or dictatorship, they are always free to go back to the regular public schools that you think are so wonderful.”
You don’t have to use “torture or dictatorship” to make a 5 year old child feel unwanted. Or an 8 year old. Or a 10 year old. We have witnessed on video how “model” teachers become very adept at humiliating slow learners who can’t achieve what charter schools demand.
Here is what you don’t understand, WT. There may be bad public school teachers who also humiliate struggling children, but no matter what, that teacher is responsible for the student. That SCHOOL is responsible for the student. So if the constant humiliation only serves to make the young student act out and doesn’t turn him into a high-performing “scholar”, the school has to deal with it. And if the child has special needs that the public school insists it can ‘t meet, the public school pays tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars to a private school to meet those needs. No public school would encourage a teacher to use methods like humiliation that are just going to make the problem worse and not better.
At charter schools, the incentives work the other way around. You explained very clearly what happens if you target a low-performing child:
“they are always free to go back to the regular public schools…”
EXACTLY!! You nailed it. The charter gets that child off their books forever. It gets REWARDED for getting rid of students who cost more money than they want to spend, or who can’t achieve the results necessary so that the school can pretend to be working miracles. There is a huge INCENTIVE to do exactly what you explained works wonders — “they are free to go back to the regular public schools”. Yep. That’s why charters are incentivized to treat the unwanted kids like garbage. Why make them feel good? They may want to STAY! And your charter would actually have to spend money and resources to teach them.
If you drum all the difficult kids out of your school, the parents who have well-behaved high performing kids are going to be happy. That’s why they pay upwards of $40,000/year for their kid to be in private schools that can shed the students who bother the rest of them. No one doubts that for a minute.
But some charter schools capitalized on what private schools have always known, but they outright lied about it. Pretending that they were just like public schools and welcomed any child who won the lottery. All while neglecting to say that they had no qualms in using practices designed to humiliate and punish the ones who they didn’t want until they left.
The charter schools that didn’t use those reprehensible methods didn’t get especially good results. And that would be okay except that they refuse to call out the ones who do. And if you are dishonest about calling out the practices of the highest performing charter schools, you are part of the problem, not the solution.
You stated the favorite excuse of the “no excuse” charter school: If you don’t like the fact we humiliate and punish your low-performing child, you are free to go back to public school. And we plan to keep it up until you do.
Diane: “What do you do for a living?”
Chemistry Professor?
History textbook author?
Minion?
I know what has Lloyd’s vote.
Christine,
Einstein had plenty of interesting, useful things to say, although his model of a temporally infinite, but spatially finite universe proved inadequate.
And I think we can forgive and, for now, forget Ms. Levinson’s modest expertise concerning attrition data and relative ELL and special needs incidence, given her article’s helpful contributions to an understanding of how the BPS school assignment process works in Boston to limit appealing options for those who live in low-income and minority neighborhoods, relative to those domiciled in richer, whiter parts of town.
While I’m grateful for your seriously addressing dilemmas in respect to exam schools, I don’t yet have a good enough understanding of your viewpoint to be able to converse with you about it intelligently.
You write:
“Boston has three selective entrance schools where admittance is tied to scores on a standardized test. Personally, I believe these tests create the aura of a meritocracy and I would dispense with them…”
“A simple solution would be to assign all students meeting the cut off score randomly”
The cut off score on what? The test you would have dispensed with?
More generally, I’m having trouble locating a coherent theory that I may or may not agree with or dissent from.
Are you saying that it is appropriate for BPS to have certain schools that serve a highly selected, relatively white, rich, non-ELL, non-SPED population because it also has schools that serve a relatively black/brown, poor, high ELL, high SPED population?
That BPS is public and our Commonwealth Charter schools are not, because BPS has a wider variety of options than the charter sector? How would that analysis apply to the Avon MA public schools district with its total of 2 schools, the Elementary and the Middle-High?
You seem to suggest that one reason that BPS is truly “public” is that it ends up with the demanding kids that the charter sector can’t handle, while neglecting the fact that the Commonwealth and 501c3 public charities end up addressing the learning needs of many of those that BPS can’t handle.
Tangentially, could Diane, you, or anyone else here explain why Diane is more qualified than the Massachusetts Legislature to define which of our schools properly qualify as public?
p.s. Very flattering photograph. Thanks.
Stephen,
You should be posting at the blogs of the rightwing foundations or the 74 or EdPost, where you would get applause. Unfortunately you have chosen to post again and again and again your love of privatization to a readership composed mainly of teachers and parents who believe in public education. You are wasting your time. Charter schools, you once wrote, are akin to Harvard or MIT, which receives some public money. But no one would call them public universities.
I would listen to what charter schools say when they are sued for violating the rights of employees or students, or when their owners are accused of misappropriating public funds. In every such case (described in my last book), the charter owners and the charter associations say they are contractors, not “state actors.” And thus not subject to the same laws as public schools. I am convinced. They are like Boeing or other government contractors. They are not state actors. They are not public schools.
Do I know more about education than state legislatures? That’s for others to decide. One major difference, aside from the fact that I have spent 50 years studying education, while legislators must become knowledgeable on many subjects. I don’t accept campaign contributions or any private funding. I don’t seek any funding. My views cannot be influenced by hedge fund managers, entrepreneurs, billionaires, or the tech industry.
Diane: “Charter schools, you once wrote, are akin to Harvard or MIT”
Actually, I indicated that Harvard and MIT met your description of “privately managed schools with unelected boards”, but differ markedly from charter schools, as those universities lack, for example, public oversight by a Board appointed by our governor.
But who’s quibbling? Oops, I am, I am.
I don’t think the question was whether you or legislators know more about education, but rather who knows more about what is the proper definition of “public”… I’ll defer to my publicly elected officials on that one, while recognizing that they could, in theory at least, be reversed by the Courts after reviewing your Amicus.
Stephen
I used to have the same views 25 years when the charter idea was new and exciting.
But years of experience and evidence and real-life examples taught me that my enthusiasm was misplaced.
We now know:
1. That most charters are no better (in test scores) than the so-called failing schools they compete with, and a substantial minority are worse in academic performance.
2. The charter schools with the highest scores usually have high attrition and exclude students who are English language learners and students with disabilities, and push out students with low scores.
3. Charter schools are more segregated than district schools, even where the district schools are themselves segregated.
4. Corporate charter chains are taking the place of community public schools. The loss of this democratic institution is a loss to all citizens, removing one place where people’s voices matter.
5. Most charters operate without transparency or accountability.
6. Deregulation means lack of oversight and supervision. This has enabled graft, fraud, corruption, and nepotism.
7. Charters have introduced the concept of for-profit schools, where profits matter more than education. Even non-profit charters hire for-profit operators. And charters often pay outlandish salaries to their leaders, up to $600,000 for non-educators.
8. Charters are usually non-union. 90% are. They have high teacher turnover.
9. Charters have produced no lessons for public schools. The no-excuses schools use harsh disciplinary methods that teach obedience and conformity. These military methods would not be tolerated by most parents.
10. Charters drain resources and students from public schools, advantage for a small minority of students at the expense of the majority. As they expand, public schools are harmed.
I have been striving, with trepidation, to post here a message responding to each of your 10 points, Diane, but have been unsuccessful. Too long? Too many links to substantiating materials? The equal signs I used to divide each section?
I say with trepidation, because I know how persuasively I might be swatted aside with one pithy entomological reference.
But I’ll keep trying.
And meanwhile, I would encourage y’all to read the most recent two blog postings here:
https://natmortonblog.wordpress.com/
There, the father of children in both traditional and charter schools in Massachusetts explains what he finds better about the charter school.
And responds in clear, cogent fashion to the type of argument he cites here:
“You don’t have to debate charter public schools for very long before you hear something like this: ‘Charters are really public funded private schools! If you want a private education for your kid, you pay for it! Stop draining funds from our public schools!!'”
I cannot agree with Mr. Ronan : “3) less total funding for traditional public schools but more funding per student at such schools” this is deceptive and that is the way the ad on TV is showing it. it is not true (if you talk to superintendents who have to oversee the budgets ) Superintendents have known for years that this budget draining is happening . The other big deceptive is the so-called research. Martin West wanted to show that charter students were “grittier” than public school students in Boston. But they didn’t understand the development of students and they used sloppy questionnaires so they did not prove the students were any “grittier” in charter schools. They pinned the result to “self-reference bias” saint the students must not be “truthful” because they have this bias. When Jay P Greene doesn’t get the results he wants in a “research study” he says the parents who have choices “don’t know how to choose.” This continued deceptive research has been going on for quite some time; the MA Business Council works with a firm in NH to bring in Sir Michael Barber’s “study” and it promptest only Pearson; then the Commissioner Mitchell Chester goes around telling the states how Pearson and Sir Michael barber have the “implementation protocols” for standardized tests and common core. There is a lot of deception. The research person I trust the most today is Helen Ladd and she will point out how the schools are being re-segregated by this ” charter” policy. Barbara Madeloni explains how tiers of a “system” designed for “choice” will just create more inequities among and between schools and school districts (which was one of our biggest problems any way — the extremes in terms of well-funded districts and the areas where they don’t have enough tax base to raise additional funds when someone like Romney denied state funds. That was our biggest problem then and now ; test scores and standardized tests that are invalid, unreliable and have no predictive validity are being sold as fraud to the parents).
jeanhaverhill: “I cannot agree with Mr. Ronan : “3) less total funding for traditional public schools but more funding per student at such schools” this is deceptive and that is the way the ad on TV is showing it. it is not true (if you talk to superintendents who have to oversee the budgets”
Thanks for sharing that. I’d be grateful if you were able at some point to obtain a precise quotation from a superintendent indicating that that statement isn’t entirely correct. The relevant budgetary matters are somewhat complex and I’d be glad to improve my understanding.
Meanwhile, this from Verbatim: Ballotpedia’s Fact-Checking Desk may be at least somewhat helpful on the subject: “Do Massachusetts charter schools ‘drain’ funding from traditional public schools?”
https://ballotpedia.org/Verbatim_fact_check:_Do_Massachusetts_charter_schools_%22drain%22_funding_from_traditional_public_schools%3F
Stephen,
Do you promise that charter schools will NEVER drain funding from public schools in the future, as they do in every other state? Will the legislature create a special fund for charter schools?
A few years back, a parent in Rhode Island expressed opposition to charter schools, and he explained marginal cost this way:
If I am driving from Rhode Island and taking four passengers in my van, I have certain fixed costs (gasoline and maintenance and tolls). If one of my passengers leaves the van to go in a “charter van,” my fixed costs don’t change, but I now have to pay the same amount to bring three passengers. Do you understand the meaning of “fixed costs” and “marginal costs,” Stephen? Do we have your personal guarantee that Massachusetts legislators will add new funding dedicated to charter schools? What is your personal guarantee worth? Do you think that public schools in Massachusetts are failing and must be saved by entrepreneurs?
I have spoken with three former superintendents/practicing superintendents. They have to conform to M. Chester “we are neutral ” on charter schools. They have to toe the line and cannot be seen as visible on some issues because their jobs are at stake. A superintendent can be fired in MA just for appearing “flamboyant” on an issue.
I can quote one superintendent who refused to speak to a charter school gathering/agenda . He said “I used to support the charter schools but things have changed; Public school advocates cannot promote the charter school agenda”…. Look at the school committees that have passed resolutions recently. These individuals who have been overseeing the budgets for a decade or more have seen the money going out of the budget . There was always a “choice” for parents to place a child in a neighboring town and my neighbors have placed their children in Sacred Heart in Haverhill, the Lawrence Catholic High schools and my best friend who is professor emeritus is on her Parochial School board in Medford. We have never been anti-catholic as Pioneer Institute has charged. I have written to Jim Stergios that sometimes he gets the diagnosis correct but his solutions are wrong. President Obama mentioned “philanthropy” in his SOthe Union address — but I don’t think he meant this kind of “philanthropy” that destroys community, public schools, and waits for the family to self-deport as Mitch Romney was known to advise (even before his presidential run).
Do you promise that charter schools will NEVER drain funding from public schools in the future, as they do in every other state? Will the legislature create a special fund for charter schools?
jeanhaverhill@aol.com
I agree it is complex; my previous supervisor (now deceased) was president of Massachusetts School Business Officials and we lived it very day…. yes it it complex but I have posted and commented before that Jim Guthrie was helping the states to resolve some of the funding issues that they were facing in terms of competing goals.
If you would like a bibliography from my previous supervisor I would be glad to type it up… His doctoral dissertation was on the inequities of affluent cities when compared with the rural and smaller cites. Things have not improved much since he wrote that report.
He also said that when we instituted technology in the schools that there would be proven cost-effective benefits as well as achievement gains; he demonstrated that in 6 districts in math the first year but it took longer to show any reading gains (remember the word complexity)? He hired Henry Levin and graduate students to do the cost-effective analysis. Since that time the hyper-marketing of “technology” as deus ex machina and the co-opting of former “researchers” by corporate dollars ( falsely called philanthropy) has become disgusting and I believe is ruining the once great school system of public education that we had with Commissioner Anrig (as you can tell I have no fondness for Commissioner Antonucci, Commissioner David Driscoll or Mitchell Chester who is building his own career ladder and probably his own fortune like John Barranco did who wanted to be Commissioner).
I refuse to take any more bait; Mr. Ronan ; I have followed the entire discussion and will not participate because you don’t want to hear anything that disagrees with your goal. Mitchell Cherster says he is “neutral” on charter schools but I think that is downright fraud like the invalid tests he has marketed all over the United States. I hold him responsible for the malarkey he sold to Governor Patrick (who was someone I voted for ; even thouugh I disagreed with him I would always respect him but I am ashamed of mitchell Chester selling out the Pearson Corporation and the harm he a done in many states.)
jean e. sanders haverhill MA
relevant budgetary matters are somewhat complex and I’d be glad to improve my understanding.
jeanhaverhill@aol.com
Jean Haverhill,
It is almost a full-time job to keep up with charter school propaganda. It is like an infestation of ants.
All the names you mentioned were “trained” by Paul Petersen, the nation’s leading advocate for school choice.
Except for Michael Barber. Please do not use the title “Sir.” In America, we don’t recognize titles.
OK; I was using his title as total sarcasm…. to illustrate that I have NO respect for these guys.
We once had some outstanding Commissioners in New England but I am totally disheartened at what I see and I lump them in with the “sirs” of the world now…. I often refuse to give an honorific title even that of “governor…. Thanks, I will not use that description any more………
We had Gordon Ambach, Greg Anrig (before he went to ETS) Mark Shedd , and some who I have fond memories of in their leadership style as well as their goals.
The “implementation protocols” are abhorrent when Barber or Mitchell Chester pushes them…
All the names you mentioned were “trained” by Paul Petersen, the nation’s leading advocate for school choice. Except for Michael Barber. Please do not use the title “Sir.” In America, we don’t recognize titles.
jeanhaverhill@aol.com
Diane, one hopes the Rhode Island chap’s explanation didn’t end there. That it went on to include this example:
If there are two traditional school vans, each able to carry 8 students. And their are nine students. And a charter school van pulls up with an empty seat… one or both the traditional school van drivers had better fight, fight, fight with all their might to drive the charter school van off the road and into a ditch, with perhaps short shrift for the fate of the passengers.
Stephen Ronan,
I think this is the van analogy you intended to use.
There are two public school vans that each transport 9 students who live anywhere from 1 mile to 10 miles from the school (in different directions).
The charter van comes up and offers a shiny new van to any family that wants to change to “charter transportation”. 3 students from each van – a total of 6 students, take them up on the offer. But it turns out that 3 of those 6 students live too far away and the charter van doesn’t want to spend the money to drive more than 2 miles. The three students who live within the 2 miles are given cookies and kindness during their very short trip. But the 3 students who live 5 – 10 miles away get screamed at, no cookies, no air conditioning or heat, and the driver does every thing he can to make the much longer trip to their homes pure misery. Not surprisingly, those 3 students go back to the public school van. But the 3 students who live near tell their friends how nice the van is and 3 more students from the 2 public school vans decide to try the charter school van.
Once again, the same process happens. 2 of the students live near by and are treated kindly and given cookies. The other 1 — who lives 8 miles away — gets the “misery” treatment until he returns to the “public van”. Now the charter van has 5 happy students getting cookies and kindness who live close to the school. They tell their friends and the 3 of the students who hadn’t tried the charter van yet make the switch.
Once again, the two who live nearby are treated kindly and rewarded, the one who doesn’t live nearby gets the special treatment the “model” charter school van driver has been trained to give those kids. That child returns to the public school van.
End result: The charter school van has 100% happy passengers (because the unhappy ones are gone). The charter school van is paid the same price for driving each student, but since all the students live very close to the school, it’s cheap and easy to drive them and their parent company is raking in the bucks, and has a few dollars extra to keep the cookies coming and the kids happy. And the two public school vans are paid the exact same per student rate but now they are filled with students who all live very far from the school. The van has to drive all over from one place to another and many of the students have extra long rides and aren’t happy and the drivers work much longer and gas and wear and tear is much more expensive since each day’s mileage for the public school van is 5 times as much as the charter van. And of course, the public school van is obligated by law to drive all students, regardless of where they live.
And here is the kicker: The charter school van uses some of its extra money to run television ads about how much more efficient they are because they get all their students home much earlier than the two public school vans do!
Surely that is the scenario that the pro-charter folks believe works.
NYC public school parent, since my previous, lengthier explanations didn’t get posted successfully, let me try to be briefer…
You ask me to explain why our public charter schools that have higher test scores also have higher attrition.
If you look carefully at the Massachusetts DESE figures, you’ll find that that actually is not true here.
Your van analogy implies that charter schools generate test score gains relative to district schools through selective retention of higher-performing students. While that may be true in some locations, please be aware that, in respect to Boston, it is contradicted by this research evidence:
“Charter schools are sometimes said to generate gains by the selective retention of higher-performing students — see, e.g., Skinner 2009. In this view, charter effectiveness is at least partly attributed to a tendency to eject trouble-makers and stragglers, leaving a student population that is easier to teach.”
[…]
“These results suggest that positive charter effects cannot be attributed to low-quality peers leaving charter schools. If anything, selective exit of low achievers is more pronounced at Boston’s traditional public schools.”
http://economics.mit.edu/files/9799
Stephen Ronan, your reply demonstrates exactly why I find the pro-charter folks so dishonest. It might surprise you to know that I started out thinking charter schools were a good idea. But when I actually saw them up close and looked at the data, and realized how dishonest the people promoting them were, I became disgusted. As a nation, we need HONEST discussions about how to improve public schools. Having people lying and presenting misleading facts — as you so happily did — has wasted billions but made some “reformers” inordinately rich. And provided very high paying jobs for people in the “reform” business who want to keep their high salaries far more than they want to be honest. That money could have been spent on the children who need it most.
I looked at your link. It looked ONLY at charter high schools, which means the incoming students have already had 9 years of schooling and of course the ones choosing an academic charter high school at that point aren’t the ones in danger of dropping out. Furthermore, you had the chutzpah to end with this:
“selective exit of low achievers is more pronounced at Boston’s traditional public schools.” The study was of HIGH SCHOOLS. Where of course older teenage students who are the most low-performing are going to drop out altogether as soon as they can. Since the students who are only killing time in high school until they are old enough to legally drop out will only be found in public schools, it’s an absurd comparison to make. They aren’t being “selectively exited”. They are already old enough to drop out. That’s very different from children leaving good, well-funded charter schools to return to failing, underfunded, falling apart public schools. I find it so offensive that you count on racism to convince people not to question such an absurd insult. You insult every one of those parents by claiming that they prefer to have their children in failing schools and that’s why they left. You are so racist to believe that low-income parents would “choose” to leave a high performing charter school for a low-performing public school that you refuse to question it. No doubt if it was affluent white parents leaving a well-funded private school in droves and returning to a failing public school someone would wonder what was wrong with that private school that would drive so many kids out. But when it comes to minority parents, you just want us to believe they just don’t care about education. Shame on you and your reformer friends for believing that.
Your dishonesty is so typical of the pro-charter folks. Do you actually care about educating at-risk kids and finding out what works, or is it just about how many charter schools you can promote to educate the “strivers” but lie and pretend they want the kids who have struggled the most in public schools? Very likely you know just as I do that the no excuses elementary schools lose high numbers of at-risk kids and the BETTER no-excuses elementary schools lose more than the mediocre ones! That’s because in order to get better, they shed the lowest performers. Of course no billionaire would ever fund a real study of what happens to every single child who enters Kindergarten in a high-performing charter school because that might actually be good for kids but very bad for the people who run those charters under false pretenses and are getting rich from it.
If you care about ALL children — and not the ones who will get good test scores — you would not be offering false studies to convince the public of things that are obviously not true. And I say obviously because if a top performing charter school goes from 93 students in 3rd grade to 56 in 5th grade, there is NO EXCUSE that you can come up with for so many disappearing at-risk kids. None. And yet the pro-charter folks continue to promote these schools as miracle-workers and that speaks volumes about how happy they are to enrich themselves at the expense of all the disappearing kids who actually need good schools and more resources the most. But the lies and dishonesty of people like you continue to insure that they will not.
Look in the mirror. I hope the money you get allows you to rationalize the dishonesty and the many children harmed by your constant lies. Do some kids — the strivers — do well in charter schools? Of course, but they would ALSO do well if those charter schools honestly admitted that they had no interest in educating the at-risk kids who struggle the most and who are the majority of students at those failing public schools. So pretending you are lying because you want to help SOME low-income students is outrageous. You are lying because you want to promote charter schools and you can’t do it by being honest. You are doing it for yourself. You may be helping a few kids but you are hurting many others. If you were HONEST, you could be helping those kids without hurting the others. But you might hurt your own pocketbook and I guess that is most important to the pro-charter folks.
I offer the false study by Marty West that set out to prove students in charter schools are “grittier”… that is an example of a false study.
A lot of the so-called research these past few decades has been like that. Not well designed studies; populations that are not matched in any way. So they pretend to do a study with very poor research. Then the rest of the so-called “studies” are hyper marketing . I offer as an example the corporation that sold “Footsteps 2 Brilliance” to the early childhood staff and three mayors in greater Boston. It is not based on anything that could be called “research” . These kinds of “Studies” are easily sold to the MA Business Council.
The highly politicized awarding of funds in Washington also has helped to create this; if you look at the Reading First critiques it is quite obvious what occurred. Those funds from Washington get mediated through different state mechanisms (again, one size does not fit all).
The corporations fund their own “studies” and only those paid by the industry are acceptable “researchers” who will spew the line . My first husband worked at Raytheon in quality control and he was always ordered to “make our products look good”… This is why one must look at the funding sources of any “study” before accepting conclusions.
One of the most honest interpretations I have read recently is by Peter Kramer on medicine and he explains quite clearly the Gene Glass (meta-analysis method) which is used repeatedly in education. Also he reports on “Big Pharma” but indirectly and how the research tradition of scientific evidence gets distorted (as well as reporting on the many confounds whenever one does research with human beings ).
If you care about ALL children — and not the ones who will get good test scores — you would not be offering false studies to convince the public of things that are obviously not true. And I say obviously because if a top performing charter school goes from 93 students in 3rd grade to 56 in 5th grade,
jeanhaverhill@aol.com
I don’t know if my much longer reply to Stephen Ronan will post, so here is a quick version.
Did you intend to mislead with that link? Hope no one would bother to look at it?
You posted a link to a study of charter high schools. Students drop out of high school altogether because they have no interest in being there, and the majority of those students aren’t going to go to the trouble to seek out a charter school. The fact that older teenagers would drop out altogether from public high schools more frequently than would drop out of charter high schools is not a study that needed to be done – did anyone think the opposite would be the case?
But pre-high school students can’t just drop out of public school and disappear. If a student leaves a charter school, they go somewhere else. If a student leaves a public school, they go somewhere else. It’s odd that no billionaires wanted to underwrite a study of what happens to each student who enrolls in an elementary school charter school over the years? I guess some information is best kept quiet. Don’t ask, don’t tell.
When at-risk students leave a high performing charter school at a rate twice or three times as high as they leave a much lower performing charter school, questions should be asked. Questions NEED to be asked. Why wouldn’t a reformer who cared about at-risk kids ask them? Unless they care more about their own well-compensated jobs promoting charters.
Stephen Ronan, school reformers were supposed to be caring about the students in failing public schools. ALL the students in failing public schools — not just the “strivers” who reformers are happy to cull from the mass.
When you posts links to studies like the one you did, in order to shut down any questions of why so many students disappear from charter schools, you aren’t acting in the best interests of all students. You are acting in the best interests of yourself.
Thanks NYC public school parent. I think you make an excellent point that Angrist’s research focused on high schools and there could, in theory at least, be contrary evidence for elementary school youngsters.
But you persist in elaborating a theory that I don’t think is well supported by data in respect to schools here.
You write:
“When at-risk students leave a high performing charter school at a rate twice or three times as high as they leave a much lower performing charter school, questions should be asked. Questions NEED to be asked.”
Forgive me, if I’m wrong, but I am doubting whether you have taken the time to carefully examine the data about our schools.
If you would like to do so, here’s what I would recommend:
Go here: http://www.doe.mass.edu/charter/finance/chart/
Download and open chart-indicators.xlsm
Enable Editing if necessary
Select Charter School of Interest e.g., Brooke Charter School – Boston (I think that’d be the Roslindale one that Peter Greene focused on)
Select “Student Indicators” hyperlink a little to the right
in the green bar “Please select Indicator” Select an option, e.g., Stability Rate
“The stability rate measures how many students remain in a district or school throughout the school year.”
Scroll down and to the right to see how the Brooke Charter School’s stability rate compares to all the comparison district schools and charter schools (including Brooke Mattapan and Brooke East Boston)
Down at the bottom of the page, you can use the tab to switch from “Indicators” to “Attrition”
Make a list for yourself of the schools you find have the highest and lowest levels of attrition, considering both school year (stability rate data) and summer attrition (attrition data). Post those here. And then we can compare test scores at the schools.
If we find that at-risk students are typically exiting high performing charter schools here at twice or three times as high a rate as they leave much lower performing charter schools, we will have achieved a unique contribution to charter school critics in this area. Perhaps we will have helped defeat the campaign to raise the charter cap.
Tangentially, while you’re at it, you may find it of interest to examine whether there is a direct or inverse correlation between out-of-school suspensions and unexcused absences.
quoting Mr. Ronan: “in theory at least, be contrary evidence for elementary school youngsters.”
Good teachers know this through experience and practice …. Developmentally the students are not the same it is not just a “theory”
When Marty West did his “grit” study he used questionnaires originally designed for college students who are more advanced developmentally (cognitively, self-reflection etc) and you can’t take those same questions and try to rework them for 6th grade or 8th grade because the students are still forming “identity” and they have different cognitive strategies (formal logic is more often available to them at age 14 but we also know that some cognitive abilities don’t fully develop until the 20s)…. This is not a “theory” but has been specifically explained in scientific method with evidence (Sternberg at Tufts, Scott Barry Kaufman)
You try to dismiss the comment by saying it is only “theory”
The other thing the corporations are doing is telling parents that the “tests” by Pearson etc. have predictive validity ; but they don’t…. And the further you go down into the elementary schools into 3rd grade the less predictive validity they have.
There are even studies available that show for students going on to college from their high schools the distance from the college to their home affects the drop-out rate (if you live in TX as opposed to congested MA there will be different rates of “dropping out”) just one of the confounds a researcher might have to consider with the oldest of the students in community college etc. when trying to make comparisons across states)
Peter Kramer’s book can be difficult to wade through but he has a good explanation of the Gene Glass research ( a couple of pages) and it is also used in medicine.
For the “confounds” that we pay attention to when working with human subjects see the discussion back in January here on Diane ‘s blog that Audrey Amsrein Beardsley described David Berliner’s presentation . If you didn’t have time to watch Berliner’s presentation He explains many of the confounds in research with student subjects.
Issues that are not controlled for (confound the research); plus the research methods that are used (often inappropriately) will create “phony” studies and the best researchers know that (but the not folks in “marketing” departments and the whole “research” department of some colleges is now “communications” rather than research.
this is well worth your time back from January
https://dianeravitch.net/2016/01/29/david-berliner-transcribed-why-standardized-test-scores-should-not-be-used-to-rate-teachers-or-teacher-education-programs/
“you can’t take those same questions and try to rework them for 6th grade or 8th grade ”
I’m acutely sympathetic to that point of view. I recall acceding to a public school guidance counselor’s request that I take the regular adult version of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory Test when I was an underage freshman. I vividly recall worrying that the use of adult norms might overpathologize youngsters like myself, that I might demonstrate elevations on certain scales of personality psychopathology… as I struggled to consider, as a 5′ 3″ lad, how to answer whether I found tall women attractive… and more intimate questions.
But, hey, he seemed like a nice chap, glad to be singled out to help him earn an advanced degree.
And I’m acutely aware that certain tests may better measure what one has learned than what one has the capacity to learn… recalling a traditional public school teacher handing me back a pop quiz in chemistry marked with a 17/100 as he remarked that he hadn’t realized my crutches were for a brain disorder.
I reacted in typical sullen fashion, but was mildly amused by his irreverence.
I commend to you Peter Greene’s marvelous recent article on endeavors to sync teachers’ and students’ rhythms for learning.
https://curmudgucation.blogspot.com/2016/08/resolve-to-breathe.html
I wish Diane had linked to that instead of to his piece about the Massachusetts ballot question that was far from his best work. Peter has kindly allowed some of my follow up thoughts to be posted as comments to the latter, though I have not yet succeeded in getting my questioning of the budgetary assumptions to appear.
I’d encourage you to review my comments there as they address an aspect of your own methodology, relying on raw enrollment data to measure attrition, that seems dangerously flawed.
In respect to discussing the quality and relevance of available research data, would you be willing to focus with me first on one study of my choosing… how about this one from CREDO?
Click to access Urban%20Charter%20School%20Study%20Report%20on%2041%20Regions.pdf
And one of your choosing?
Or, if you prefer, sit back, relax and watch as NYC public school parent and I conduct original research right before your very eyes.
p.s. Thanks for the link to Berliner… I liked much of this: “Reliance on standardized achievement test scores as the source of data about teacher quality will inevitably promote confusion between ‘successful’ instruction and ‘good’ instruction. ‘Successful’ instruction gets test scores up. ‘Good’ instruction leaves lasting impressions, fosters further interest by the students, makes them feel competent in the area, etc. Good instruction is hard to measure, but remains the goal of our finest teachers.” But I prefer my chemistry teacher’s disinclination to make me feel any competence I truly lacked.
that seems excessively cruel; I do not find it “funny” or “sarcastic” just plain cruel.
On the testing note we do not have “change sensitive” tests that can follow a student through the grades through the developmental periods (such as the development of abstract cognitive thinking necessary for algebra) (Stanford Binet says they have developed this — change sensitive type of measure but I have personally not seen it in implementation and would have to do further research on how it works over time )….
This is another reason that I believe the Pearson “implementation protocols” that Mitchell Chester promotes across the country are INVALID. So I have listed my several reasons for not supporting the waste of precious R&D funds on building these horrid tests. There is also an opportunity cost as to what could have been done with the R&D funds that Arne Duncan wasted.
And I’m acutely aware that certain tests may better measure what one has learned than what one has the capacity to learn… recalling a traditional public school teacher handing me back a pop quiz in chemistry marked with a 17/100 as he remarked that he hadn’t realized my crutches were for a brain disorder.
jeanhaverhill@aol.com
These are two different purposes: we might be better at the former than the latter. And, I still think the qualified teachers who are thoroughly doing their role in a school can better measure the students on ALL of the variables that occur in learning their assigned subjects.
The state commissioners and boards are using the tests for the wrong purposes.
And I’m acutely aware that certain tests may better measure what one has learned than what one has the capacity to learn…
jeanhaverhill@aol.com
Peter does an excellent job on covering many issues. You also need Jan Resseger and Edushyster and others to fill in because there is so much to be covered every day. And, I referred to the Amrein-Beardsley review of the David Berline presentation (they are essential components and not enough gets to the voting public or the tax payer on these issues so they think it is all “union” propaganda which it is not)
EduShyster did an excellent job describing the politics of the MA legislation as she has done an excellent job over the year citing the “Lawrence Miracle” that arne Duncan promoted showing up the same day the test scores were released in Lawrence to get his photo-opportunity then recommending that other states adopt the “lawrence” model — having worked in this region of MA on the 495 belt (outside the 128 loop) I call “Hogwash” to A. Duncan on his promotion (but EduShyster wrote it much better than I ever could).
I wish Diane had linked to that instead of to his piece about the Massachusetts ballot question that was far from his best work. Peter has kindly allowed some
jeanhaverhill@aol.com
The former Commissioner of Texas worked on this issue before he went into private legal practice. I am fully aware of how data can be misinterpreted on purpose as well as how data can be “flawed” . The TX Commissioner tried to work on more acceptable comparisons among and between states because there is so much that is downright unfair in comparisons.
I am not sure what you mean by “your own” methodology because I am not practicing or writing any research studies (I am retired) but I try to follow the concerns that arise at the annual conferences when the issues are discussed. It was at one of those conferences that I found Mitchell Chester pushing every state to sign on with Pearson and with Jeb Bush (I posted it back about 6 months ago so don’t want to repeat it here).
I’d encourage you to review my comments there as they address an aspect of your own methodology, relying on raw enrollment data to measure attrition, that seems dangerously flawed.
jeanhaverhill@aol.com
I chose Peter Kramer because he has 4 books now on medical research and there are a lot of parallels that I can see because we are working with human subjects.
There are many studies that I support and that I reference. If you look back at comments over the past 5 years you will find my comments and I try to acknowledge what I think is valid research (Children’s Hospital Ambiulatory Care did some wonderful work in Lawrence that was cited in the health literature and they continue to work with school populations — Deborah Waber does excellent research and she has published data on the students in the Boston schools who are forced to take the MCAS).
My decision on charter schools has already been made for some time… I don’t want to “debate” the issue ….
Areas that I like to investigate are those such as the one Duane pointed out by Neil Wilson, the book Black Swan on chaos theory (he indicates we need to toss out the bell curve in schools) , and whenever Gene Glass writes anything at all or promotes an article in a journal those are always my first choice for the limited reading time I have.
and one of your choosing?
jeanhaverhill@aol.com
You might enjoy the Scott Barry Kaufman book “Ungifted” He uses Sternberg at Tufts as his primary model for what is “intelligence”
Also the book about “Dyslexia ” that Ben Foss wrote ; he had a unique ability and creativity that as never recognized by tests and not rewarded in academic settings but her persisted and found a path to develop his talents .
But I prefer my chemistry teacher’s disinclination to make me feel any competence I truly lacked.
Again, I would probably have reacted as you did and , had I the courage, I might have popped him in the nose. Fortunately I never had that from a teacher and most of them encouraged achievements and inspired creativity I also took the MMPI and it is beyond the scope of this particular blog to go into the validity of the instrument … but again it is often using a test of sorts for the wrong purposes.
jeanhaverhill@aol.com
Stephen Ronan, which of these scenarios is a red flag to you that is worthy of a very close look?
1. Low performing charter school or low performing public school has a very high attrition rate.
2. Very high performing charter school or very high performing public school has a very high attrition rate.
While I would certainly have no objections to a close investigation of #1, what can such an investigation possibly find? Parent says “yes, we left, the school was terrible.” Or maybe that school serves a very transient population, which might account for its very low scores. It’s hard to imagine the school forcing out kids to help keep its test scores at the bottom, but maybe there is one. Maybe the school gets extra funding the worse the test scores are and therefore wants any kids who can perform at grade standards to leave.
But when scenario #2 happens, anyone who fights off a close look is obviously desperately trying not to know what is going on. And the question becomes, why? What are they afraid of learning?
When the education reform movement fights so hard to prevent a close look when scenario #2 happens, something is going on. When the educational reform movement wants you to think that scenario #2 doesn’t need to be looked at closely because the schools in scenario #1 are losing students, too, then that is when they have lost my trust. No doubt they think it is a very clever way of mis-directing folks who genuinely care about having better schools. “This high performing charter school loses lots of kids, but so does that terrible failing school so it’s completely fine to ignore it.”
I would be just as skeptical of a high performing public school that parents “voluntarily” removed their kids from as often as they did a low performing public school. I would ask “What’s wrong with the school that so many students are leaving?”
In the case of a failing school, I KNOW what is wrong with the school!
In the case of the high performing school, I don’t know what is wrong with it. Do you? Or don’t you care.
NYC public school parent: “In the case of the high performing school, I don’t know what is wrong with it. Do you?”
Using the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education data sources I referred you to, have you been able to establish any consistent correlation between higher performance at charter schools and higher attrition?
If not, what do you find to be your main obstacle? Perhaps others here could assist?
Stephen,
I don’t support the privatization of public schools. I don’t care what the test scores are.
Why doesn’t the charter industry honestly state what they propose in Question 2, which is to use public funds for privately managed schools with unelected boards?
Do you think the public would support that?
You seem to think that charter schools will be funded by a different source than public schools. They won’t. Like every other state, Massachusetts will sooner or later take money away from community schools to support privately-run charter schools.
We have a listing of the school committees that have voted a resolution not to promote charter schools.
Will supply if anyone wants it.
When the school committees had a resolution against tests from Pearson , the Commissioner went to each city/town and strong-armed the schools committee. This is undue political pressure that only promotes Chester’s career goals and his affiliations with Pearson. I have been requesting that Suzanne Bump in the AG office audit the finances. Some of these federal funds go through a “lead” state o Chester draws on that account to also get his mischief done as he goes to tell people to sign on with Pearson and with Jeb Bush. M. Chester is a disgrace to MA; he is like Romney who would kill the goose that laid golden eggs (all of the hard work we did with MEAP and staff development on setting standard before Chester came along)
Why doesn’t the charter industry honestly state what they propose in Question 2, which is to use public funds for privately managed schools with unelected boards? Do you think the public would support that?
jeanhaverhill@aol.com
JeanH,
I would not be surprised if Chester lands at Pearson after MA
Diane: “privately managed schools with unelected boards”
You mean kind of like Harvard and MIT but assisting younger students, and subject to close monitoring and supervision by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts’ Board of Elementary and Secondary Education of which: “The 9 members appointed by the governor shall consist of 1 representative of a labor organization selected by the governor from a list of 3 nominees provided by the Massachusetts State Labor Council, AFL-CIO; 1 representative of business or industry selected by the governor with a demonstrated commitment to education; 1 representative of parents of school children selected by the governor from a list of 3 nominees provided by the Massachusetts Parent Teachers Association; and 6 additional members…. Of the 9 members appointed by the governor, 1 shall be appointed for a term that is coterminous with that of the governor. Each of the remaining 8 members shall be appointed for a term of 5 years”?
“Do you think the public would support that?”
To be honest, yes, I think they might, if not swamped by misinformation by the measure’s opponents.
In respect to funding impacts, it’s important to be realistic that even if the cap is somewhat lifted, the State is unlikely to make any sudden dramatic moves to increase the number of charter seats, although the process could be sped up somewhat if we pass the “Millionaire’s Tax”: https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/05/18/inside-fight-for-millionaires-tax/TvMqLaVx4EWUnukhIjQZoI/story.html whose funds would be earmarked for roads and education.
My guess is that if the charter cap is lifted that will increase the likelihood of the millionaire’s tax passing, resulting in more funds available for both public charter and public traditional schools.
Stephen,
Why do you think the ad buy for the charter campaign is being purchased by Republicans?
Public schools are not private universities. They are paid for by the public. You seem to be totally ignorant of the lack of democracy in how charters are run. Have you heard of Families for Excellent Schools, now operating for charter expansion in Mass? It represents the families of billionaires, not poor urban families. Do you think hedge fund managers will answer the complaints of poor Hispanic parents?
This I what your idea of choice looks like, Stephen.
There is only one Harvard, one Stanford and one MIT. How many publicly funded, private sector, often fraudulent and inferior, autocratic and opaque K-12 corporate charter schools are there?
Harvard and MIT are not opaque and they are not financed with public funds from taxpayers. Harvard also has $32.7 billion in cash on hand through its endowment.
Harvard admits 2,106 undergrads from 39,041 applicants. Applicants had a choice to apply but who chooses the undergrads that are accepted?
K-12 public schools do not operate that way. Every child who lives in the area a public school serves is accepted to that public school. There is no sifting.
The cost to attend Harvard for the average student is $60,659. What is the cost to send a child to a public K-12 school?
Harvard’s acceptance rate is 5.2%. That means Harvard made a choice not to accept 94.8% of applicants.
Stanford University is 4.7% (annual cost to average student is almost $60k)
MIT is 9% (annual cost to average student is $58,240)
https://college.harvard.edu/admissions/admissions-statistics
This is what you mean by choice if you can afford it.
But what are we getting with those autocratic, opaque, often fraudulent and inferior, publicly funded, private sector corporate charter schools?
Figure 26: Academic Growth of Charter Schools Compared to Their Local Markets
Page 57, credo.stanford.edu
READING:
No Significant Difference – 56 percent
Significantly worse – 19 percent
Significantly Better – 25 percent
Translated: 75 percent are the same or worse than the public schools. What happens when a student takes a high stakes test and only gets 25 percent of the questions right? A 25 percent score on any test is a failing grade. How many years did it take to achieve this failure in the corporate charter schools?
MATH:
No Significant Difference – 40 percent
Significantly worse – 31 percent
Significantly Better – 29 percent
Translated: 71 percent are the same or worse than the public schools. What happens when a student takes a high stakes test and only gets 29 percent of the questions right? A 29 percent score on any test is a failing grade. How many years did it take to achieve this failure in the corporate charter schools?
Click to access NCSS%202013%20Final%20Draft.pdf
Stephen, most if not all autocratic, opaque, often fraudulent and inferior, publicly funded, private sector corporate charter schools are not Harvard, Stanford or MIT or even close to them and those three private sector universities are not publicly funded or cheap.
Diane: “Why do you think the ad buy for the charter campaign is being purchased by Republicans?”
Oh, dear, Diane. I imagine you are relying on the Edushyster/Mo Cunningham stuff? As the dude said, “trust, but verify”. Kindly review my comments at http://edushyster.com/family-affair/. And thanks for the reminder, I’ll head over to the site some time later today to add more. So please do check back there in another day or two. Thanks.
Diane: “Public schools are not private universities. They are paid for by the public. You seem to be totally ignorant of the lack of democracy in how charters are run. ”
I was particularly impressed by Howard Fuller’s discussion of that subject in his debate with Julian Vasquez Heilig… Not sure I could improve on that, so won’t try.
Diane: “Have you heard of Families for Excellent Schools, now operating for charter expansion in Mass? ”
Yes, I have. In fact just last night I read its report: “Safety Last: New York City’s Public Schools Are More Dangerous Than Ever.” Since I support what I know of DiBlasio’s efforts regarding school discipline, I wasn’t especially pleased with it. But I guess it is important that the Mayor get his facts straight, and I’m not well versed enough in the issues to know whether their critique may be well-supported by the evidence.
Click to access FESNY_School-Safety-Report_02_18_2016.pdf
“It represents the families of billionaires, not poor urban families.”
The poor urban families that I know best are grateful for charter schools as an option, are frustrated not to have more such options closer at hand… The multi-bus commutes on public transportation are a serious obstacle for middle schoolers.
Stephan,
After four years of documenting the billionaires and hedge fund managers behind the charter movement, I don’t have the energy to respond to your naive comment.
Ever heard of ALEC? An ally of yours. So is Scott Walker, Pat Mccrory, Rick Snyder, Rick Scott, and every other Republucan governor and right wing think tank.
How dare you compare public schools to private universities! Public schools are a public responsibility that should be equal for all and open to all. They are akin to police, firefighters, public beaches, public highways, public libraries, public parks, sanitation, and every other government service. Would you hand them over to the private sector too?
Enough.
“After four years of documenting the billionaires and hedge fund managers behind the charter movement, I don’t have the energy to respond to your naive comment.”
My main point there was that wealthy folks who are Democrats as well as Republicans support these efforts, unlike what you may read in your local blogosphere.
As has been the case with public libraries.
Andrew Carnegie was a Republican, while I get the sense that Gates may lean Democratic.
Do you oppose criminal justice reform because Charles Koch and Newt Gingrich join George Soros in supporting it?
HIV vaccine research, because it has received U.S. billionaire funding?
“How dare you compare public schools to private universities!”
I would advise you to be cautious with that kind of critique. As you are aware, there is a difference between comparing and equating… I’m sure I could find many relevant examples in your writing to illustrate the difference.
“Public schools are a public responsibility that should be equal for all and open to all.”
Boston kids may apply to Boston charter schools and be selected by lottery. That is not also the case for Boston exam schools, and METCO program schools.
I note that I have received no responses to this question: “One question that has long intrigued me is how those here who so vigorously attack charter schools feel about exam schools. Christine? Diane? New York City public school parent? Others?”
Nor for that matter any response to my question as to whether you support Boston kids attending suburban schools via the METCO program, schools that are not governed by elected officials accountable to those kids families.
But I understand, now, that you may currently lack the energy to respond to such naive questions. Thanks for the update. Hope you get some well-earned rest.
Stephen,
The NYC public schools are responsible for all who apply. If they don’t get into an exam school, they will be enrolled in another public school.
If kids don’t get into a charter, the charter has no responsibility for them. If they are kicked out in November, they return to the public school and the charter keeps the money. A racket.
Public services don’t belong to plutocrats; they belong to taxpayers. If Newt Gingrch wants criminal justice reform, I assume he is neither taking control of the prisons or buying the judges. Of course, prisons and hospitals are rapidly being privatized, not for the public good, but for profit. They cut corners and cut costs.
You support privatization, I don’t. End of story.
there was once a time when a concept of “noblesse oblige” was supposed to fill in for the great inequalities. In the family owned businesses there was a concept of “good will” when you sat in the same church pews with the business owners. Today’s business world has seemed to drop those earlier values and we have people who claim they have a “right to earn profits” while there is no right for persons to have water . It’s pretty disgusting to me
Andrew Carnegie was a Republican, while I get the sense that Gates may lean Democratic.
jeanhaverhill@aol.com
Okay, I’ll take the bait, though likely for the last time.
“I note that I have received no responses to this question: ‘One question that has long intrigued me is how those here who so vigorously attack charter schools feel about exam schools. Christine? Diane? New York City public school parent? Others?’ ”
Boston has three selective entrance schools where admittance is tied to scores on a standardized test. Personally, I believe these tests create the aura of a meritocracy and I would dispense with them because through stack ranking students above a cut-off score, the “most prestigious” school gets the top scorers and the “least” gets the lowest. Predictably, since tests correlate most closely with socio-economic status, the highest scores result in stratification of student bodies at the 3 schools. The “most prestigious” is also the whitest, least poor, has the fewest ELL’s and least involved SWD’s. At the “least prestigious” school the population closely mirrors the city-wide school population. (Demographically, the second school, predictably, is right in the middle.) A simple solution would be to assign all students meeting the cut off score randomly to one of the three exam schools such that the demographics are the same across all three schools. Politically, it won’t happen – parents and alumni (whose children often enter from private and parochial schools) who would possibly be affected have the social capital and clout to assure that.
A public school system has a committment to serve all children – with their wide range of needs – within its district. And Boston is doing that by providing for students who can flourish in a traditional academically rigorous program at the exam schools, however flawed the admissions criteria may be.
Boston also has a K-12 inclusion school for students with developmental disabilities such as Down Syndrome, included side by side with students without disabilities: http://www.bostonpublicschools.org/Page/829
There’s the Carter Development Center for our students with severe disabilities and complex medical issues:
http://bostonpublicschools.org/school/carter-development-center
There’s also the McKinley School, which provides a curriculum which provides on-going therapy for students who need behavioral support: http://www.bostonpublicschools.org/Page/883
And there’s the Horace Mann School for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing: http://www.bostonpublicschools.org/Page/857
I’m certain the response from the lift the cap folks is well, we don’t have the capacity to serve those kids. No, you don’t. Only a large public system has the capacity to provide many diverse and appropriate educational settings. This is why charters cannot be permitted to decimate the public system by skimming off the few students they wish to educate.
Stephen Ronan,
If someone really had such a good idea for a school, why not do it under the supervision of the city? There are already choice schools overseen by the same education departments that oversee public schools. Spending the money to establish a separate entity with separate oversight has only one purpose — because you don’t want to follow the same rules.
And those rules — as we all know — having nothing to do with union work rules. If they did, you’d have 100% successful schools in states without teachers’ unions where those billionaires could easily underwrite schools instead of changing the law in Massachusetts. Those rules that many charters don’t want to follow are the pesky regulations that were established in the first place to prevent abuse of children. To prevent unsafe conditions. To prevent “legal” profiteering from public money.
Why do you think the same organization who is behind the Massachusetts charter schools is also heavily attacking Mayor de Blasio’s efforts to stop suspensions of Kindergarten to 2nd graders. Five year olds! And the huge amounts of money FES spends in non-stop attacks and “advocacy ads” to convince the public that those five year olds are dangerous and suspensions is NECESSARY. Think about why they are doing that.
Do you really think there are intelligent and educated people who believe that 20% of the 5 year olds in a charter school are violently acting out and had to be suspended? Do you think FES would be trying to make that claim if those children were white middle class children and not be laughed out of the room? Do you not realize that the only reason they get away with such sickening and outrageous characterization of 5 year olds is because those children are minorities? And that white people hear these ads and think “of course, those many violent students who need suspending at age 5 are minorities and I keep hearing how violent they are, and FES is telling me it is absolutely true!”
The people behind Mass charters have no real interest in educating the majority of at-risk kids. You and I both know it. They want to cherry-pick the ones who are cheap and make money from it or gain prestige through false claims. There are plenty of ways to establish alternative schools (part of the system) for those kids that are not charter schools — especially with billions of dollars! But only one way guarantees you can treat the ones you don’t want in any way you please in order to get them out of your school. There is only one that can establish the rules and regulations they can selectively apply to the unwanted low-performing children to make sure they understand how “bad” they are. There is only one way where the oversight comes from far away with a hand-picked board whose highest priority is making charters feel good.
If you think that is enough, I suggest you see how the SUNY Charter Institute has overseen schools in NYC. Or more accurately – has NOT overseen schools. When “oversight” is “what percentage of the remaining students are meeting standards and we don’t care how many leave”, the incentives for charter schools become warped and they MUST do those reprehensible things to survive. And that will never change. If you support charters, you support a system where the incentives are not to educate as many at-risk kids as possible, but to educate only the students who will help your bottom line and make you look good.
If you understood anything about economics, you would understand why that will never work, unless by “work” you mean educate some kids and make profiteers very rich. Any charter operator who wants to at ethically is going to have results that make him look bad. Always.
Mr. Ronan asks: ““One question that has long intrigued me is how those here who so vigorously attack charter schools feel about exam schools.”
We can debate the value of exam schools on their merits. They provide education for high-performing students who score highest on a test. They don’t demand outsize resources by claiming to have a miracle cure for failing schools. (In fact, they often get less.) Exam schools requiring a higher test score for admissions don’t claim to have a secret sauce because the average SAT scores of their students is higher than the average SAT score of exam schools that require a slightly lower test score for admissions. We can have an honest debate about whether there is a value to them or not.
But it is telling that you refer to them because that honest discussion is something that the purveyors of charter schools do not want to have. Instead, we have liars — that’s what they are, Mr. Ronan, liars — claiming that certain charter schools are working miracles with the exact same kids as found in those failing public schools nearby. And with less money! So why not cut money from those struggling public schools, right? After all, the charter school “proved” it could do it with less and so did all those billionaire-funded studies that are used in order to avoid answering the obvious question — if those schools are so good, why would so many children drop out to return to failing schools?
One or two reformers have tried to say “let’s just admit that charters are just for strivers and be honest.” They are attacked by the majority of billionaire-funded fake reformers and soon shut up because they worry about their own pocketbooks and never mention the unmentionable again for fear of losing their jobs. Because charters can’t exist unless they continue the myth of the secret sauce. They can’t exist being honest.
You want charters for strivers like exam schools are for high performing kids? Why? You can set up a public school for strivers and get just as good results. And the lower cost of such public schools keeps money in the system. But then we have to have a conversation about what happens when all the non-strivers students are concentrated 100% in non-striver public schools. In fact, THAT would be a place that charters could step in, but of course they’d never do it for the same per pupil cost that public schools take to teach the striver kids. But if they would – then fight for that, Mr. Ronan. Fight for a charter school that every public school can send kids who they deem are too much trouble to teach. Fight to use all that billionaire money to teach only the kids that public schools fail with and decide they don’t want. And as soon as you have success with them and manage those 99% passing rates that charters get with every single student, send them back to public schools where they can thrive. And public schools will send you the next batch of kids who are failing and they don’t seem to be able to help so you can work your miracles.
But don’t say “it’s fine for our charter to eliminate all costly underperforming kids because of magnets and it’s fine for us to lie about the fact that we only want to teach only students who would do well in any school that didn’t have to address the needs of kids who struggle.” It is never fine to lie.
Show me a magnet school that is as dishonest as a charter school and I will have the same problem with it. I know exactly how those magnet schools work. Just like I know exactly how high-performing charter schools work. But only one type of school spends millions in PR and lobbying to get people to believe something that isn’t true. Please stop condoning dishonesty. It’s one of the reasons that most public school parents who want good educations don’t trust reformers.
NYC Public School Parent,
Thank you for your cogent response about charters and dishonesty.
We must continue to point out to charter advocates that the original purpose of charters was to save kids who were failing, not provide a refuge for high-performing kids. They were supposed to take the kids that public schools could not educate, for whatever reason, and devise ways to do it and share what they learned with public schools.
They were not created to cause the collapse of public education in targeted districts. But that’s what they are now.
Very thoughtful, constructive reply re: exam schools, Christine. Much appreciated.
Relatedly, have you had a chance yet to review Meira Levinson’s article that I’ve mentioned on occasion:
“The Ethics of Pandering in Boston Public Schools’ School Assignment Plan”
https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/12991704/Levinson%20Ethics%20of%20Pandering%20TRE%20FINAL%202%20.pdf?sequence=1
“How can access to public elementary schools of variable quality be justly distributed within a school district? Two reasonable criteria are (a) that children should have equal opportunity to attend high-quality schools; and (b) school assignment policies should foster an overall increase in the number of high-quality schools. This article analyzes Boston Public Schools’ (BPS) new school assignment plan in light of these criteria. It shows that BPS’ plan violates equal opportunity by giving middle-class families privileged access to existing high-quality schools. BPS arguably panders to more-advantaged families, however, in order to pull them into the system and deploy their economic, political, and social capital to increase the total number of high-quality schools. Is this ethically defensible?”
Stephen, if I were coaching your debate team, you would be sitting on the bench. You make no response to the position I present:
“I’m certain the response from the lift the cap folks is well, we don’t have the capacity to serve those kids. No, you don’t. Only a large public system has the capacity to provide many diverse and appropriate educational settings. This is why charters cannot be permitted to decimate the public system by skimming off the few students they wish to educate.”
and instead redirect to another topic about BPS’s school assignment process, totally irrelevant to the topic you raised and the subject of this blog post. Bad form. Interestingly, though, the article you directed me to contains the following assessment of charter schools in Boston:
“Although a few hypersegregated charter networks—amounting to at best a few hundred schools across the country, including some in Boston—may now be achieving more consistent positive results than this, their academic achievements have proven difficult to scale within districts, with a full range of students, and along measures beyond state standardized test scores. Boston-area charters, for example, have been lauded as the most effective in the country and are also highly segregated. But they also serve radically lower percentages of ELL and special needs students; they have much higher attrition rates than the Boston Public Schools at virtually every grade level; they tend not to “backfill” with new students, so their student body becomes ever- more selective; and their average SAT scores, while still significantly higher than Boston’s, are far worse than one would predict given their MCAS scores, suggesting that they may teach to the high-stakes MCAS test rather than providing an overall superior education.”
https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/12991704/Levinson%20Ethics%20of%20Pandering%20TRE%20FINAL%202%20.pdf?sequence=1
You’ve sabotaged your own argument! Gotta bring your A game to play on this field.
the Lowell Sun and the Brockton Enterprise both have active comment columns today; I would imagine Worcester does also if anyone has time to leave them a comment.
Lloyd writes: “The cost to attend Harvard for the average student is $60,659. What is the cost to send a child to a public K-12 school?”
“Can’t vouch for its accuracy, but this is what I find here:
http://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/123014/what-harvard-actually-costs.asp
“For the 2015-2016 year, the university says that most students from families making less than $65,000 a year attended absolutely free. If you came from a family making between $65,000 and $150,000, you typically have to kick in 10% of your family income or less. Students with families making slightly more also receive considerable financial support from the school.”
“One statistic in particular illustrates the scope of the university’s aid program, which is entirely need-based. For roughly 90% percent of families, Harvard actually costs the same as, or less than, an education at a state school.”
“The university says that its admissions process is entirely need-blind. If you come from a lower-income family and are eligible to receive a sizable aid package, you theoretically have the same chance of admission as someone from a wealthier family.”
Please note, Lloyd, that I did not equate Harvard and charter schools but mentioned the former as a reason to suppose that parents
In respect to the CREDO studies, I discussed those most recently with Bill Honig and Diane here (at the end of which discussion, Diane inflicted far more damage to my public reputation than any H.S. chemistry teacher ever did).
https://dianeravitch.net/2016/08/03/bill-honig-a-good-site-for-wisdom-about-schools/#comment-2582389
Bottom line, charter schools seem to create gains on standards measures of academic progress (flawed as some of those may be) with certain populations more than others, e.g., not so much for white folks in suburbia.
And we should keep in mind that the series of CREDO studies have demonstrated forward progress in charter school results, that may continue on today.
Stephen,
Your argument about test scores doesn’t cut any ice here. We all know how schools game the scores. Charters keep out the low-scoring kids or kick them out. No surprise. Give us a reason to privatize a public democratic institution. So far, you haven’t offered one.
Stephen, you are being disingenuous by ignoring the fact that after far too many years, the majority of corporate charter schools are not outperforming community based, democratic, transparent, non-profit, public schools.
Yes, I read that Harvard offers economic support to famlies that earn below a given amount, because that info is on the same Harvard site I provided a link to, but the majority of Harvard’s students pay full price, and Harvard still makes the final choice of who they accept (5.2 percent of applicants) and who they reject (94.8 percent of applicants). Many corporate charters schools do the same thing but not as drastically. Parents might fill out an application, but the final choice of who gets accepted belongs to the corporate charter school.
You are also being disingenuous when you fail to mention that most if not all corporate charters do not serve the neediest students, but go after top performing students and children that are easy to control and bully to achieve higher test scores.
The original concept for charter schools never intended for them to become corporate profit centers that ignore many if not most of the neediest students. In fact, the original concept for charter schools was that they would stay inside traditional, community based, democratic public school districts but with more autonomy for professional, highly trained teachers to make decisions instead of legislators and/or administrators telling them what to do and how to teach, so those professional teachers would have an opportunity to have the freedom to develop better, more innovative classroom teaching techniques, and teaching to the test and forcing teachers to follow scripts written by corporate hacks who have little or no teaching experience wasn’t one of them.
What we have today with the autocratic, opaque, often fraudulent and inferior corporate charter school industry is far from the original concept of more freedom for professional teachers to in innovate in the classroom to develop new methods to teach and help the neediest children succeed that could then be replicated in the traditional public schools after these new methods proved successful. Without the oversight that comes with the community based, democratic, transparent, non profit public schools, this isn’t happening.
jeanhaverhill,
Thanks for your sympathy. But the chemistry teacher, in this instance, knew the target, and his classroom audience, well enough not to be afraid of inflicting much damage. Kinda like Diane here. She’s not afraid I’ll curl up in the fetal position as she wings a zinger off the ceiling or attempts a carom shot off a tree in the parking lot.
In repect to “your methodology”, that’s as reflected in your comparison of enrollment in different grades without clearly attending to potential effects of grade level retention. Your example was, nevertheless, far more compelling than what we find in the literature of the Mass. Association of School Committees, which is not up the the standards of accuracy towards which, I am confident, you and I both strive.
I have appreciated your references to relevant literature, e.g., to “Ungifted”. Keep ’em coming!
Stephen,
Try to limit your comments to 2 a day.
Diane,
Up here on the New England seacoast, we have green-head flies, which appear at the height of summer on our most lovely beaches. They look like common house flies, except for their green heads. They are the most annoying of persistent creatures and have a vicious bite for something so slight. Many a good summer conversation has been ruined as they constantly intrude and must be slapped away. On occasion, I have even left the beach rather than tolerate them. Do you have green-heads on Long Island?
No, Christine, I have not seen green-head flies on the beaches of Long Island, but I have encountered a few on this blog. They don’t sting, but they are very annoying, persistent, and their green heads are empty.
I love Cape Cod.
Not a fair comparison; I’m assuming when you were taking chemistry you were an adolescent and deserved some considerations from a more powerful adult in the teacher’s role. That is not the case any more; you are certainly capable of “attacking” in your own way to any of us who refute your “evidence”. In that regard I can compare you to Mitchell Chester in that regard; he says that constituents are impervious to facts; I say that I have a different set of facts than Commissioner Chester and he is irresponsible in the power that he holds over schools, school committees, and students. I cannot forgive him for the horrid job and the poor advice he gave to Governor Patrick all the time trying to set himself up as a “tsar” to prop up Arne Duncan across the states. Abuse of power and “strong arming” school committees that dare to disagree.
Kinda like Diane here. She’s not afraid I’ll curl up in the fetal position as she wings a zinger off the ceiling or attempts a carom shot off a tree in the parking lot.
jeanhaverhill@aol.com
If I were to take those CREDO studies at their word, what they really show is that for charter schools, the more very young kids you suspend, the higher your test scores are. The more very young kids that disappear, the higher your test scores are. That is absolutely true for charters that serve primarily at-risk kids.
CREDO can’t explain why charters with higher suspension rates have higher test scores for at-risk kids than charters that never suspend them and that don’t have high attrition rates. They will spend untold millions to figure out how to “match” the remaining charter school kids with a supposedly typical public school kid at an acceptably failing school. (Which real researchers have shown is questionable.)
But they won’t spend a penny to figure out why the top performing charters lose so many at-risk kids.
I guess they already know why. No doubt, so does Stephen Ronan. Anything to avoid an honest discussion of how poorly charters do when it comes to teaching all but the strivers among the at-risk kids, and how wonderfully they have figured out how to get the others to act out and “disappear”.
Diane, I would respectfully suggest that you may be excessively, indiscriminately dismissive of all the criminal justice reform promoted by billionaires. At the Charles Koch Institute, the top two supported reforms listed are:
“* Excessive & Disproportionate Sentencing: Too many people in America go to prison—and for far too long—for low-level, nonviolent crimes. All criminals should be held accountable, but punishments should be proportional to the crime committed.
“* Collateral Consequences of Incarceration: Thousands of laws keep people from obtaining jobs and productively re-entering a community once they have served their sentence. After being held accountable, an ex-offender should be allowed to put his or her life back together.”
If you think that we should dismiss that as junk, because some billionaires believe it… you’re far from persuading me.
I think we’re both opposed to privatization of criminal justice programs by for-profit corporations. But apparently, at least philosophically, you would also oppose the criminal justice reforms in Massachusetts that moved from publicly operated facilities to a far greater management role for public charities. Yes?
For those not familiar with that process…
Prior to “Reform”: with public institutions, public employees:
“For over 100 years, Massachusetts training schools employed random beatings, food deprivation, and extreme periods of isolation to control youth in their custody. ”
http://www.cjcj.org/Education1/Massachusetts-Training-Schools.html
“Coughlin had long cultivated close relations with politicians throughout the state. Indeed, the Boston Globe reported in 1970 that ‘most of the department’s 900 employees got their jobs through political connections.’
“Yet, the scent of scandal increasingly enveloped the agency in the late 1960s, coming to a head in late 1968 and early 1969 with a series of investigations and news stories alleging atrocious conditions (physical abuse, rats and vermin, harsh use of solitary confinement and rioting) at the Institute for Juvenile Guidance in Bridgewater.”
[…]
“For Coughlin’s successor, Jerome Miller, Commissioner of the Massachusetts Department of Youth Services, “the final straw came late on a Sunday afternoon when he received a call from the state’s oldest and largest facility, the Lyman School, where – in a moment of anger – one of the cottage supervisors had caged two boys in a basement and driven away with the keys.
[…]
“Miller’s efforts to reform the Massachusetts training schools encountered stiff resistance from facility staff, and progress toward improving the quality (and humaneness) of care was uneven. Within two years, Miller would conclude that transforming these institutions was a mission impossible and that a more radical solution – closing the training schools – was necessary.
“Many Youth Services employees, especially those with 10 or 20 years under the old system, felt threatened by Miller’s approach,” the Boston Globe reported in 1971. “They had grown accustomed to corporal punishment, shaved heads and silence at meals – all outlawed by Miller.”
“Once Miller decided to close the training schools, his reform effort included several core components:
* Develop alternative programming. As federal funding began flowing in 1970 and 1971, the Youth Services Department started to make progress establishing a network of community-based alternative programs around the state. This work involved three primary tasks:
“1. Building a new finance and accounting system that would allow the Department to contract with private programs and facilities. Prior to Miller’s arrival the state had no mechanism for setting daily rates or per diem payments to private facility operators and service providers, no system for monitoring performance of these provider agencies, and no system in place to process and pay invoices in a timely manner.
[…]
2. […]
“After initially proposing to establish state-run correctional halfway houses for youth, Miller ultimately funded a network of privately operated group homes across the state, modeled more on the facilities that housed foster kids in child welfare than on the halfway houses used in adult corrections.”
Click to access Closing%20Massachusetts%20Training%20Schools%20(AECF;%20May%202014).pdf
Currently, Diane, the Robert F. Kennedy Action Corps, a 501(c)(3) public charity, operates the most secure juvenile facilities in the state.
Stephen,
Public schools are not to be compared with a derelict prison system. Have you ever actually been in a public school? Everyone that I have visited was staffed with caring professionals, who work for too little pay.
Stephen, find another hobby. What do you do for a living?
There are hundreds of examples of terrible charter schools across the country.
But I don’t feel like playing your game.
Diane: “Have you ever actually been in a public school?”
Yes, both awake and, not infrequently, asleep.
As a prime example, I had an implicit deal with a history teacher. I would allow him to speak his mind (well, actually, read from the textbook), uninterrupted, with no words of dissent from me, and he would allow me to catch up on my ZZZs.
Thanks, Diane, for your thoughtful 10-point commentary re: what you have learned over the years. I look forward to responding.
Meanwhile:
Diane: “If they are kicked out in November, they return to the public school and the charter keeps the money. A racket.”
In Massachusetts: “For students who attend the charter school for less than the full year, the tuition payment shall be reduced based on the number of days of enrollment.”
http://www.doe.mass.edu/charter/governance/adminguide.doc (page 74)
That’s good, Stephen, but you should really inform yourself about how charters operate in other states.
When they first started, charters said they would accept accountability in exchange for results.
They also said they would produce better education at less cost.
Today: they want no accountability. They give generous campaign contributions to legislators and governors to guarantee no accountability. So even if they produce no results, there is no accountability
Despite their promise of lower costs, charters lobbied to get the same as public schools, even though they get large sums from corporations and foundations. They don’t cost less and they don’t deliver better results.
Believe me, the MA legislation will change to favor charters
In a positive development, tonight the MA Democratic State Committee passed a resolution to OPPOSE question #2, which would lift the cap on charter schools. DFER MA was not amused.
In other news, former Red Sox pitcher Curt Shilling is considering a run against Elizabeth Warren for the Senate. I never knew the bloody sock was due to a grievous head injury.
Christine,
That’s great news. Write it up. Important not to let this GOP measure appear bipartisan
Done. How would you like me to get it to you?
Send it to me at dr19@nyu.edu
Wow, congrats to the teachers unions!
As the Boston Globe described the pending discussions at the State Committee:
“Charter schools have long been a contentious issue among Democrats, forcing activists to take sides between two traditional party constituencies: minority and low-income families versus teachers unions.”
“Ballot question on charter schools divides Democrats” By Jim O’Sullivan Globe Staff August 15, 2016
Stephen,
Given the time you give to defending the privatization of public schools, I conclude that you are a paid advocate for the charter industry. This is a website devoted to fighting what you advocate. I have written two books in refutation of privatization via charters and vouchers and posted for four and a half years about charter school scandals, graft, corruption, cheating, and fraud.
Perhaps you would like to explain why none of the highest performing nations in the world have turned their schools over to corporations and entrepreneurs.
The Trump campaign would welcome your help.
Diane: “I conclude that you are a paid advocate for the charter industry.”
They need me, Diane. But can’t afford me. Now if you, and each of your readers… $27.00… can we make that monthly?
Diane: “Perhaps you would like to explain why none of the highest performing nations in the world have turned their schools over to corporations and entrepreneurs.”
Ah, there you go again. Leading by following. Just like Obama. Actually, scratch that, I guess Obama is reasonably amenable to high-performing charters.
Diane: “The Trump campaign would welcome your help.”
I see that V. 2.0 of Godwin’s law has arrived to rule our universe.
http://www.enterprisenews.com/news/20160811/shortened-school-year-approved-for-brockton-charter-school-due-to-delay-in-opening
I have a sarcasm title for Peterson also; I write about him as Schumpeter Peterson because he is still pushing the economic models of Schumpeter and that is the wrong paradigm for education.
PEPG …. Peterson
(affiliates are Fordham Institute; Marty West etc)
Diane, I do believe that Massachusetts charter schools do have to comply with Federal laws regarding special needs kids. They certainly don’t have the population of them that the public schools do, that’s for sure.
http://www.enterprisenews.com/news/20160815/state-considers-adding-another-brockton-charter-school
this is a quote from Boston/government arena that illustrates how the potentates in Boston (and BESE) look at the rest of us in the state; the 495 belt, Worcester County, and some of the western cities. “[These cities]…. …. no longer have a functional purpose… ”
“The cities in our sample, after seismic shifts in transportation and the economy, no longer have a clear functional purpose, variously serving as points of entry for immigrants, lower-cost bedroom communities, central loci for social services, and as hubs for remaining industries,” This is the traditional type of arrogance that has come from the Boston offices; neocolonial in attitude and you can guess who is in the “colony” and why they want to privatize our schools through corporate hyper-marketing… we “no longer have a functional purpose” that is useful to the conglomerate of Boston. (p.s. Revere, Everett, Lynn fall into the same demographic as Brockton and some of our other cities that have more poverty). (I used a secondary source on the quote — most of this gets circulated from corporate groups or the Pioneer Institute)
Hmm, I seem to be joining the party a bit late, but I’ll ask this question, regardless. Traditional public schools are public schools typically run by a municipality. In MA, charters are public schools run by the state. How then are MA charters any less democratic? Are state officials not elected or appointed by elected officials? It’s like saying local police are public law enforcement and state police are not. It’s nonsensical.
As for the gentleman above who finds choice and democracy unrelated, well, I find that a stunner to say the least. China may call its single party system a “democracy,” but few really believe that it is because it lacks the fundamental element of democracy — the opportunity to choose which candidate you think is best. In this way charters are far more democratic. They give parents a choice. Absent that choice all but the wealthy are told where, when, and how their children will be educated. If that sounds “democratic” to you then I suspect your mind is long closed on this issue.
Nat Morton,
Are you aware that public schools are a public service, like police and firefighters and public parks and beaches and public libraries? Are you aware that every high performing nation in the world has a well funded public school system,no charters or vouchers? Are you aware that charters and public schools draw from the same finding and more funding for charters means less funding for the vast majority of children in public schools? Are you aware that the creation of privately managed schools whose boards consist of hedge fund managers is a loss of local control?
Ms. Ravitch, being a parent of both public charter and public traditional school students I am keenly aware of both systems here in Massachusetts. I am aware that MA’s traditional public school system is considered among the best, if not the best, in the nation and that our state’s charters regularly out perform them. I am also aware that the city of Boston, the district with far and away the largest concentration of charters in the state, remains the best funded large enrollment system in the country (US Census Bureau) despite the existence of city charters these past 20 years. I am also aware that MA’s Chapter 70 program ensures that every public school in the state receives a foundational level of spending whether there are charters in the area, or not. Finally, being an adult, I am not frighten by “hedge fund manager” talk. What matters most is not process but student outcomes.
this is the kind of “research” that Mr. Morton subscribes to on his blog and he claims to have a lot of it. “Yes, if this were a prize fight the ref would have stopped it on a technical knockout by now. The research keeps pouring in demonstrating that Massachusetts public charter schools are doing a better job educating Boston’s kids, all of them, including the neediest.
Again this week we have more research from the nation’s leading universities that shatters charter opponents’ claims that charters only perform better because they teach only high performing students.” quoting Mr. Morton’s blog
Education is not a race; education is not a Prize Fight…. The facts that I am aware of and the research studies that I would cite are totally ignored by Mr. Norton with his propaganda. I don’t think he should be spreading propaganda on this blog by Diane Ravitch. Certainly those who read here know what is propaganda and can sort out the various “research” approaches that are mentioned by those writing and commenting here.
Curious, why didn’t you mention the work of the MIT PhD candidate that was the subject of that blog entry? Perhaps you find it easier to attack me rather than her?
one commentor wrote on Mr. Norton’s blog : “the concerns of traditional school districts outside urban centers is charter expansion = pseudo private school. When you see charters that are 90% white and well below community averages for need/income groups and then note evidence such as emerging in Ms. Setren’s research, you get an understanding why, besides the typical democrat union mindset, even open minded people worry about charter expansion.”
At one time Boston had 100,000 pupils. It is more likely 1/2 of that now.
The people along the 495 belt and those in western MA, Worcester County, Franklin or Hampden County, Essex County, etc. — there are people commenting in the Worcester and Lowell papers that do not represent what Mr. Norton is saying …. we need to consider ALL of of the student populations for 350 school districts …. confining the “study” to “MIT” is a unique gathering of a unique population. It was also one MIT person who got dragged into the Grit study by Fordham and that does not represent the authority of the entire University. One individual does not convey an authority in a writing just like the people of Fordham Institute do not convey the Fordham University yet they use it for “persuasion”.
I still prefer the study by Deborah Waber at Children’s Hospital which is much more realistic in terms of student testing (MCAS) and also can be generalized to students beyond the schools of Boston (which is its own unique “thing”)
Do you have a link to the Waber study? I’m assembling a collection of research relevant to the MA charter debate, and I’ve yet to find a credible study that could be construed as negative on the performance of MA public charter schools. Thank you.
Nat Morton,
MASS charter schools look good because there are so few of them. You have a large supply of TFA, who come from elite colleges in MASS.
What do you think will happen when there are 300 charters, and the public schools are declining in every urban districts because charters drained away the best students and lots of resources? Will you hold yourself accountable for killing public education?
I’ll take your comment as implicit agreement that the available data on MA charters confirms they are producing better results with the same kinds of students. I agree, that’s what the data clearly shows.
Your question about scale is an interesting one. Can the MA charter system scale? I think they answer each of us would have to give to that question is, ultimately, “I don’t know.” There’s only one way to find out.
But let me now ask you this. MA’s traditional public system is likely the strongest in the nation, if not one of the strongest. If the new wave of MA charters is unable to deliver as effective as the current set of 80 schools, who’s going to choose them? That is the nature of choice. A school not worthy of its enrollment finds itself without an enrollment.
As for holding myself “accountable for killing public education,” please, let’s try to keep this rational. We’re disagreeing on policy. Let’s not try and put black hats on each other.
It WAS one of the strongest…. And there was evidence when the MEAP went through several iterations and became the MCAS. It was strong when Sandra Stotsky worked with teachers and staff development to create curriculum guides and frameworks.
MA had wise use of federal funds (from my experience it was a track record of Commissioner Anrig) that continued a decade or more); but with NCLB and ‘Racing to the Top” and Pearson tests and the dismantling of our schools and dismissal of staff I will no longer project that MA can or will be the “strongest” even on the standardized tests in vogue. Even though Arne Duncan likes to flaunt his “miracle” in Lawrence MA… all of this has yet to be proven (their “miraculous” claims of success in Lawrence) but others have written of this and I don’t need to go on and on….
One major difficulty is in civic education; the MA Council for the Social Studies sent letters back as far as Commissioner Antonucci that the social studies/history/civic education was being neglected because of the constant focus on practicing on computers to take computer tests . You cannot measure education by the Pearson tests and call it “success”…. There is no test that can be used for that purpose… when you strip the curriculum down to mastering some of the skills tested on reading and math tests (that have yet to be proven reliable or valid) you really have nothing at all other than some opinions.
But let me now ask you this. MA’s traditional public system is likely the strongest in the nation, if not one of the strongest.
jeanhaverhill@aol.com
Deborah Waber does not research “charter” schools. She does systematic research on children identified as living in Boston many of whom are in poverty and what happens to the children when they have to take the horrid MCAS tests which has only gotten worse since Pearson has been overseeing the questions. Deborah Waber understands the school students that we have in MA and she is not confined to Boston; The children are referred to the clinics at Children’s Hospital .
Happy to read it. If you don’t have a link I’ll go look for one. As described, I fail to see how it’s relevant to the Question 2 debate.
that is a big problem when you don’t see relevance.
The tests are being used to determine “who deserves” education and the charter schools “cream” the schools to get the “strivers” and they send back to general ed any student not testing high enough …. You should have read what NYC educator wrote earlier on this thread.
It is a relevant theme. Charter schools ant the “plum” of the top of the “tested” (even when we know the tests aren’t really valid any more. How do you think they make their selections and then how they de-select and prepare their “got to go” lists.
The system of public education , if you include the “neediest” and those who are falling off the achievement gap are the same students who get referred to the clinic at Childrens. She will see a new population that “falls out” every time a test of that nature is given (the Pearson tests; designed to fail most of our kids).
It is two sides to the coin; fail the neediest and withdraw resources because they “don’t deserve resources; they are failures”.. and pick off the stivers and pump more resources into the children you perceive as “worthy” to be selected into a private or semi-private school setting then bounce out any that don’t match the results you want in a charter. It is a vicious policy; mean-spirited. The lower down in the grades you do this, the worse because those tests have no predictive validity and it gets worse when you get into the elementary grades because the tests then predict nothing at all.
I don’t have time to give you a master’s degree in understand educational policy… You should sign up at one of the best colleges for teacher education (which are also being dismantled by the “pearson implementation protocols” that Mitchell Chester brags about… But of course , none of this is relevant to the hedgy risky frisky funds and the social impact bonds.
Well, there are many things wrong or misleading in this comment; too many to address in one reply so I’ll pick just two:
– If what you claim is true about MA charters forcing out lower performers we should see it in charter school attrition rates. We don’t. In fact, Boston’s charters have a far lower attrition rate than Boston’s traditional public schools. Neither do we have evidence beyond hearsay that creaming is happening; somehow it’s been missed by parents, parents’ lawyers, the press, and the DESE for the last 20 years. Sorry, the facts don’t fit your assertion.
– Please spare me the appeal to self-authority. You may not have the time to give me a masters degree in education policy but I similarly lack the time to educate you on data analysis, basic economics, and organizational leadership that my education and 30+ years in my field have given me. If you find flaw with what I present, please speak to it. The “well it’s because I’m smarter than you” card is sophomoric
.
Nat Morton,
The way to destroy charter schools in Mass is to open more of them.
Cherrypicking, fraud, graft will be yours.
I seem to recall that Roxbury Preo has the highest suspension rate in the state
Ironic you would **cherrypick** Roxbury Prep (tell John Lerner I said “hello”) When you look at the Boston wide data for charters the difference is only about 4%. In a cohort of 50 (typical MA charter class size) that’s two additional suspensions per grade, per year. Hardly a difference worth fussing over.
Here is the Fryer-Dobbie article. https://dianeravitch.net/2016/08/04/dobbie-and-fryer-charter-schools-in-texas-have-no-effect-on-test-scores-and-negative-effect-on-earnings/
As I said before, the expansion of charters leads to a decline in quality because there are a limited number of teachers willing to work 70 hours a week, teacher churn is harmful, and the overwhelming majority of charter studies show that charters do not get better results than public s hoops.
Ok, will give it a read, but you haven’t really answered my question. If the quality of a charter education deteriorates with expansion to the degree you describe, won’t demand wane as a consequence? Trads will become the better alternative and most parents will choose to send their kids there.
Demand will wane when the hedge fund managers stop spending millions for charter propaganda.
You really need to get to know a few more charter parents. We’re not so easily confused as you might imagine.
“Charters closed the ELL language gap in a year — one year! That is astounding and is as compelling a reason as any to lift that furshlugginer cap on public charter schools.” this is the claim that Mr. Norton makes on his blog. I have neither the time nor the inclination to debate with him on the blog or here. My vote is already in and I am calling taxpayers daily to choose “Vote No on 2″…. do NOT lift the cap. I have seen these “special schools” in operation with their own hand-picked “board” and how the money gets siphoned off. Every loophole is identified to find a way to turn “profits”… (remember to watch this on “social impact bonds ” as well that they are using in juvenile justice.
You really do have a skewed view of charters. Suggest you spend time learning more about them. What you describe simply is not what’s going on in Massachusetts. The research and my family’s first hand experience tell me you’re just wrong.
the “research” is skewed…. and your family experience is anecdotal . A case of 1???? or 2? kids? You need class of 30 or more to do anything that smacks of “research”.
N= 1 is anecdotal
The research and my family’s first hand experience tell me you’re just wrong.
jeanhaverhill@aol.com
Um, were you not citing anecdotal evidence just a few comments ago?
And no, declaring research “skewed’ does not make it so. You really need to make a stronger case (actually, make a case) for why we should not view this research as credible.
… and as for me commenting here, this is Ms. Ravitch’s house; she can ask me to leave at any time, and I will honor it. I came here because I found someone had linked to my blog from this site. On arriving here I found I was being described as “ignorant, ” so thought I might as well defend myself. As for “propaganda,” I’m citing peer reviewed research from some of the nation’s leading universities. You don’t agree with their findings, that’s fine, but calling for me to be banned from these pages merely for mentioning them smacks of intolerance. We are debating a matter of policy. Surely we can agree we’re all here because we want to improve public education, even if we find it difficult to agree on what public education is.
Nat,
I hope you read the Dobbie and Fryer study that came out last week. It said that charters in Texas have negative effects on both test scores and earnings. No-excuses charters raise test scores but have no effect on lifetime earnings.
Why should we privatize public schools for that?
If have not seen study but based on what you say I’m unlikely to find it relevant. Charter laws differ greatly from state to state; far more than they do for traditional public schools. I’m not sure I would find a story about a Texas charter(s) any more relevant than, say, I found the story about test cheating in Atlanta public schools relevant to the Boston Public School system. Different laws, different governance, different results.
i think that is a big problem…. you see relevance as a very narrow , rigid view that fulfills your desired ideology and expectations.
The fact that you have not seen any studies outside of the MIT report you talk about is a serious flaw in your formation of an option. For 5 or more years Diane’s blog has cited many fine research articles ….
If have not seen study but based on what you say I’m unlikely to find it relevant.
jeanhaverhill@aol.com
You should be careful about making presumptions about what you think I have or have not seen. I have cited from several studies, not just those from MIT. In fact, just this weekend I finally got around to creating what I hope is a simple, clear list of those that are relevant to MA. You may find it here: https://natmortonblog.wordpress.com/2016/08/21/overwhelming-research-on-ma-charters/
I welcome any you feel I may have missed.
Oh dear, Diane! First greenheads
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwik6vbApdPOAhWJMx4KHS32DOEQjRwIBw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.capecodtimes.com%2Farticle%2F20140801%2FNEWS%2F140809966&psig=AFQjCNFrQYMjpEx4Mz59pE9GtmGeOkSsig&ust=1471895837329207
and now gnats!
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjp3uqJpdPOAhWEqx4KHTUMB5kQjRwIBw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gettingridofgnats.com%2Fauthor%2Fggcom-admin%2F&psig=AFQjCNFDxRIPoIdsjKpUl5x0Ot1nsGEh2Q&ust=1471895671129061
I can’t help but wonder if they are actually the same pests, as one references the other’s blog. They’ll be gone when summer ends and Ballot Question # 2 goes down to defeat. Of course, it’ll be a bit chilly to enjoy the ocean breeze by then.
Love you, too, Chrisy.
On your blog page you say you are anonymous because you don’t like ad hominem remarks.
My favorite example is Freedom Works guy telling Joan Walsh “you will never get a husband.” I guess women have seen that for decades. But you bully an audience on the blog by pretending to “know it all”, using authority like MIT (that is what Fordham Institute does when they write about “grit”), you persuade parents that you are vastly superior in knowledge and that they should trust your opinion.
Love you, too, Chrisy.
jeanhaverhill@aol.com
I never called Mr. Morton ignorant; I never said he should be banned. I said I am tired of debating with narrow-minded people who have one purpose in mind. Mr. Norton or Morton should sign up for a course at U. MA Lowell where my colleagues teach how to interpret research and the standards for quality research.
You didn’t call me ignorant, that was another commenter here. You did imply that I should not be here because of my views.
You spread your viewpoint all over the Boston Globe in comments; you write a blog where you provide your opinions to parents…. You certainly have a wide audience for your own viewpoints and the reports that you cite…. I have been pointing out that you only choose the reports that agree with your viewpoint. You are selling an ideology. I never called President Nixon ignorant either; but a lot of my cohort said he was a moral imbecile.
You should read the book by Peter Kramer on how “Big Pharma” creates their “research ” studies. It might give you some ideas as to how the “cherries” are picked. They start out with carefully managed populations (selecting their subjects) and the y”pick off” the phobia as an easy to cure mental illness that will show their latest medicine in the best light. As a clinician, Dr. Peter Kraer does not run his practice that way and never did (he is not a moral imbecile).
I have been indicating this all along for several years about what good research should look like. But you are all powerful and you want the parents in MA to think that you must know everything about school finance and chapter 70 and the funding formulas. And you turn everything in the legislation to your own self-interests and that is how the “hedge” funds find their loopholes . Just as the federal prisons are no longer going to be “privatized” the investors will no longer put their money there and we can see what happens.
You didn’t call me ignorant, that was another commenter here. You did imply that I should not be here because of my views.
jeanhaverhill@aol.com
Sorry, you’re just wrong there. I’d welcome a study that shows MA trads doing even as well as its charters. Can you point me to one? I ask often on social media and get little more than scorn. It’s a simple request. Let’s see how you handle it.
Nat,
Schools that screen out kids with profound disabilities and students who are English language learners, and that kick out low-scoring students, get higher scores than the schools that accept all children. It is really not that complicated.
Not complicated, but in MA neither is it true. The data simply refutes what you say. Sorry you cannot see that. I trust that those of us looking for the best public education for our kids can.
Actually, I’ve looked at you statement again:
“I don’t think he should be spreading propaganda on this blog by Diane Ravitch. ”
… and it could be read two ways, that I should stop commenting here or that I should be stopped. I’ll assume good intent and withdraw what I said.
that is my own personal opinion; Diane is free to do whatever she does; also, we are not “authoritarian” ordering our colleagues to do anything but participate in discussions and conversations. And, I would say that about anyone who is spreading propaganda (you seem to like to put “research studies” on your own blog space and perhaps that is where they should stay). Of course anyone is free to place comment in the Boston Globe and I am free to disregard them.
“I don’t think he should be spreading propaganda on this blog by Diane Ravitch. ”
jeanhaverhill@aol.com
You may not be ordering your colleagues, but for all intents and purposes you’re ordering all but the wealthy parents to send their kids to the model of public school you prefer. A trad-only system is, IMO, the more authoritarian approach.
No, Nat, it is called public education. Like “forcing” people to use public beaches, public highways, public libraries. Like forcing them to have only one police department, one fire department.
You choice zealots should study the history of American education.
The last choice zealots were Governor George Wallace and the other southern segregationists. Welcome to their club.
Monsignor Doran runs one of the best parochial schools in the state. The charters have also done damage to the parochial schools. Many of my colleagues work in alternative schools with disabled children. The important thing for me is the parochial school has a board (Professor Emerita and local parents on the board) and the alternative schools report directly to the superintendent and the locally elected school committees. New England has always been local control (not outside boards and not “hedge fund” managers). There have been choice programs set up among and between towns; curriculum people are hired as resources among towns but all of these variations report to elected school boards and superintendents who are hired by school boards. I know in my city the duly elected mayor serves on school board. MA never had “counties” like Virginia so arrangements among and between cities/towns were always voluntary and collaborative.
you’re ordering all but the wealthy parents to send their kids to the model of public school you prefer.
jeanhaverhill@aol.com
this study is older but it indicates why MA went the way it did ; not like county government in Virginia , not like the BOCES in New York; unfortunately the R&D money that was available (federal money that MA used wisely) has now been diverted to “test and punish” so the funds to do this kind of analysis haven’t been available and we are led with super-hyper marketing “studies” like the MA Business Council promotes.
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED098691.pdf report written by Dr. Donald Meals of Abt Associates (federal R&D money paid for the grant to study and report on alternatives in MA)
It’s an interesting bit of history but much has happened in public education since the time of the Ford administration. I’m curious, why do you think this study has more relevance to the debate than the one’s I’ve cited?
“Dr. Perry indicated that charter advocates have been too polite and advised them to become aggressive in the political arena. It is interesting that charter advocates decry any criticism of charters but don’t hesitate to blast traditional public schools.” Bill Phillis
I agree with Bill Phillis’ quote; Mr. Norton seems to have criticism for the MTA as a priority . This is like the fellow last week who was angry that his chemistry teacher insulted him and his history teacher let him sleep through class. We see this kind of aggression towards public schools every day. jeanhaverhill@aol.com
Good lord, let’s keep it real. If you want to watch the sharks fees hope over to Twitter this morning and look at the six on one attack I’m getting from the gentle keepthecap souls. Not even 9am and I’ve been called greedy, dumb, selfish, and a pawn.
” like the fellow last week who was angry”
I am sorry you missed my points.
I was not upset with the chemistry teacher whose behavior you found appalling.
His tests and his joke accurately pointed out that I was thoroughly ignorant of the tested material.
My points there were several… including… tests can often accurately distinguish between knowledge and ignorance. Knowing or not knowing stuff on a teacher’s timetable sometimes reflects more on one’s subservient acquiescence, or lack of it, than capacity. We should respect high test scores as often reflecting competent mastery of material, while at the same time questioning the import of the material that has been learned.
Tangentially, I celebrate the fact that our Boston charter schools have open admission by lottery rather than exams and auditions like Boston Latin, and Boston Arts Academy, among our BPS schools. I remain open-minded and curious to see a coherent defense of the latter approach. Sorry, Christine, it looks my reply ended up posting above, rather than below, your message as I had intended. It’s here in case you missed it:
https://dianeravitch.net/2016/08/10/massachusetts-charter-advocates-kick-off-campaign-with-deceptive-advertising/#comment-2585990
I’d still be pleased to continue that conversation.
In respect to sleeping through history class, I appreciate my teacher’s allowing that. I was a busy man. He knew that. And we both knew that I could read the textbook at a faster clip than he could read it aloud. At the same time, had he not had tenure, and had I the authority, I likely would have let him go, to perhaps achieve fame and glory taping material for audiobooks.
Local control is still a strong value in New England. This study reports on the New Hampshire (former Governor Sununu’s ) review of alternatives for NH — the decision was not to remove the “strivers” into separate buildings and facilities. That is what they are doing with tests and selection criteria in a charter location… New Hampshire (at the time of this report) did not go along with the separate building for “gifted” or for “strivers” or “creaming” the school population. They also did not set up County governance of schools or BOCES but have service centers /SAU that offer the resources for smaller communities shared among the different towns and all under oversight of school committees . “Feasibility Study- Governor’s Initiative for Gifted in NH.pdf”
“Massachusetts: Charter Advocates Kick Off Campaign with Deceptive Advertising”
Just had a Save Our Schools doorknocker come to my door and tell me to vote against lifting the charter school kids because of hundreds of millions of dollars that would be lost to the public schools and that charter schools don’t accept children with disabilities.
the figures this week show $450 million lost to school districts in their cities and towns; we have computed the losses for Haverhill, Lawrence, Lowell… etc. The city councils and school committees in these school districts realize it and many are passing resolutions (as school committee did in Haverhill MA)….
quoted from a secondary source: “Only 40% of students enrolled as Freshmen in Boston charter schools actually graduate”…. where do those other students go do you think?
MATCH Charter started out in 2009 with 94 freshmen. Four years later, MATCH had 31 seniors, only graduated 23, and retained 8 students, 5 of them male. That is a 24% 4-year Graduation Rate, the lowest 4 year graduation rate of all the charter schools in Boston! You have to ask yourself why MATCH Charter, with its extended day, extended year, and cherry picked population of students, can’t graduate a kid in 4 years? The class of 2103 had a 67% attrition rate, explain to me how that is “higher performing!”