Education Trust published a report in 2016 about Michigan’s charter sector. At the time, there was hope that Governor Snyder and the Republican-dominated legislature might pass a law establishing clear accountability standards. But Betsy DeVos, then a private citizen, lobbied hard against any accountability and the law never passed. After its failure, key legislators received large campaign gifts from the DeVos family. The charter sector suctions up $1 billion a year from taxpayers, with no accountability.
Education Trust, no critic of charter schools, wrote at that time:
New report proposes to make charter authorizing a privilege earned through strong performance – and no longer an entitlement
ROYAL OAK, Mich. (Feb. 11, 2016) — Michigan charter school authorizers’ performance overall has improved marginally over the last year, but remains terribly low compared to leading states’ charter sectors, according to a new report released today by the nonpartisan Education Trust-Midwest. The report celebrates high-performing authorizers and sheds light on the devastatingly low performance of other authorizers.
Three Michigan public universities – Northern Michigan University (NMU), Eastern Michigan University (EMU) and Saginaw Valley State University (SVSU) – are the state’s worst performing authorizers today, according to the report. Indeed, of the charter schools authorized by NMU, SVSU, and EMU, roughly one-quarter of their eligible schools ranked among the worst performing 10 percent of schools statewide, according to the 2013-14 accountability rankings. About 19,000 students attend schools authorized by NMU, SVSU, and EMU in Michigan today.
“Some of Michigan’s public universities have betrayed the public trust in them – and the investment of millions of Michigan taxpayers’ dollars – by consistently failing their students for years,” said Amber Arellano, executive director of The Education Trust-Midwest and one of the report’s authors.
The new report proposes Michigan’s first performance-based accountability system for charter authorizers. Presently no one – not even Governor Rick Snyder – holds authorizers accountable for their academic performance, despite the fact that their authorized schools serve nearly 145,000 Michigan children, and charter schools take in more than $1 billion dollars of taxpayer dollars annually.
“We call on State Superintendent Brian Whiston and the Michigan Legislature to finally hold authorizers accountable for their schools’ performance,” Arellano said. “Charter authorizing should be a privilege — not an entitlement — and should be earned and maintained by consistently high achievement. Learning matters in the lives of children: it needs to matter for Michigan school charter authorizers, too.”
Accountability for All: 2016 includes an updated scorecard that ranks authorizers with “A” to “F” grades based on analyses of their school portfolios’ student achievement outcomes. The sixteen authorizers graded enroll 95 percent of Michigan’s charter students.
The report’s findings include:
- About 20 percent of Michigan charter school openings between fall 2011 and fall 2015 were by “D” and “F” authorizers. While some poor-performing schools closed recently, other failing schools continue to operate.
- New data suggest efforts to bring greater public scrutiny and transparency to authorizer performance are helping to improve authorizer practices, at least marginally. Eastern Michigan University improved its scorecard grade from an “F” to a “D” by closing a poor-performing school, for example. Oakland University improved its overall score from a “D” to a “C” when it opened a new school with a strong operator. “Despite both authorizers’ continued struggling performance, we are glad to see them taking steps to improve,” Arellano said.
- Six authorizers – overseeing two percent of charter students statewide – received an “A” grade for their performance. They are: Washtenaw Community College, Washtenaw Intermediate School District (ISD), Grand Rapids Public Schools, Wayne RESA, Hillsdale ISD and Macomb ISD.
- Six authorizers received a “B” or “C” grade: Lake Superior State University, Ferris State University, Grand Valley State University and Bay Mills Community College, Central Michigan and Oakland University.
- Four authorizers received a “D” or “F” grade this year. They are: Detroit Public Schools, Saginaw Valley State University, Eastern Michigan University and Northern Michigan University.
- Eight in 10 Michigan charters demonstrate academic achievement below the state average in both reading and math, according to a Stanford University analysis cited in the report. Among Michigan charter districts with significant African American populations, two-thirds perform below Detroit Public Schools – the worst performing urban district in the nation – in math, according to the 2013 state assessment results for African American students.
“The data are clear for tens of thousands of students. In Michigan, the charter school promise has been broken,” said Sunil Joy, the report’s lead author and a senior policy analyst at Ed Trust-Midwest. “With 70 percent low-income students and 60 percent students of color in Michigan’s charter schools, this is a civil rights issue.”
The report also features several examples of high-achieving charter schools in Michigan, including Detroit Merit Academy, where 88 percent of African American students read at or about grade level, according to the 2013-14 accountability scorecard. To put this in perspective, this is roughly 20 percentage points higher than Detroit Public Schools for African American students.
“There are terrific charter school leaders and teachers doing the hard work of closing opportunity and achievement gaps,” Arellano said. “Sadly, they are in the minority in Michigan. We need to change that – and we can, with strong state leadership and political will.”
So these scores are trusted? One third of Chicago public high schools do not offer physics even if one wanted to take it. Now this is something more damning than just a score.
SAD Michigan. BAD DeVos.
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Education and commented:
It is about time.
When DeVos was (finally) asked why Michigan public schools haven’t gotten better under 15 years of ed reform governance she said Michigan just needs more “choice”
No one had ever bothered to ask her about Michigan PUBLIC schools before – because no one in ed reform cared.
It took someone from outside the echo chamber to ask the obvious question and when it was finally asked she had no answer. It never occurred to ed reformers that anyone valued public schools and would (eventually) ask this question.
They still can’t answer the question.
I actually give the Michigan privatization crew more credit than I do the DC crew.
The Michigan crew never hid their outright hostility to public schools. They’re ideological privatizers and proud of it.
The fake public school supporters are worse. Much worse. They hide the agenda from the public under a marketing campaign.
Spot on!!!
DeVos doesn’t really “live” in Michigan in any ordinary sense because she’s so wealthy she lives in a different country than the vast majority of ordinary people.
But it’s been hard to watch if you live in one of these states.
Michigan, Ohio and Indiana sacrificed their public schools on the altar of this “movement”- they took the systems that were strong and made them weaker and took the systems that were struggling and eradicated them. The systems that were solid but needed support from politicians didn’t get it. They’ve neglected public schools for the last 15 years, under the thrall of ed reformers who don’t live here and don’t use our schools.
There are no net gains. We all lost. That this was led by the self-described Best and Brightest from America’s most expensive private colleges and universities really gives one pause.
It’s turning around in Ohio. Ed reform is almost a dirty word at this point, but boy we have paid for this blind adherence to a set of economic theories disguised as “education theories” and we will keep paying. Every public school student paid for this experiment.
Chiara,
Thank you. I agree with you re: NO NET GAINS. WE ALL LOST….Best and Brightest from America’s most expensive private colleges and universities really give one pause.”
Amen.
“Eastern Michigan University improved its scorecard grade from an “F” to a “D” by closing a poor-performing school, for example.”
You are not “improving your grade” when you close a “poor-performing school.” You are avoiding a problem instead of addressing it. And that’s if you believe a school should be graded on a “scorecard”–which I don’t; this isn’t a baseball game–with those scores based solely on students’ results on standardized tests.
But this kind of tactic should come as no surprise from the charter sector–where expelling kids who “score poorly” on standardized tests, whether by virtue of needing special education services, or truancy problems, or behavior issues, or simply switching schools every couple of months–is accepted practice if it improves the school’s average test scores.
And we need to underscore the fact that this report comes from Education Trust Midwest–where they’ve never seen a charter they didn’t love.
I don’t understand how they get away with what they get away with.
Ed reformers pushed teacher rankings. They spent YEARS lobbying for it. The federal government alone spent billions of dollars on it- states probably spent tens of billions.
FORTY FOUR states took their advice and put these measurement schemes in.
The schemes don’t work. So what do they do? They move the goalposts:
“On the whole, evaluation reforms have fallen far short of reformers’ ambitious goals and promises. The evaluation process has hardly become an engine of professional development in most districts; few schools recognize, yet alone dismiss, low-performing teachers, while teachers identified as high-performing are lucky to receive a small merit pay bonus, if any recognition at all. But this is not the question on the table.
Instead, we want to know whether the new evaluation systems have had a net positive or negative effect on our nation’s schools. This is particularly challenging given the variable experiences with evaluation reforms across individual districts and states. Here is how I think about the calculus of this question:”
They made HUGE promises – when the promises didn’t pan out they decide that the promises don’t matter.
So will 44 states get suckered into following these people again? Yes! Yes they will! They already are! They’re all buying the “personalized learning” promises.
What would it take for people to stop listening to them? How many experiments? How much money?
ANOTHER SCHOOL SHOOTING! Two students critically wounded. Perpetrator killed by police. see
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/shooter-wounds-two-students-at-maryland-school-armed-officer-ends-attack/ar-BBKsWWG?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=ientp
Stop trolling, Charlie boy……….
Congress is debating the education budget.
Public school students get nothing, again. Other than drug abuse awareness training and school security schemes.
Your representatives in DC see your children only as potential drug abusers and violent thugs. The best they can offer public school families is school shooting prevention and “Just Say No” campaigns. Nothing positive or hopeful or of value for their actual educational needs. Just the bare minimum- keep them alive until they graduate. That’s the absolute best DC ed reform offers for 90% of families who happen to attend the unfashionable public school sector that none of these people attended or send their children to.
The federal government has no jurisdiction nor mandate to operate public schools. The goals and function of the federal Department of Education, are crystal clear on that. Here is the mission statement:
Q
ED’s mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.
ED was created in 1980 by combining offices from several federal agencies. ED’s 4,400 employees and $68 billion budget are dedicated to:
•Establishing policies on federal financial aid for education, and distributing as well as monitoring those funds.
•Collecting data on America’s schools and disseminating research.
•Focusing national attention on key educational issues.
•Prohibiting discrimination and ensuring equal access to education. END Q
(from the Dept of Ed website)
Education is a state/municipal responsibility and has been since the first publicly-operated schools were opened. If states/municipalities wish to provide for public schools, then these local governments must levy and collect the tax revenue locally. This way, the control is local, and not subject to faceless bureaucrats in WashDC.
By collecting federal taxes, and then having a federal department disburse the funds, money is lost in “bureaucratic friction”, and most of the revenue does not reach the schools. And with federal sheckles come federal shackles. All kinds of restrictions on how to spend the funds.
When people demand quality education for their children, they should demand that their state/municipal governments provide it, and not go “hat in hand” to the bureaucrats in WashDC.
Charles, you don’t know what you are talking about. Federal funds are crucial in poor districts.
See point one of the Ed Dept’s mandate
Q
•Establishing policies on federal financial aid for education, and distributing as well as monitoring those funds.
END Q
The federal government disburses funds to schools in all types of economic districts, rich and poor. Stipulated.
I still maintain that the feds have no mandate to “operate” public schools.
(The feds do operate schools on indian reservations and military bases, but these are not open to the public).
this is a black helicopters and tin foil hats interpretation of federal and state education policy.
What do helicopters and hats have to do with anything? The states and municipalities were operating public schools for many years, before the feds ever stuck their noses into it. Local control ,local funding, school boards elected by the local families, is the only way to go. (Providing unrestricted cash grants to areas of extreme poverty, can be provisioned)
Education should not be entrusted to the federal government. The feds came up with common core, and NCLB. People on both the right and the left, complain about how the feds have mucked up education in this nation.
You are right, Charles. Trump and DeVos have finally managed to discredit the Department of Education.
Massive discontent with federal education policy pre-dates the current administration. There are many on both the right and the left, who would be delighted with the abolition of any federal role in education. (excepting non-restricted cash grants to economically-depressed schools).
Charles,
Read: Healing Our Divided Society: Fifty Years After The Kerner Report.
There was a forum. Diane was a speaker: http://www.eisenhowerfoundation.org/link2a
And view: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NC-o33DQ0yc
The gap can never be closed if you are stack rating schools by scores on standardized tests–with an approximation of the bell curve.
Right, Laura.
Standardized tests generate gaps that never close, by design.
Absolutely right, Laura!! What idiotic policy would tie test scores to teacher and ,earner quality?????
“Everyone above the mean!”
Closing gaps on normal curve
Like filling holes in blackest space
Even though you weave and swerve
Impossible to win the race
“Lake Belowbegone”
Belowbegone
Is school reform
With everyone
Above the norm
I once was on the dias with Amber Arellano for a panel discussion on improving MI schools. The setting was an event for Oakland County school boards. Oakland County is Michigan’s richest county, and most of its public school districts are well-regarded, among the top-scoring districts in the state. The audience was elected school board members for these PUBLIC school districts, people who were presumably focused on improving the educational offerings and succcesses in the districts they represented.
And what did Amber Arellano, Education Trust Midwest’s glamorous and charismatic CEO want to talk about? Charter schools and increasing choice. She framed her remarks by noting the number of failed charters in nearby Detroit. Left unsaid, but hanging in the air: Charters in Oakland County wouldn’t fail, because, well… let’s just say that the student populations would be different. Oakland County kids would benefit from an array of boutique charters for students’ individual passions and interests. Oakland County charters would be managed by innovative educators.
That was her message. I was stunned. Wasn’t this audience dedicated to preserving public education?? Evidently not, as she was surrounded, after the program, by would-be innovators and entrepreneurs, wanting her advice on how to capitalize on MI’s charter laws.
Her chief talking point is reflected in the report: You, too, can start a charter, but to sustain it, you must generate “good data.”
This is the next logical step in Michigan’s utterly failed charter movement (driven by terrible legislation): First, we attract families to charters in areas (like Detroit) where public schools are in intense poverty and have been mismanaged by the state. The low-hanging fruit. Then, we go after the school districts that aren’t in trouble, while pointing fingers at the charters (and charter operators) who are taking on the most troubled kids. We can do better, we tell them.
The purpose of this report is to spread the charter movement into solidly performing public districts who have thus far resisted the lure of the boutique charter, by once again contrasting (mostly white) children of privilege with children in struggling, underfunded schools in our poorest cities and rural areas.
nailed it…again!
Do not fail to notice how public universities get the blame instead of the toxic stupidity of the policies themselves and instead of the wild west free market zero regulation way it’s all going down. The “promise of charters” hasn’t been broken since it could never have been kept as it’s currently embodied.
Sickening. RESIST.
Vote every day with your time and money.
Thanks, Diane.