Archives for the month of: March, 2018

 

When she delivered her keynote remarks to the National PTA, Betsy DeVos took potshots at 60 Minutes, claiming the show edited her remarks. She apparently did not explain in what way she was misquoted.

“So, now that I have the opportunity to speak unedited, I’m not afraid to call out folks who defend stagnation for what it really is: failure,” she said, criticizing those who are against school choice given that U.S. students are ranked 40th in math, 23rd in reading and 25th in science compared to other countries.

“The Education secretary is a proponent of school choice, which encompasses policies such as letting students attend religious or charter schools with public funding.”

DeVos did not acknowledge that the US placed dead last in the first international assessment in 1964.

She did not acknowledge that the US was never a high scoring nation and typically scores around the median.

She did not acknowledge that test scores are the result of child poverty and that any effort to raise test scores must address as child poverty.

She did not acknowledge that the US is #1 in child poverty among the OECD nations.

She refuses to acknowledge that school choice does not produce higher test scores. On the whole, school choice lowers test scores. The prime example of the effects of school choice is Michigan, where NAEP scores have fallen since Betsy DeVos’s choice policies were imposed. The other examples are Milwaukee and Detroit, which demonstrate the null impact of choice. Milwaukee has charters, vouchers, and public schools that must take the kids the choice schools don’t want. Detroit has loads of charters. Both are among the lowest scoring urban districts tested by NAEP.

She has an agenda, but it has already failed. She is an ideologue and zealot, who pays no attention to evidence, not even in her own state.

She would destroy public education if it were in her power. But we will stop her. She is already an object of ridicule. It won’t get better.

 

This is good reading!

The California Democratic Party wrote up some pointers for Trump while he visits there.

An excellent reminder of the differences between Trump and Democrats in the Golden State.

Personally, I sincerely hope Trump makes time to visit charter schools and praise them as the capstone of the Trump-DeVos agenda. California’s charter-friendly environment makes Betsy DeVos very happy. After all, California has more charter schools than any other state.

 

Stephen Colbert has his turn deconstructing the 60 Minutes interview of Betsy DeVos.

He perceptively zeroes in on her nonsensical claim that she doesn’t pay much attention to schools (they are just “buildings”) or systems, but only on individual students. Colbert wonders how the Secretary of Education can pay attention only to each of 50 million students. He suggests renaming the Department of Education the Department of Jennifer.

Of course, she was unable to talk about Michigan, whose numbers on national tests have sharply declined since DeVos took charge of education policy by generously funding key legislators.

Remember, DeVos says she is “not a numbers person.” How can anyone be Secretary of Education and not pay attention to states, districts, schools, and the trends embodied in national data? Why would she be unaware of the backward trends in her home state, where she has been deeply engaged?

By the way, after her disastrous appearance on TV, she quickly tweeted data from NAEP and international tests to assert that public schools are making no gains. Neither is true. I wish she would read my book “Reign of Error” and see that NAEP scores are the highest ever (but flattened out in 2015 after a solid decade of reform strategies) and that the USA never posted high international test scores, that we typically score in the middle, and that poverty is the root cause of low test scores.

I promise you will never hear this billionaire talk about poverty and/or segregation. These are root causes of poor school performance, but they are of no interest to her. She prefers to promote failing and failed school choice programs.

Peter Greene has a different take on Betsy’s refusal to acknowledge “school systems,” “school districts,” or even “schools.” She says it is because she only wants to focus on individuals, which is really hard to do when you are in charge of the U.S. Department of Education. Actually, it is impossible. Peter thinks she is wishing away those buildings and districts and schools. She has her own agenda.

 

The NPE Action Fund endorses Denise Cole for election to the Newark, New Jersey, Board of Education.

The vote is April 17.

“Denise Cole has received the endorsement of the Network for Public Education Action for a seat on the Newark, New Jersey Board of Education.

“Denise is a dedicated public education advocate, with a strong history of working with national, state and local organizations like Journey for Justice, The Alliance to Reclaim Our Schools, PULSE (Parents United for Local School Education), Parents Educating Parents, and Communities United. Her years as an advocate will help her amplify the voice of the voters and community so that they can collectively take part in decisions that will directly impact their lives.

“She supports the NAACP’s Resolution on a Moratorium on Charter Schools, and believes that “charter schools should be required to be totally transparent with the public on the spending of taxpayer money.” With almost $250 million dollars diverted to charter schools from the Newark Public School budget, such transparency is crucial.

“Denise told us that taxpayer dollars should go “directly into the classroom for teacher and student success,” and that this is best achieved “by incorporating wraparound services that are sustainable.” Denise invites parents to work to support changes in the traditional public schools that they seek in charter and private schools. She said, “We must become the change we want for our children and community.”

“We ask you to support Denise Cole’s candidacy for the Newark Board of Education on April 17th.”

 

All of us have a stake in preserving the religious freedom that is guaranteed by the First Amendment to the Constitution. Whatever our religion or lack thereof, we are all protected by the State keeping its distance from religion. The Founding Fathers knew their history, and they knew that Europe had been torn apart by endless wars between religious sects. They sought to create a nation where people of differing religious beliefs could live in harmony, none dominating the others. For that reason, the First Amendment states that Congress shall make no law establishing a state religion. Religious minorities have flourished (for the most part) because of the protection afforded by separation of church and state.

But now this principle is threatened by a new and powerful ideology of dominionism. This is the tie that binds the evangelicals. 

Although this article focuses on Texas, it has clear national implications. Read it and think “DeVos,” “Trump.” Even devout Christians should fear these influential leaders’ refusal to separate church and state.

“Though it’s seldom mentioned by name, it’s one of the major forces in Texas politics today: dominion theology, or dominionism. What began as a fringe evangelical sect in the 1970s has seen its influence mushroom — so much so that sociologist Sara Diamond has called dominionism “the central unifying ideology for the Christian Right.” (Italics hers.) That’s especially true here in Texas, where dominionist beliefs have, over the last decade, become part and parcel of right-wing politics at the highest levels of government.

“So, what is it? Dominionism fundamentally opposes America’s venerable tradition of church-state separation — in fact, dominionists deny the Founders ever intended that separation in the first place. According to Frederick Clarkson, senior fellow for religious liberty at the non-profit social justice think tank Political Research Associates, dominionists believe that Christians “have a biblical mandate to control all earthly institutions — including government — until the second coming of Jesus.” And that should worry all Texans — Christians and non-Christians alike.

“Dominionism comes in “soft” and “hard” varieties. “Hard” dominionism (sometimes called Christian Reconstructionism), as Clarkson describes it, explicitly seeks to replace secular government, and the U.S. Constitution, with a system based on Old Testament law.

“The father of hard dominionism, the late Presbyterian theologian R.J. Rushdoony, called for his followers to “take back government … and put it in the hands of Christians.”

“Rushdoony’s legacy has been carried on by his son-in-law, Tyler-based economist Gary North, an unapologetic theocrat who in 1982 called for Christians to “get busy in constructing a Bible-based social, political, and religious order which finally denies the religious liberty of the enemies of God.”

Dominionists are so eager to win control that they are willing to use the deeply immoral Trump as their instrument.

 

 

 

 

Dana Milbank of the Washington Post wrote a hilarious column about the DeVos Interview on 60 Minutes.

Many of you can’t read the Post because of a paywall, so I will quote what I can. (I subscribe to the Post and love their news coverage and opinion columns.)

Milbank surmised that the “unappreciated genius” of DeVos was that she would convince many people that getting an education was a waste of time and money, and Trump needs the votes of uneducated people. So, the worse she is, the more it degrades education and helps Trump.

Milbank wrote:

”Betsy DeVos gives every indication that she is, to borrow President Trump’s phrase, a “low-IQ individual.” Her interview with Lesley Stahl of CBS’s “60 Minutes,” broadcast Sunday night, is being mocked as the most disastrous televised tete-a-tete since Palin met Couric.

But this unabashed ignorance is DeVos’s hidden genius — and precisely why she is a perfect choice to be Trump’s secretary of education.

Whenever DeVos speaks, it feels as though the sum total of human knowledge is somehow diminished. During her confirmation hearing last year, she was utterly defeated by complex subjects such as “teachers” and “students” but was certain that schools need guns to repel attacks by “potential grizzlies.”

DeVos responded to question after question, “I don’t know.” When Stahl suggested she might visit some low-perming schools, DeVos “expressed her reluctance “to talk about all schools in general, because schools are made up of individual students.”

“Yes, and brains are made up of individual brain cells, many of which self-destruct upon hearing DeVos speak. Listen to her for five minutes and you will no longer be able to complete the New York Times crossword puzzle. After 10 minutes of DeVos, the human brain loses the ability to perform simple arithmetic. After 15 minutes, those in the presence of DeVos report forgetting the answers to their security questions, including first pet and first car.

“All this proves that it is sheer (if perhaps unintentional) genius to have DeVos, who married into the Amway fortune, in her role in the Trump administration. If this is the caliber of the top education official in the land, it hardly speaks well for getting an education. People could quite reasonably conclude that education isn’t all it’s cracked up to be, and they wouldn’t go to all the trouble of attending school.”

 

 

Peter Greene warns that it is a mistake to think that Betsy DeVos is a dope. She is not. She doesn’t really care about educating all children, although she thinks she should pretend to. Her thinking is in a different place, shaped by her fundamentalist, evangelical views. 

“Here’s another theory. Let’s assume that getting a good education to every child is not a goal. Let’s assume instead that the goal is to have education functioning on the free market, free of public institutions and government meddling. Let’s assume that seeing some businesses prosper and profit is further proof that the market is working properly. Let’s assume that directing public money to religious schools at the expense of government programs is a desirable and commendable outcome. In fact, let’s assume that in such a system, having some schools and students sink to the bottom is a desirable outcome, because the free market is supposed to reward the deserving and allow the undeserving to sink to the low level where they belong. And if gutting public education has the effect of gutting unions and taking power away from those damn Godless Democrats, well, that’s only right, too…

”Looking at that smile, I was reminded of an old Christian admonition- “Be in this world, but not of this world.”

“It’s a view that people of faith, people who have been elevated by a relationship with a personal Lord and Savior, do not actually belong in this dirty, debased world. The rules of this world cannot be their rules. To achieve Godly goals, they may have to use worldy tools, even pretend to go along with worldly rules, but this is stooping to achieve a higher purpose. God will even give His chosen tools (like earthly wealth and political power), but they must avoid being seduced by worldly things, including a desire for worldly acclaim and recognition. That means, among other things, that the Chosen don’t owe these earthly, debased, going-to-hell persons an explanation. You can be in the world with these people, and maybe feel sorry for them, but there is no need to connect with them– you are almost like two separate species, passing each other for a brief moment as you travel to two separate destinations, you to eternal glory in Heaven, and they to endless damnation in Hell.

“So you smile. You smile hard, because it shows that you’re still better than they are, and that you haven’t stooped to their level. You smile even as they say mean things about you, because if the people of this world mount powerful forces against you, it’s just further proof that you are right (and they are wrong). In fact, you are so right, and so sure of it, that real conversations with them aren’t necessary because what could you learn from people who are so low and earthly and wrong? But you go through the motions to show that you’re the bigger person, and because sometimes worldly tools must be used to achieve divine goals. You smile.

“Betsy DeVos’s smile is the smile of Dolores Umbrage or the Church Lady. It’s an angry, flinty smile, a smile that says, “I am in this world, but I am not of it, and some day I will rise above it and leave you behind.”

Not having Peter’s insight into fundamentalist theology, I tend to think of that perpetual smile as a smirk. I call it the billionaire’s smirk: “I am very, very, very rich, and you are not. Nothing you say can diminish my wealth and power.” It is a smirk of smugness and condescension.

California teacher Tom Ultican has been systematically deconstructing the “Destroy Public Education Movement,” one claim, one city at a time.

In this post, he explores the disastrous consequences of the policies of school choice zealots, especially the DeVos family. Every intervention made things worse, especially for the poorest children, who live in Detroit. They were not simply abandoned. Their schools and city were ransacked by raiders of DPE.

 

Mercedes Schneider describes Betsy DeVoid’s effort on Twitter to recover from her awful interview on 60 Minutes, which made her appear ignorant and clueless, even about her own state.

In the interview, she feigned ignorance when Lesley Stahl said that the state’s scores on NAEP dropped precipitously over the past decade of choice, which Betsy engineered. But Lesley Stahl knew.

The best Betsy could come up with was that Detroit charters—which select their students— have higher scores than Detroit public schools. But even the charter scores were abysmal.

If Betsy wants to argue the miracle of choice, Detroit is not a good example. No miracle.

 

 

Ben Mathis-Lilley, chief news editor for SLATE, points out what should be obvious: everyone is mocking Betsy DeVos’s clueless interview with 60 Minutes, but she echoed what Democrats have been saying for years.

Low-scoring schools should compete to get better, even if they have less funding and larger classes? More money for high-scoring schools? Charters are awesome?

“The bad news for Democrats who found DeVos’ performance appalling is that these principles have been a crucial part of their party’s education policy for 17 years. Broadly speaking, the regime of compelling competition between schools by creating charter-school or school-choice programs and by rewarding those whose students do well on standardized tests was launched at a federal level by the No Child Left Behind Act; the NCLB was co-sponsored by Ted Kennedy and passed the Senate in 2001 with 87 votes. When Barack Obama became president, he created the Race to the Top program, which the Washington Post described at the time as a “competition for $4.35 billion in grants” that would “ease limits on charter schools” and “tie teacher pay to student achievement,” i.e. direct extra funds to already-successful schools.”

He points out that Senator Cory Booker addressed DeVos’s pro-voucher, anti-public school organization twice. Yet Booker is shocked, shocked that she has the same views as he does.

”DeVos is not qualified for her job and has more than earned her reputation for cluelessness. But if you gave her a Harvard degree, a history of employment at McKinsey or Goldman Sachs, and a little more public-speaking finesse, nothing DeVos told Lesley Stahl above would have bothered the Democrats who’ve been setting their party’s education policy for going on two decades.”