NPE Action urges you to write a letter to state senators in Kentucky. Please read about the harm that this bill will do to the public schools.
The bill now moves to the Kentucky state senate. Many, perhaps most, of the senators represent rural districts, where the public school is the heart of the community. They should oppose this law, as charters will take resources out of their public schools and harm the children of their community. Urban public schools will have larger classes and will have larger proportions of the students rejected by the charters, those whose needs are greatest.
As the bill is now written, it has many terrible features. Charter schools will not be required to have certified teachers. There is no limit on the number of charters that may open. The bill allows for-profit EMOs. There is no mention of how charters will be funded or how much funding they will receive. In other words, the bill will open the door to charter entrepreneurs to open shop in Kentucky and drain public funds to pay their investors.
The children of Kentucky will lose if this bill passes.
Citizens of Kentucky, I urge you to contact your state senator and urge him or her to save Kentucky’s community public schools.
Insist that every school be staffed with certified teachers. Keep out the profiteers.
Support the public schools that accept all children, not the schools that accept only the ones they want. Support the public schools that are legally required to enroll and provide services to children with disabilities. Do not authorize schools that choose their students and kick out the ones with low test scores.
A few years ago, I spoke to the Kentucky School Boards Association, and the walls were festooned with children’s artwork celebrating the public schools in every district.
Don’t betray the children or their public schools.
Stop privatization before it is too late. If this bill passes, the legislature will focus entirely on charter schools; legislative hearings will be packed with cute children wearing matching tee-shirts, pleading for more money for their sponsor. Public schools will be forgotten.
Don’t let it happen!
Diane Ravitch's blog 
“As the bill is now written, it has many terrible features. Charter schools will not be required to have certified teachers. ” From the Lubienski book (discussed here previously) traditional public schools hire 80% certified teachers; parochial schools were close with 75% but NOT the charter schools and not the “christian evangelical schools” that Devos favors; they were about 40% certified teachers and that means they can put any curriculum in the hands of the teacher and the person must teach it. The Hobby Lobby curriculum will be in place. I couldn’t believe I talked with a retired principal yesterday who never heard of the ACA debate that centered around the Hobby Lobby groups. We have a lot of work to do to get even our own colleagues up to date.
On the positive side, Former Commissioner of MA Paul Reveille was interviewed on pubic radio WBUR (Boston University station) this week and he had better things to say that were more in the line of what we value — not the Governor Baker and his Secretary of Ed who will be pushing “Hybrid” collections of “portfolio” schools as they are doing in Lawrence and Springfield and calling it “empowering”…. Governor Baker comes from a strict view: (a) we are NOT going to put any more funds into public education so (b) bet on any horses in the gamble that you think will be at the starting gate in your city to operate some kind of “consortia” and look for winners to bring home the prize. That is the same way J. P Greene thinks when he says “throw it all up in the air called chartering” and see which ones land on their feet and which ones will dissolve. (I am paraphrasing him of course but Greene and Baker see this gambling from the starting gate as the way to plan for educational policy).
Jean,
“Portfolio” districts were a big idea about 10 years ago. The idea was that the district board would manage a portfolio like a stock portfolio; keep the winners, close the losers, open new ones. Hope for the best. It is a strategy to promote privatization.
yes, and that is what I think Jay P Green says about charters…. some will “fly” (succeed according to test scores I guess) and some will fail and he is ok with that. We have a group in MA that keeps repeatedly saying I am anti-catholic because I do not support charter schools. Today’s message about the Blaine definition speaks to that.
I found her earlier description of the systems: http://haveyouheardblog.com/the-official-education-rephorm-lexicon/ in Lawrence MA they have switched to “architecturally open ” model trying to convince parents that it is like “open” classroom/scohol and Governor is using “empowerment” as the catchword… They change the lingo…. still meaning the same thing — they refuse to do the Foundation Budget revisit (using old formula from 1993 to reimburse schools.) Bill Phillis had a recent post about this in OH….
with the non-acceptance of charter schools by voters in MA, this is what the republican governor is pushing. I think Edushyster wrote it up some time ago as the “Portfolio” or “hybrid”… The governor is calling it Empowerment. And the title is borrowed from planning buildings “Architectural” open-ness in place of sound educational policy (because that would require Foundation Budget to be improved over the 1993 model).
Click to access Lawrence-Turnaround-April-2014.pdf
Don’t buy it — I do not trust the data they are bringing out of Lawrence MA…. Also, the so called “springfield model” may not work anywhere else but Springfield . No sound evaluation plan is in place to determine what are effective or efficient results from planned variation — not sensible and that is why I call it gambling with the futures of students.
Cross posted the NPE alert at OpEd news https://www.opednews.com/Quicklink/URGENT-Save-Kentudky-s-Pu-in-General_News-Charter-School-Failure_Charter-Schools_Diane-Ravitch_Network-For-Public-Education-170305-162.html
https://www.the74million.org/article/nine-and-counting-new-legislation-would-expand-virginias-charter-schools-will-gov-mcauliffe-sign?utm_source=The+74+Million+Newsletter&utm_campaign=3e32374e00-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2017_03_05&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_077b986842-3e32374e00-176117225
good summary information here “only 9 in VA” but they have targeted — guess where, the community schools of minority children….
https://deutsch29.wordpress.com/2017/03/05/blaine-amendment-challenge-in-limbo-at-the-us-supreme-court/
this is from Bill Phillis at OH E&A “The constitutional rights of school district students are being violated by the state of Ohio confiscating funds for charters and vouchers
Consider:
The Ohio Supreme Court ruled four times that the Ohio public school system is unconstitutional.
The state has the constitutional responsibility to secure a thorough and efficient system.
The primary flaws in the system as noted by the Court-the operation of the foundation program and the emphasis on property tax in the formula–have never been corrected.
The state has never determined the actual cost of a constitutional system; therefore, residual budgeting continues. Removal of funds from the flawed system for charters and vouchers exacerbates the unconstitutional system.
School district students are deprived of educational opportunities by virtue of an unconstitutional system and are further deprived via the charter and voucher policies.
Charter and voucher schools are not common schools and thus not part of the system required by the Constitution.
The state is operating illegally by confiscating funds from the constitutionally-mandated system to support a variety of entities that are not required or authorized by the Constitution.
State legislators should consider these indisputable principles as they formulate a state budget for the public common school system. They need to be reminded that the system is unconstitutional and that they have the responsibility to fix it.”
forgive me for those who have already seen this… when the votes in November resoundingly defeated “choice” the Governor moved over with different language for the same ideology. This is what our League of Women Voters came up with in our cover letter (we are a smaller city not powerful in the state).
Consensus meeting participants in Haverhill MA:
We discussed how to offer equity and excellence in Haverhill for school students. Education Reform Legislation of 1993 authorized a total of 25 charter schools and this number of charter schools has grown considerably (currently, we have two in Haverhill one of which is a Horace Mann). We realize that funds are limited and by adding more charter schools, the funds under control of our locally elected school board would be reduced each year. Is it possible to have autonomy, necessary for innovation, and also have well regulated schools that meet agreed upon standards for our Massachusetts students (using the curriculum frameworks )? We also expect transparency and accountability as taxpayers, voters and parents.
The need in Haverhill is for high quality public schools. If schools were funded at a constitutionally-required level, sufficient funds would be available for a thorough and efficient school system and we believe it should be under the direction of locally elected school board and superintendent (with the Mayor and the City Council overseeing accountability as well).
We cannot defer the question of performance testing for long because it is an integral part of our school planning and management. The way the Department of Education (DESE) is setting policy on “test and punish”, Haverhill students will be punished under these conditions because the tests identify “economically disadvantaged” as failing. Policy for finding which schools are in need of more assistance should not rely totally on these “tests” that have not been proven valid or reliable. Just as districts are penalized when they have to tax themselves disproportionally to raise any local funds for schools, the districts where there is poverty also are punished by the DESE in the way that they have structured the “school improvement grants”. These policy considerations need to be deliberated at the legislative level.
Note: the state has recently changed the accounting of our children who are “economically disadvantaged” and this adds further penalties to the cities like Haverhill. Lowell and Brockton MA are heavily penalized as well … Haverhill funds schools at just a smidgeon above foundation levels.
PENALTIES, penalties and an endless blame. No wonder our nation is so weary — how many long years now has this same mantra been used to bring in a flood of education money profiteers?
NOTE: The Foundation Budget Review reports a “newer “ category of economically disadvantaged status and this is currently being redefined (it is in flux); it formerly was the number of students receiving the “hot lunch” program. In today’s count it is contingent on a student’s participation in one or more of New the following state-administered programs: Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP); Transitional Assistance for Families with Dependent Children (TAFDC); Department of Children and Families’ (DCF) foster care program; or MassHealth (Medicaid) up to 133% of the federal poverty level (FPL). In computing the “cherry sheet” for reimbursements economically disadvantaged headcounts are assigned to the district where the pupils are actually enrolled (and where the extra costs occur).
Which leads me to the next argument connected to Health Care (ACA) specifically MEDICAID…. will attach the letter to my rep Niki Tsongas about what the republicans are doing to the MEDICAID reimbursements.
I was born in Louisville, and educated at public schools in Bowling Green and Lexington. I believe that charter schools, will never occur in Kentucky. The power of the rural areas, is strong enough to cancel the influence of the urban areas.
In some counties, the public school system is the largest employer in the county. The individuals who work (mostly in support positions, not in the classroom), will urge their representatives/senators, to kill this legislation.
“It is more important to kill bad bills, that to pass good ones” – Calvin Coolidge (R)
MEDICAID (ACA) …. proposals in the House will harm our students who are most vulnerable… Letter to Niki Tsongas (MA Rep).
to: Niki Tsongas
As your constituent and a member of the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) I am concerned that the Medicaid proposal currently being reviewed and discussed jeopardizes health care for the nation’s most vulnerable children: children with disabilities and children in poverty. Specifically, a per capita allotment system for states will undermine our ability in MA to provide adequate educational and developmental services for our students.
Medicaid is cost effective and an efficient way to fund essential health care services for children. Accordingly, a per capita allotment, even one that is based on different groups of beneficiaries, will disproportionally harm children’s access to care, including services received at school and early childhood programs. We urge a “No” on any Medicaid refinancing proposal that undermines health care for children with disabilities.
School district and early childhood personnel regularly provide critical health services to ensure that all children are ready to learn and able to thrive. I participated in just such a major program in Lawrence MA. Medicaid eligible children with an IEP or even a Family Service Plan can receive health services that are reimbursed by Medicaid for providing Early Periodic Screening Diagnosis and Treatment Benefits (EPSDT). We brought doctors and nurse practitioners out from Boston Children’s Hospital to work with our Lawrence public school children.
School districts and programs use their Medicaid reimbursement funds in a variety of ways to help support the learning and development of the children they serve. In a 2017 survey of school districts, it was reported that two-thirds of Medicaid dollars are used to support the salaries of health professionals and other specialized instructional support personnel (e.g. speech-language pathologists, audiologist, occupational therapists, school psychologists, school social workers and school nurses) who provide comprehensive health and mental health services to students. Districts also use these funds to expand the availability of a wide range of health and mental health services available to students in poverty, who are more likely to lack consistent access to health care professionals. Further, some districts depend on Medicaid reimbursement to purchase and update specialized equipment (walkers, wheelchairs, exercise equipment, special playground equipment, equipment to assist with hearing and seeing) and assistive technology for students with disabilities so they can learn alongside their peers.
School districts and programs would stand to lose much of their funding for Medicaid under the Committee’s proposal. Schools receive roughly $4 billion in reimbursement for Medicaid annually. States would no longer have to consider schools and programs to be eligible Medicaid providers, which would mean that districts and programs would have the same obligation to provide services for children with disabilities under IDEA, but no Medicaid dollars to provide medically necessary services.
States that opt to take advantage of a block-grant would only have to provide required services to the “most vulnerable elderly and individuals with disabilities” which means they could deny health care coverage to children under rules and regs of IDEA.
Providing comprehensive physical and mental health services in schools and programs improves accessibility for many children and youth, particularly in high need areas. Reduced funding for Medicaid would result in decreased access to critical health care for many children and youth. Sixty-eight percent of districts use Medicaid funding to pay for direct salaries for health professionals (school nurses, physical and occupational therapists, speech-language pathologists, school social workers, school psychologists, and many other critical school personnel).
Seven out of ten students receiving mental health services receive these services at school. Cuts to Medicaid would further marginalize these critical services and leave students without access to care.
Given the failure to commit federal resources to fully-funding IDEA, Medicaid reimbursement serves as a critical funding stream to ensure districts can provide the specialized instructional supports that students with disabilities need.
These are some of the important benefits of Medicaid for our Merrimack Valley region. Converting Medicaid to a block grant, or instituting per capita allotments threatens to significantly reduce access to comprehensive health and mental and behavioral health care for children with disabilities and those living in poverty.
highlights and key points… write to your rep in the House to ask for a NO vote when they are dismantling Medicaid services
Fewer health services for children
Cuts to general education
Higher taxes
Job loss
Fewer critical supplies
Fewer mental health supports
Noncompliance with IDEA
(these ideas are fully developed on the CEC Action website and you can choose what you want in your letter when you write it)
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/03/us/politics/trump-devos-school-choice-florida.html?_r=0 If you know Jan resseger, this was sent to me from Sheila Resseger….
At Pioneer Instiutte I have had disagreements with Jim Stergios when he says I am anti-Catholic (I don’t support his charter school ideology).
We are getting bashed again in MA even though the voters did not support charter schools last November. It is coming at us in many different ways. I write to Cheri Kiesecker in Colorado to support her goal of reducing the computer data bases on our children and holding to the privacy rules; the trump administration will use the data bases to find kids to deport (they say they want to get “criminals ” out but they are also looking for the students who are on any kind of services — so be VIGILANT! Keep their mucky hands out of your computer data bases. )
The commonwealth government, is in the process of dismantling the cross-town bussing program in Louisville. The largest school system in the commonwealth of Kentucky, is going to return to neighborhood schools.
The national trend is for a return to neighborhood schools.
see
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/gop-bill-could-dismantle-one-of-nations-most-robust-school-desegregation-efforts/2017/03/04/114a31e8-ff6b-11e6-99b4-9e613afeb09f_story.html?utm_term=.d53fc8330929