Archives for the month of: April, 2017

A reader posted a comment yesterday asking why I had a problem with religious schools receiving public funding. Aren’t there good religious schools. I pointed out that most of the religious schools that are funded by vouchers are not very good schools. The very good religious schools don’t have many seats available. The ones that do have seats available and need the money tend to be a certain type of Christian school that teaches creationism and uses textbooks that do not teach modern science, math, or history.

Then another comment arrived, this one from a man who is writing a book about education in Arizona.

I post this quote from a work in progress for the nice lady who wrote about Diane’s piece and asked whether there are good religious schools. Diane used a quote from me in the blog today.

Here are the Organizations already providing “scholarships” on the “tax credit” dime here in AZ. I am a proud Catholic School Graduate and I have grandchildren in Catholic Schools in New Hampshire.

Those choices were my parents and my children’s RELIGIOUS choice. They wanted their children indoctrinated into the Catholic Faith.

Catholic schools have their history in anti-Catholic sentiments going back to the KNOW NOTHING PARTY and anti-immigrant attitudes in the 1840s. There was a time when it was a “mortal sin” for Catholics to attend public school if a Catholic School was available..

We in AZ live in a state that allows a “Christian Scholarship” fund that doesn’t include any Catholic, or for that matter Mormon schools, that is a RED FLAG.

I ask the following.

How is it that the Senate president of the Arizona State Senate, can simultaneously be the executive director of a $17,064,168 organization, The Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization Inc., while having control over all of the bills that come up for voting in the Senate including those that benefit his organization?

o This while collecting a salary and other compensation of $145,705 per annum in 2014-2015 for directing the ACSTO.
 Source IRS Form 990 FY 2013: http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/2014/860/931/2014-860931047-0b056c5d-9.pdf

o Again the question is asked, “Politically would this be considered “permissible” if the organization was dedicated to promoting Catholic Schools and run by the Senate President who happened to be the Bishop of the Diocese of Phoenix?

o Researching the Organization in question one finds a list of the “participating schools”. That list which is provided below is devoid of any Catholic or Mormon Schools. Do they not fit the organization’s definition of Christian Schools? Would having a Muslim or Hindu Tax Credit group be okay with the legislature? How about an ATHEIST School?

 Bethany Christian School
 Christian Academy of Prescott
 Flagstaff Community Christian School
 Joy Christian School
 North Valley Christian Academy
 Northwest Christian School
 Paradise Valley Christian Prep
 Scottsdale Christian Academy
 Trinity Christian School (Prescott)

I am sure these are good programs but I have met some of their leadership and a lot of them ascribe to the philosophy that the world is 6000 years old.

• Catholic Education Arizona is an IRS 501(c) (3) nonprofit charitable organization and has never accepted gifts designated for individuals. Per state law, a school tuition organization cannot award, restrict or reserve scholarships solely on the basis of donor recommendation. A taxpayer may not claim a tax credit if the taxpayer agrees to swap donations with another taxpayer to benefit either taxpayer’s own dependent. This new law changes that.

o The rules for donating to a Catholic Educational Program speak volumes to the previous complaint regarding what is a Christian School. It required separate rules to “allow” the donations to go to Catholic Schools. The restrictions make it impossible for one to donate for their own child’s (or grandchildren’s) tuition.

 This is a taxpayer funded way to provide the scholarships that Catholics used to provide in their donations to the church of their choice.

 The leadership at this charity received compensation of $131,115 in 2013-2014. This was on revenue of $16,269,022.
 Source: IRS FORM 990 See: http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/2014/860/937/2014-860937587-0b8e0571-9.pdf

“Freedom to choose” for religious purposes has always been an option in this country. Catholics chose to create Catholic Schools. Jewish parents chose schools based at their Synagogues. There are Hindu Schools and Muslim Schools. These faiths funded this choice with sacrifice and tuitions that were subsidized by their church, synagogue or mosque, not by diverting funds meant to support the public schools to their religion.

• Jewish Tuition Organization is another 501 C specifically to provide Scholarship or Grants to Attend Jewish Primary and Secondary Schools. http://www.jtophoenix.org/take-the-credit/

o The Executive Director at the Jewish Tuition Organization has a salary of $70.000 as of the 2013-2014 Fiscal Year. This is on Revenue of $2,922,316.

o Form 990 FY 2013 JTO: http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/2014/860/970/2014-860970081-0b26cdec-9.pdf

I worked for Lamar Alexander when he was Secretary of Education. He had a car and driver. He did not have a security detail.

The cost of Betsy DeVos’s security team is $1 million per month. She is protected by federal marshals, whose agency is reimbursed by the U.S. Department of Education.

This outlay comes as DeVos and Trump seek a multi-billion dollar reduction in the budget of the Department. They want to cut after-school programs and dozens of others that are needed by children in poverty.

Why doesn’t she pay for her own security? She is worth $5.4 billion. She can afford it. Why should poor kids tighten their belts and do with less while she travels in style on the taxpayers’ million?

Anna Allanbrook is principal of the Brooklyn New School in Brooklyn, New York. She explains here how her elementary school became “the Opt Out School.” Very few children in New York City opt out. Some are afraid they won’t get into a good middle school or a good high schools if they don’t have scores. Some are afraid the Immigration Police will come for them. Some are intimidated by administrators who want to play it safe. Read what happened at BNS.


Dear Families:

Tomorrow on April 4, 2017, fifty years after Martin Luther King Jr delivered his famous speech, Beyond Vietnam: A Time to Break Silence, at Riverside Church and forty nine years after he was shot and killed, we will join with communities across the country, by reciting a few excerpts from those words. This reading is an initiative organized by the The National Council of Elders. Just as Martin Luther King saw a need to condemn silence in 1967, so too does the National Council of Elders see that need today. They have asked schools, churches, civil rights groups, labor organizations, museums, community organizations, and others to join in the building of a movement to break silence, promote dialogue and engage in nonviolent direct action.

In that speech, Martin Luther King said, “When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered.”

As the daughter of someone born in Vienna, Austria in 1924, I can’t help but remember his story when grappling with recent times. When we think of that big fifth grade curriculum question: What Are You Willing to Stand Up For?, I am reminded of Martin Niemöller’s famous quote:

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Educators in the public schools are told not to talk about anything political. This puts us in somewhat of a bind as in the last twenty years, politicians have made school performance a political issue. But there is hope and that hope is reflected in the story of the Opt Out Movement.

At BNS the idea of not taking a state test started with one child and one mom, a mom who said, “No, my child would not be taking the citywide tests.” Within just a few years, BNS became known as the “Opt Out” school. Lots of folks ask how this happened and the answer is very simple. The staff in our school came together around our thinking about the tests. We did this because of what we saw happen when kids took these new tests. We did this by meeting and sharing ideas, first amongst ourselves and then with others. Simultaneously, parents were mobilizing and talking to parents in and outside of the school community. Teachers and parents held meetings to talk about assessment in general, and to talk about the Pearson tests, the specific tests that led to such a major revolt. Teachers described what they saw when kids were testing: children banging their heads, children throwing up, children crying.

Opting Out gave Brooklyn New School the freedom to not teach to the test. In fact our third to fifth grade teachers met again and decided as an entire school not to do any test prep. This became BNS policy. That in a nutshell was the result of one family initially saying no to the test.

This year, the opt out movement may not seem that important. Somehow what has happened nationally is more frightening and certainly more destructive than six days of standardized testing.

There is a sense of urgency today in the United States of America.

We must frame our actions in our commitment to our children, knowing that a big part of our work is the development of the citizens of tomorrow, people who are thoughtful, who read, who think, and who have the skill set to distinguish between facts and alternative facts.
The reality is that many of our New York City public schools are already doing that, offering rich curriculum and programming, which invites learning and encourages inquiry and reflection. As a part of our work, just as social media has made protest visible, we need to make public education visible and we need to work with our colleagues to embrace the possible.

All too often, folks come into our school and marvel at our projects, our trips, the art, the music, the science, saying, “I didn’t know this was happening in public schools.” It is happening in public schools and it could happen even more. The potential is unlimited. Schools that have the freedom to determine what it is they are teaching and how they are teaching, are working in remarkable ways.

If we reframe the conversation to be about kids, if we remove the stigma of low test scores and focus not on bad schools and good schools, but rather on giving our children what they need, we have the power to effect change.

We have no idea how the new administration is going to affect us, although we know that the decisions of prior Secretaries of Education have had tremendous impact. And we know that decisions made at the national level can hurt us locally unless we stay focused on our vision.

At BNS, we took away the impact of standardized tests by reminding parents of their rights. In the next days, weeks, months, we need to be attentive and vigilant, never tiring, being active citizens, and always staying true to the children.

It is not the nineteen thirties, but it is worth remembering the years of my dad’s childhood when it was decided that he and other Jewish children would no longer be allowed to go to school with the Gentiles. That was not normal, and resistance did happen. As policies that are not normal are implemented today, we need to stand together as educators to do what is right for our kids.

All for now,

Anna

Quote of the Week:

Anonymous, as told by the ELA testing proctor: “I think two answers are right. Where should I explain (in writing) my thinking?”

Derek Black, law professor, writes that Arizona is a state that funds its schools poorly and inequitably. It is one of the lowest-spending states in the nation on education. Worse, the kids who need the most get the least. So, instead of fixing its funding system, it has passed an expansive voucher system, which will be most helpful to students in the most affluent districts to underwrite the cost of their private and religious schools. Once again, Arizona stabs its neediest students in the back with underfunded schools. Think Arizona: Think white retirees who don’t want to pay to educate poor Latino and Native American children. Vouchers are the fix for white retirees. But not for the kids.

He writes:

The “program allows parents to take between 90 percent and 100 percent of the state money a local public school would receive to pay for private or religious education. The average student who isn’t disabled will get about $4,400 a year, but some get much more.” The funding mechanism and its expected cost to the state is murky. “The original Arizona plan was estimated to cost the state general fund at least $24 million.” Now, a revised plan and estimate are supposed to save the state $3.4 million by 2022.

What is clear, however, is that Arizona’s per pupil funding for public schools currently ranks 47 out of 50 states. To make matters worse, it distributes those meager funds unequally. The Education Law Center’s 2017 School Funding Fairness Report grades Arizona’s funding distribution as an “F.” Schools with moderate levels of student poverty receive only 88 cents on the dollar in comparison to schools with no student poverty. The comparison is even worse between high poverty school districts and low poverty school districts. In other words, Arizona spends the least on students who need the most.

That same report also shows that Arizona is doing almost nothing to fix its low funding levels or unequal distribution. Arizona ranks 49th in the nation in terms of the level of fiscal effort it exerts to fund its schools.

These background facts place Arizona’s new voucher program in a troubling light. These cold hard facts show that the state is not really interested in supporting adequate and equal education for its students. Thus, it is no surprise the state would double down and make matters worse. If gross inequity and inadequacy in public schools does not bother the state as a general principle, why would robbing those schools of more money be a problem? Why not just cap the state investment in a students’ education, send that student to private school, and tell the family and or the private school that they need to make up the difference? If things do not work out in the future, that is on the family and the private school.

These background facts also mean that the rhetoric of political leaders lacks credibility. Speaking of the voucher program, the Governor tweeted: “When parents have more choices, kids win.” If one understands the facts, one understands that this voucher program is not about helping kids in Arizona “win.” It is about raw politics and continuing the longstanding trend of depriving public schools of the resources they need to succeed. If parents in Arizona want vouchers (or charters), it is not because those policies are normatively appealing. It is because the state has been robbing them of the public education they deserve. Many families now surely believe they have no other realistic option. In short, the state has created the factual predicate of failing public schools to create the justification for its own pet project of privatizing education. The kids caught up in the mess simply do not matter.

Parents can make a huge difference. No one can criticize them as looking out only for “adult interests,” that obnoxious term that Michelle Rhee popularized.

The parent protest continues at CPE 1.

Here is an update by retired teacher activist Norm Scott at his blog EdNotes.

I am not a big believer in the power of petitions, but sometimes they are a stimulus to more significant and visible activism. So for that reason I urge you to sign the petition on behalf of Sarah Chanbers. Her cause was brought to my attention by two highly trusted advocates for equity: Xian Barrett, Chicago teacher and activist, and Monty Neill of FairTest.

Please sign and support Sarah:

“Chicago teacher Sarah Chambers faces firing because she has been fighting cuts to funding for special ed (she is cochair of special Ed taskforce) and against citywide education cuts. In recent years she also was a leader of the hugely successful teacher boycott of standardized tests at Saucedo school (complemented by mass parent and student opting out in this overwhelmingly Latino school).

“Here is a petition that was created to try to defend her:

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/768/541/715/dont-fire-sarah-chambers-defend-a-powerful-voice-for-special-education-students./?taf_id=35415218&cid=twitter#bbfb=340110318

“I hope you will join me in signing the petition.

Monty”

Monty Neill, Ed.D.; Executive Director, FairTest; P.O. Box 300204, Jamaica Plain, MA 02130; 617-477-9792; http://www.fairtest.org;

Watching the news on any given day is an exercise in masochism. We have to know what is going on, but it is usually not good.

Therefore I conclude that we must take long walks, listen to music, see plays, go to museums, do whatever we can to keep our souls nourished.

Last night, I went to see a parody of “Hamilton,” called “Shamilton.” It is playing at the Triad on West 72 Street in Manhattan. It was fun and hilarious. Christine Pedi, who is a host of the Sirius Broadway Channel, was producer and a member of the cast. I spoke to her afterwards and learned that her sister is an art teacher in a Yonkers middle school. Beforehand, I had oysters with my son and partner at the amazing Mermaid Inn on Amsterdam Avenue and 88 Street.

Go, if you can.

If you can’t, visit your community theater, support the arts, go to a museum, sing, dance, watch others singing and dancing, and re-invigorate your soul with the joy of the arts.

The New York Opt Out movement started in Bellmore, on Long Island. The parent leader there, Jeanette Deutermann, opposed the misuse and abuse of standardized tests, as well as Common Core.

Every year, state officials predict the demise of the movement, every year they offer bribes and threats, yet for three years in a row, large numbers of parents have refused their children’s participation in the state testing. The numbers for the state will not be released for weeks by the New York State Education Department, but individual districts have released their data. The Long Island newspaper Newsday called districts and concluded that 51% of students who were supposed to take the state tests did not take them. They opted out.

This sends a powerful message to the state. It is the only way that parents can make their voices heard, by saying NO.

In North Bellmore, three-quarters of students refused the tests.

The Bellmore-Merrick Central High School District again had among the highest percentages of students in Nassau County opting out of the state English Language Arts exams last week, with 73 percent of seventh- and eighth-grade students sitting out the exams.

According to Superintendent John DeTommaso, the district had the second-highest percentage of non-participating students.

At the same time, 70 percent of students in the Bellmore Elementary School District opted out of the exam over the three days that it was administered.

As reported by the Herald in 2014, the opt-out movement” began as a small, grass roots social-media campaign in North Bellmore and rapidly spread statewide, with parents demanding that the state scale back the number of exams and their difficulty. Many parents argued that the exams, based on the Common Core State Standards, are one to two grade levels above their children’s abilities.

North Bellmore mother Jeanette Deutermann founded the group Long Island Opt Out, which, along with the New York Alliance for Public Education, the Badass Teachers Association and United Opt Out, sparked much of the national movement, according to a Columbia University study.

Deutermann said this weekthat this year’s opt-out numbers show that parents “are not backing down.”

“It’s not just a test itself,” she said. “It’s what [Common Core] does the entire year. My son was in the grade where everything flooded in at the same time. We saw the changes in our kids. We saw their reactions to it. It was beyond frustration. It was complete shutdown. We watched them struggle through work that was completely grade-level inappropriate.

“The state has an option,” Deutermann added. “They make little tweaks to the tests here and there … but parents are really researching and following and learning what these tests are and what they’re not.”

On Monday, DeTommaso called the Central District’s — and Long Island’s — opt-out numbers “an incredible movement by parents,” and said that Central administrators don’t believe a single assessment can give “the full picture of how a kid is doing throughout the year.

To those who claim that Opt Out is a movement of “white suburban moms,” please don’t overlook Brentwood on Long Island. The district enrollment is 6% white, two-thirds on free-reduced lunch, and 60% of its students opted out.

As reported earlier today, scores of parents are conducting a sit-in protest at CentralPark East 1, demanding the ouster of the principal.

Leonie Haimson attended the meeting of the school’s leadership team last night and reports here on what she learned.
https://nycpublicschoolparents.blogspot.com/2017/04/amazing-evening-parents-and-teacher-sit.html?m=1

The complaints against the principal were many. The parents refused to leave when the meeting ended. Although police were present, someone made a decision not to arrest the parents.

Debbie Meier, who founded the school in 1974, taped a message of support for the parents.

One of the great groups in Texas fighting against the far-right is “Raise Your Hand, Texas.” I am not in 100% agreement with them, since they consider charter schools to be part of public education, failing to recognize that the biggest corporate charter chain in the state is the Harmony chain, which are Gulen schools, run by Turkish nationals who have the chutzpah to take control of public funds meant to educate future citizens.

Nonetheless, Raise Your Hand Texas has produced some absolutely fabulous anti-voucher commercials. Each is very short. I recommend that you watch them.

I expect that these well-produced commercials helped to arouse public opinion against vouchers, which were passed by the Senate but overwhelmingly rejected on Thursday by the House of Representatives. That bipartisan vote made me proud of my native state!

First, Mr. Voucher tried to convince Texans that that Education Savings Accounts (ESAs), tax credit scholarships, and other voucher schemes are good, but instead ended up being schooled about how vouchers hurt Texas students, schools, and taxpayers. Next, he tried to convince Texans that any and all choice is good for students, and again was schooled about the importance of quality school choice–choice with transparency and accountability.

Now, in the third installment in the Mr. Voucher video series, a new monster voucher arrives on the scene – FrankenVoucher – and he’s twice as devastating:

Mr. Voucher III: FrankenVoucher

And just in case you want a refresher on the first two:

Mr. Voucher I: Same Ol’ Mr. Voucher

Mr. Voucher II: Can I pretend to rescue you?

Petri Darby, APR
VP of Marketing
Raise Your Hand Texas
1005 Congress Ave | Suite 100 | Austin, TX 78701
work: (512) 617-2137
mobile: (713) 724-9917
RaiseYourHandTexas.org | Blog
Follow us: Facebook | Twitter | Instagram | YouTube

Raise Your Hand Texas is funded by Charles Butt, a Texas billionaire who went to public schools and he appreciates what they did for him. He inherited his family’s chain of supermarkets across the state. He is the only billionaire I know of who acknowledges the importance of public education and shows his gratitude by supporting them against the voucher vultures.