Archives for the month of: April, 2018
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

James Harvey: Don’t Be Fooled By NAEP “Proficient”

By dianeravitch
April 10, 2018 //
12

 

James Harvey, executive director of the National Superintendents Roundtable, warns parents and the public not to be fooled by the “proficiency” standard of NAEP, the National Assessment of Educational Progress. The NAEP scores for 2017 will be released today, and you will hear loud lamenting about how many students are “not proficient.”

Under the leadership of Chester (Checker) E. Finn, Jr., the National Assessment Governing Board adopted “achievement levels” in 1992. The levels are: Advanced, Proficient, Basic, and Below Basic. They have been “provisional” since that time. They are determined by the subjective guesswork of adult panels who decide what students in fourth and eighth grade “should know and be able to do.” Sometimes these panels include teachers, but not always.

Before 1992, NAEP results were reported only as “scale scores” on a scale of 500 (they still are). One could see if the scores went up or down but not deplore their rise or fall because the scale scores tell you what is, not what ought to be. Checker has long been a critic of American schools, and he pushed for an easily understandable way to gauge the slow progress of the schools. Progress on a mass test is always incremental. When it is not, the measure is suspect.

Achievement levels provided a way to make simple (and simplistic) judgment calls. Most often, in this time of lamentations and chest-pounding about the younger generation, the achievement levels have turned into a cudgel with which to beat teachers, students, and public schools, usually by ignorant politicians who want to pass laws to ensure that “no child will be left behind” and that “every student succeeds.” Laws don’t teach children, nor do bluffs and fake threats.

My term on NAGB, the NAEP governing board, did not overlap Checker’s. I served later, from 1998-2004. I came to believe that the Advanced level represented A+ performance; Proficiency was a solid A, A-, even a B+; Basic was a B to C- level, where the plurality of students scored, and Below Basic was D and F. That was my judgment, not the policy of the board. When anyone asserts that all or almost all students should score in the Proficient range, I think of this as massive grade inflation. Reaching Proficient is a very high bar. It is entirely unrealistic to use NAEP Proficient as a passing standard, as the Common Core Tests do. Any school in which every student scores an A or A- or B+ must be a school for gifted students.

James Harvey writes:

NAEP TERM “PROFICIENT” IS MISLEADING

STATEMENT OF JAMES HARVEY

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

NATIONAL SUPERINTENDENTS ROUNDTABLE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

SEATTLE, April 9, 2018 – As the U.S Department of Education prepares to release the latest findings from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), the American people should understand that the misleading term “proficient” sets a performance benchmark beyond the reach of most students in the world.

A detailed analysis released in January concluded that the vast majority of students in most countries could not demonstrate proficiency as NAEP defines the term.

The authors of the analysis, the National Superintendents Roundtable and the Horace Mann League, linked NAEP’s proficiency benchmark to the performance of students around the world on international assessments such as TIMSS (Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study).

The report on this work (How High the Bar?) concluded that:

In no nation do even 40 percent of students meet the NAEP Proficient benchmark in Grade 4 reading.

Only one nation has 50 percent or more of its students meeting the Proficient benchmark in Grade 8 science (Singapore).

Just three nations have 50 percent or more of their students meeting the Proficient benchmark in Grade 8 math (Singapore, Republic of Korea, and Japan).

Citing U.S. Department of Education documents, the report criticized the Department for misusing the term “Proficient.” The term, as the Department acknowledges, does not mean performing at grade level. Surprisingly, according to the Department’s statements, it does not even mean proficient, as most people understand the term.

Roundtable and Horace Mann League officials have insisted that the problem can be addressed without lowering standards by changing the term “proficient” to “high.” Without such a change, they maintain, the misuse of the term will continue to confuse both the public and educators, as in the past it has confused U.S. Secretaries of Education.

CONTACT: JAMES HARVEY: Office (206) 526-5336
Cell (206) 579-9272

******************************************

National Superintendents Roundtable
9425 35th Avenue, NE, Suite E
Seattle, WA 98115
*****************************************
National Superintendents Roundtable
9425 35th Avenue, NE
Suite E
Seattle, WA 98115
206-526-5336

Web: superintendentsforum.org
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/ntsupsrt
Twitter: @natsupers

 

Categories Accountability, Education Reform, NAEP, Testing

NPE Action: Why Opt Out Matters

By dianeravitch
April 10, 2018 //
6

 

Opting Out is the best way to say NO to the machine. 

It is the only way to stop the machine from sorting and processing your child.

When you opt out, you join a mighty force of determined parents. Determined to protect their child.

Carol Burris writes for NPE Action:

“The NYS Common Core exams begin this week. Although we are glad that the tests are shorter in length, there is no indication that the content of the tests and the proficiency levels have changed.

“When content is too difficult and curriculum is developmentally inappropriate, learning is negatively impacted. This is especially true for young children. The result is not higher achievement but rather frustration and stress. While you can excessively test prep to produce high scores, that does not mean that a deep understanding has occurred.

“That is why Opt Out is still important. It is how New Yorkers send a powerful message that they want curriculum that fosters a love of learning and intellectual growth. They do not want skill and drill pressure for inappropriately set benchmarks.”

Opt out.

Categories Education Reform, Opt Out, Testing

NAEP Results: Scores Mostly Flat, Gaps Widen

By dianeravitch
April 10, 2018 //
18

 

Education Week reports that NAEP results are flat, with few exceptions. The billions squandered on annual testing and Common Core Gabe produced meager change, especially for those already at the bottom. Achievement gaps widened.

With so little change, it is time—past time—to give serious attention to rethinking the federal testing juggernaut that began with No Child Left Behind, intensified with Race to the Top, and continues with the so-called Every Student Succeeds Act. The latest national results show that many children have been left behind, we are nowhere near “the top,” and every student is not succeeding.

In short, the federal policy of standards, testing, and accountability is a train wreck.

It is past time to stop blaming students, teachers, and schools, and place the blame for stagnation where it belongs: On nearly 20 years of failed federal policy based on failed assumptions.

 

Education Werk reports:

“Across the board, struggling American students are falling behind, while top performers are rising higher on the test dubbed the “Nation’s Report Card.”

“A nationally representative group of nearlyt Behind,  585,000 4th- and 8th-graders took the National Assessment of Educational Progress in 2017, the first time the tests were administered digitally. The results, released Tuesday, show no change at all for 4th grade in either subject or for 8th graders in math since the tests were last given in 2015. Eighth graders on average made only a 1-point gain in reading, to 267 on the NAEP’s 500-point scale.

“That meager gain in reading was driven entirely by the top 25 percent of students. During the last decade, 8th grade reading was the only test in which the average score for both high and low performers rose. By contrast, in math, the percentage of students performing below basic (30 percent) and those performing at the advanced level (10 percent) both increased significantly since 2007. The same pattern emerged in 4th grade math and reading.”

 

 

 

Categories Education Reform, Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), Failure, Inequity, NCLB (No Child Left Behind), Race to the Top

Billionaire Secretary DeVos Rips Poorly Paid Oklahoma Teachers for Failure to “Serve the Kids”

By dianeravitch
April 9, 2018 //
36

Billionaire Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos, who never worked a day in her life for pay until she was named Secretary of Education by Trump and who never had to worry about paying a mortgage or a meeting a car payment, lashed into Oklahoma teachers for their failure to end their strike and get back to work “serving the kids.”

No doubt her butler and her chauffeur are paid more than the average teacher in Oklahoma, even without a college degree.

Her criticism will  likely stiffen the spines of striking teachers.

Categories Betsy DeVos, Oklahoma, Teacher Pay, Teachers

New York: “The Tests Aren’t Worth the Paper They Are Printed On”

By dianeravitch
April 9, 2018 //
31

 

Two local union leaders in New York—in Mahopac and the Saranac Lake District—urge parents to opt their children out of the state tests because they are a waste of time and money. 

They write that while the state has shortened the tests by a day and hired a new vendor, parents should opt out and do what is right for their child:

”And yet, have any of the changes reduced the impact these tests have on students? More importantly, are the tests, and the data they produce, having any positive impact on teaching and learning in our schools? In our view, the answer to both of these questions is an unqualified “no.” The tests aren’t worth the paper they’re printed on.”

There are serious questions about the validity and reliability of the tests, about computer testing, and about how accurately the tests measure student ability.

They conclude:

”In our view, there are compelling reasons to refuse the 3-8 state tests again this year. If you’re new to the testing, and have concerns about the state tests as we do, you’re not alone. Hopefully your school district has notified you of its protocol for refusing the tests. If not, you should know that to opt out, simply send a letter to your child’s principal prior to the April 11 start date.

“We’re committed to doing our part in helping rebuild the trust that parents, students and teachers have in the state Education Department. The same is true for the approximately 20 other teacher union local leaders from around the state who comprise an ad hoc coalition in support of the views expressed here. Yet until meaningful changes are made to the broken system of grade 3-8 tests, civil disobedience in the form of opting out will be necessary. Here’s hoping that this year’s round of protesting finally results in SED listening to the collective voice of parents, teachers and students.”

 

Categories New York, Opt Out, Standardized Testing, Students

Flint, Michigan: Legal Settlement Announced

By dianeravitch
April 9, 2018 //
8

This is a good first step on behalf of the children and families of Flint, although the state of Michigan gets off cheap for only $4 million. When will anyone be held accountable for what was a completely avoidable criminal action? To save money, Flint’s emergency manager cut off the source of the cty’s safe drinking water and subjected the people of Flint to lead-polluted water. Numerous children suffered lasting injury. The official misconduct should be punished and should not be forgotten.

DETROIT, April 9 – Attorneys for Flint schoolchildren have reached a historic agreement with the Michigan Department of Education (MDE), Genesee Intermediate School District (GISD) and Flint Community Schools (FCS) to establish an unprecedented program to provide universal screening, and in-depth assessments when necessary, to all Flint children impacted by the Flint water crisis.

“The program will leverage the Flint Registry, a population-wide screening platform, and expanded assessment services by the Genesee Health System/Hurley Children’s Hospital Neurodevelopmental Center of Excellence (NCE). The program will be organized and operated under the leadership of Dr. Mona Hanna-Attisha, Director of the Michigan State University-Hurley Children’s Hospital Pediatric Public Health Initiative, and will begin at the start of the 2018-19 school year.

“The children and families of Flint have lived with exposure to lead in their water and with schools unequipped to help students whose learning may be affected by this dangerous neurotoxin,” said Greg Little, Chief Trial Counsel at Education Law Center (ELC). “The program set up in the agreement announced today is a major milestone on the road to addressing the needs of children affected by the Flint water crisis.”

“The settlement agreement is a major step in DR, et al. v. MDE, et al., a class action lawsuit filed on behalf of Flint children asserting violations of federal and state special education laws. The settlement will be final after an April 12 court hearing in Detroit, subject to court approval.

”The lawsuit challenges systemic deficiencies in Flint’s special education program, including failures to find and serve children with special needs and to address the impact of the water crisis, which potentially put thousands of children at risk of developing a disability or worsening an existing disability. The settlement addresses a major aspect of the special education failures in the Flint schools: the need to identify all students with disabilities and properly evaluate them.”

“The agreement has several key elements:

“The state of Michigan will provide more than $4 million to get the program up and running by September 2018. Families of Flint children exposed to elevated lead levels in the Flint drinking water can enroll their children in the Registry, complete a screening, and have their children referred for further assessment by the NCE. The battery of available assessments will include neuropsychological testing, which is important for evaluating the effects of lead on cognitive development, memory and learning.

”The state, city and school district will provide staff to facilitate and maximize participation in the program and collaboration between the program and the schools.

“Training and professional development will be provided for administrators, teachers and staff on the availability of the program and how to recognize children potentially harmed by lead who may need to be referred for assessments.

“Importantly, results of the assessments will be sent to the schools to be used in the process of evaluating students for special education services.

“The settlement is a critical first step in creating a system to identify the needs of the children of Flint,” said Kristin Totten, ACLU of Michigan Education Attorney. “However, the heart of this lawsuit remains, which is ensuring kids with disabilities receive the education guaranteed them by law. As we move forward, we are fully committed to protecting those rights.”

“This is a groundbreaking program, using the most advanced testing available, that represents the first step in an unprecedented solution to an unprecedented crisis,” said Lindsay Heck, an attorney at White & Case. “The partnership created between the medical profession and the schools recognizes that education is the antidote to the crisis that Flint children have endured. In the next phase of the lawsuit we will work to ensure that FCS schools have the resources to provide the children of Flint with the educational opportunities they deserve and to which they are entitled under the law.”

“The agreement is a partial settlement of the lawsuit. The attorneys for the Flint parents and children will continue to pursue additional claims, including the provision of appropriate special education services and proper student discipline procedures.

“The legal team representing the students pro bono includes attorneys from the ACLU of Michigan, Education Law Center, and global law firm White & Case LLP. The team is headed by ELC Chief Trial Counsel, Greg Little.

“About Education Law Center:

“Founded in 1973, Education Law Center (ELC) is a leading voice for public school children and one of the most effective advocates for equal educational opportunity and education justice in the United States. Widely recognized for groundbreaking court rulings on behalf of at-risk students, including New Jersey’s landmark Abbott v. Burke decisions, ELC also promotes education equity through coalition building, litigation support, policy development, communications and action-focused research in the states and at the federal level.

“About White & Case LLP:

“White & Case is a leading global law firm with lawyers in 43 offices across 30 countries. Among the first US-based law firms to establish a truly global presence, White & Case provides counsel and representation in virtually every area of law that affects cross-border business. White & Case’s clients value both the breadth of its global network and the depth of its US, English and local law capabilities in each of its regions and rely on White & Case for their complex cross-border transactions, as well as their representation in arbitration and litigation proceedings. To learn more about the Firm, our work on behalf of clients, and our global pro bono practice, please take a look at our Services and Global Citizenship pages.

“About ACLU of Michigan:

“The ACLU of Michigan is a nonprofit and nonpartisan organization that protects the liberties that our Constitution, federal and state laws guarantee everyone. We have offices in Detroit, Lansing, Flint and Grand Rapids.”

Categories Education Reform, Michigan

Leonie Haimson: Why Parents Opt Out of State Testing

By dianeravitch
April 9, 2018 //
32

 

Writing on the leading news site for New York City Parents, Leonie Haimson explains why about 20% of parents in New York State have refused to allow their children to take the state tests. 

The most important reason is that the tests have no value for individual students. The test results are not retuned until the fall, when students have a different teacher. Knowing their score without being able to review right and wrong answers is useless.

Haimson writes:

“So what are the facts? The state exams have been shortened from three days to two, which is an improvement, and the state mandated that no child could be held back because of a low score on the exam, and no teacher judged on the results, as occurred during Mayor Bloomberg’s administration.

“But there are still many questions about the quality and usefulness of these exams. Here a third grade teacher points out how many of the reading passages continue to be far above grade level, and how the results fail to provide any useful diagnostic information to teachers about their students. Many other educators have pointed out how the state exams are replete with questions like “What is the main idea” of a reading passage, while offering multiple choice answers that are confusing and ambiguous.

“As Jeanette Deutermann of Long Island Opt Out points out, the overemphasis on high-stakes testing has caused schools to narrow the curriculum, focus on low-quality worksheets and eliminate project-based learning. The exams also widen inequities and are toxic for students, as Johanna Garcia explains. Chancellor Farina privately told a group of NYC parents two years ago that she herself would opt out of the test if she had an English Language Learner or special needs child — though she refused to admit this publicly.

“The Common Core standards and exams have also promoted other damaging practices in schools, such as “close reading” strategies in which teachers aren’t supposed to explain the larger context of passages, with students deprived of the background knowledge they need to fully comprehend assigned texts. For the best and most concise critique of how this impairs learning, see a one minute video from Nick Tampio, professor at Fordham University.

”Indeed, some Common Core proponents are now backtracking and renouncing the value of the current state exams, including Louisiana State Superintendent John White, (formerly Deputy Chancellor of NYC DOE) who now says that reading tests should be based instead on knowledge and a broad curriculum.”

it is a giant waste of student and teacher time, as well as many millions of dollars.

No other nation in the world tests every child every year from grades 3-8.

A few years ago, I spoke in Texas to administrators and school board members. One school board member got up and identified himself as an engineer. He said that his company samples its products. If they inspected every single item, he said, they would have no time to mpmanufacture the products. All their energy would be devoted to inspection.

Categories Education Reform, New York, Opt Out, Parents, Standardized Testing, Students

Will DeBlasio Close Another School for At-Risk Students?

By dianeravitch
April 9, 2018 //
19

Normally I wouldn’t write about the fate of a single school. But this is a special case.

I recall that when Bill DeBlasio ran for Mayor in 2013, he said emphatically that he would not follow the Bloomberg script of closing schools. I moderated a debate back in that first election where he pledged to take a different path. He has recently hinted that he has national ambitions, so his reversion to the previous Mayor’s plan of closing schools as a matter of course, over the protests of the school community, is very disturbing.

Here is a statement by the PTA president of a school that is slated for closure. It is a “transfer school,” that is, a high school for kids who have persistently struggled and are trying to earn a diploma. In other words, it is a “last chance” school for kids who have not been able to make it in the general education program.

Read this and see what you think. Should this school die?

“For Immediate Release

Contact: Shaunte Williams, PTA President
(718)-877-3821

“Crotona Academy, a transfer high school in the South Bronx, is actively rallying its community of students, alumni, parents, and staff to challenge a New York City Department of Education proposal to lock its doors to more than 150 at-risk students.

“Superintendent Paul Rotondo informed the school’s community in early February that the DOE had put the alternative high school on a fast track toward closure by August 2018. “This proposal threatens a major disruption in the education of teenagers who are at Crotona precisely because they have already suffered a disruption in their education,” said Shaunte Williams, president of Crotona Academy’s parents association and the parent of a current student at Crotona Academy.

“Unlike other identified NYCDOE schools proposed for closure, the decision to close the transfer high school Crotona Academy was left totally at the discretion of the Superintendent of transfer schools, Paul Rotondo. Superintendent Rotondo has been granted the authority to select which of his transfer high schools he elects to merge, co-locate, replace the school leader, or close completely. On February 9, 2018, Superintendent Paul Rotondo shocked the Crotona Academy community of students, parents and staff by stating that the school was proposed for closure effective September 2018.

“For thirteen years, Crotona Academy High School, the “Little Transfer School That Could” has dedicated itself to educating and supporting at risk, over aged, under credited students in their determination to earn a traditional high school diploma. Crotona Academy High School is a small transfer high school located in the poorest congressional district in America in the heart of the South Bronx. Since its inception, Crotona Academy High School has worked in conjunction with community-based organizations to offer in depth-individualized support, job readiness and career exploration to students who for a litany of reasons could not succeed in a general education high school. A large proportion of the Crotona students and their families are struggling with poverty-induced obstacles such as homelessness, unemployment, substance abuse, and mental health issues. Nearly half of Crotona Academy’s total enrollment compromised of special education and English language learners. In September 2016, the Crotona Academy school community was grateful to move into a new school building location after eleven years of being relegated to receiving instruction situated in series of TCU trailer units.

“Superintendent Rotondo’s decision to close Crotona Academy High School leaves many questions to bear in mind…

“Crotona Academy High has been identified by NYSED as a school “In Good Standing” for over five consecutive years. There are currently nine underperforming Transfer High Schools identified by the NYSED ESSA as “Focus” or “Priority” schools. Four of these underperforming Transfer High Schools identified by NYSED as Focus or Priority transfer high schools are located in the Bronx. Superintendent Rotondo however has elected to select only Crotona Academy High School, a school in GOOD STANDING for closure. Crotona Academy High School is actually the only transfer high school Superintendent Rotondo has selected for closure.

“Crotona Academy has made significant educational gains within the last three years in student attendance and has experienced a steady increase in student enrollment, graduation rates of English Language Learners and Special Education students and the inclusion of a variety of multi-cultural and college/career ready programs.

“Unfortunately, Superintendent Rotondo in the published Impact Statement has strategically concealed much of this data in order to support his rationale to close Crotona Academy High School.

“In spite of the educational gains Crotona Academy has made, the school’s five year identified status as a school “In Good Standing” by NYSED ESSA, and the fact that Crotona Academy students were just moved into their new school building less than two years ago, Superintendent Rotondo has still chosen Crotona Academy High School for closure. To add insult to injury, the proposed plan for the school building is to move the Crotona Academy students out and designate the school building to another school currently located in TCU trailer units.

“What message does this send to the Crotona Academy students? Those Crotona Academy students are less worthy than other students to be educated within a nice school building. That although NYSED has identified Crotona Academy as a school in good standing for the past five years, that this information is irrelevant, that the gains made at Crotona Academy in attendance, enrollment, graduation rates and post-secondary enrollment rates, is deemed by Paul Rotondo as inconsequential. What is the rational for Superintendent Rotondo to TARGET Crotona Academy High School for closure rather than those underperforming transfer schools identified by NYSED? What was the rationale for Superintendent Rotondo directing Crotona Academy High School to seize enrollment in August 2018 and preventing admissions although there was a demand from the community and no indication that the school was being proposed for closure that announcement was made later in February 2018.

“Clearly, many unanswered questions deserve to be answered before a decision is made to close Crotona Academy High School. It would be a travesty to punish at risk students by forcing them to relocate to other schools due to the questionable and possibly bias decision making practices of Superintendent Rotondo.

“A public hearing on the DOE proposal will be held on Thursday, April 12, 2018 at 5:00 P.M. at Crotona Academy High School located at 1211 Southern Boulevard, Bronx, NY, 10459. The panel for Educational Policy will vote on the proposal at a meeting on Wednesday, April 25, 2018 at 5 pm Murray Bergtraum High School, located at 411 Pearl Street, New York, NY, 10007. The Crotona Academy community encourages supporters to attend and voice their opposition to the proposal at both hearings.

“To voice your opposition to the closure ahead of the above-mentioned hearing dates, contact the DOE (anonymously) calling 212-374-5159 or email D12proposals@schools.nyc.gov”

Categories Bill de Blasio, Closing schools, Education Reform, New York City

SQUALOR IN HIGHER EDUCATION: Who Protects Predatory For-Profit Colleges?

By dianeravitch
April 9, 2018 //
10

I posted this report during the Obama administration. It remains timely since the for-profit higher education sector is having a renaissance under the leadership of Betsy DeVos, who is the best friend the predatory, for-profit higher education sector ever had.

As a private citizen, she invested in this squalid sector. As Secretary of Education, she has protected predatory for-profit institutions and even put one of their champions in charge of monitoring their behavior. A fox in charge of the henhouse. She has also cut back on federal efforts to help students who were defrauded by these institutions and left with a mountain of debt and a worthless diploma (think Trump U).

Here’s the lowdown: When your company is raking in profits, it can afford to hire top lobbyists. When you are operating in the public sector, you have to squeeze out the money to pay for any lobbyist.

I urge you to read this fascinating report on the predatory for-profit higher education sector, written before the Trump administration came into being by D.C. lawyer David Halperin. It is carefully researched and sourced. It is long, but has the interest level of a detective story. You will find villains in both political parties. You will find distinguished academics who sold their reputation to bolster a predatory for-profit institution. Behind most of the political squalor is one unifying theme: the power of greed.

It opens like this. I invite you to read the entire report to find out who is protecting the for-profit colleges that rip off American students:


Timothy J. Hatch and Ronald L. Olson are two of the most prominent and successful lawyers in Los Angeles. Hatch is a partner at the national litigation powerhouse firm Gibson Dunn. Olson, a name partner at Munger, Tolles & Olson, has represented some of America’s biggest corporations. He is a former chair of the American Bar Association’s Litigation Section, and today he serves on the boards of directors of Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway, the RAND Corporation, the Mayo Clinic, and the California Institute of Technology.

Both Hatch and Olson also have been for years key parts of the protective infrastructure that has shielded predatory for­-profit colleges, institutions that have deceived and abused U.S. students and taxpayers. Hatch has represented the giant publicly­traded for­profit college businesses Education Management Corporation (EDMC), Kaplan, and ITT Tech against charges of fraud, and he has sued the U.S. Department of Education to halt regulations that would hold poorly­performing colleges accountable. Olson is on the board of directors of Graham Holdings Company, which owns Kaplan, and his law firm has represented Corinthian in major fraud litigation ­­ which is fitting, as the Graham company owned a significant stake in Corinthian until its 2015 collapse. In the fraud case where Olson’s firm represented Corinthian, the other party that whistleblowers were suing was Corinthian’s auditor, giant accounting firm Ernst & Young. Their lawyer in the case was Timothy Hatch.

Although the notorious Corinthian Colleges is gone (sort of), many bad actors remain in business. Seven of America’s ten biggest for-­profit college companies, which collectively received about $8 billion dollars in taxpayer money last year, have in recent months and years been under investigation or sued by federal and state law enforcement agencies for deceptive business practices. Despite the mounting evidence that these seven companies ­­ Apollo/ University of Phoenix, EDMC, ITT Tech, Kaplan, Career Education Corporation, DeVry, and Bridgepoint Education ­­ have engaged in predatory behavior against their own students, they continue to market themselves as affordable places to build successful careers, and they continue to enroll new students and deposit their federal grants and loan checks. These companies also have continued to fight reform measures by government to hold bad schools accountable for abuses.

A key reason why such predatory for­-profit colleges have been able to continue receiving billions annually in taxpayer dollars while ruining the financial futures of students across the country is that national power players ­­ politicians, lawyers, academic leaders, celebrities ­­ have been willing to vouch for these companies, serving as their paid lobbyists, board members, investors, and endorsers. It’s not just Donald Trump who has made big money off a deceptive college operation.

Read on to learn who these power players are. You may be shocked. I was. After reading this, I felt that the whole political system is rigged to protect the predators. I went to wash my hands. Why is the “money all gone,” as reformers like to say when they explain why budget cuts are necessary? Because it is lining the pockets of the rich and connected.

Imagine if that $8 billion dollars were used to make community college free for all those who wanted higher education at a reputable university?

Hear are a few tidbits from this report:

● Department of Education data has shown that the University of Phoenix’s graduation rate for first­time, full­time students is about 16 percent, and that graduation rate for the school’s online programs is about 4 percent.

● A 2012 comprehensive investigative report on for­profit colleges by then­ Senator Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) found that the University of Phoenix spent $892 on instruction in 2009, compared to $2,225 per student on marketing, and $2,535 per student on profit. “This,” the report found “is one of the lowest amounts spent on instruction per student of any company analyzed.”

● Around 25 percent of University of Phoenix students default on their loans within three years of leaving school.

Read and gasp. And weep that students will continue to be defrauded by predatory corporations peddling online for-profit junk.

Categories Accountability, Education Industry, For-Profit, Fraud, Higher Education

Stock Tips for the DeVos For-Profit Education Era

By dianeravitch
April 9, 2018 //
13

 

The business media recognize that Betsy DeVos is changing federal policy to make room for for-profit education, both for K-12 charters and for higher education. She is rolling back regulations intended to curb the excesses of predatory for-profit “colleges,” known for preying on and exploiting veterans, the poor, and unwary students.

So here is a business analysis of the stocks that are soaring with the expectation that the DeVos is great news for educationally unsound for-profit colleges.

The basic story is that DeVos’ Department of Education has made clear that it sides with the predators, not the prey. Students will continue to be cheated. DeVos doesn’t care.

For-profit charters and for-profit virtual charters and for-profit higher education strike me as morally reprehensible. They may make money for investors, but they are educationally bankrupt.

By it’s nature, the for-profit corporation owes its first duty to investors, not students. It must turn a profit or go belly-up. Thus, it must cut costs, and the easiest way to do this is to cut the cost of teachers by hiring inexperienced teachers and giving them large classes. They are also incentivized to seek the easiest to educate students and avoid expensive ones who need extra attention.

Many of the for-profit charters are trying to cut costs by putting kids on computers. They call it “blended learning” or use the oxymoron “personalized learning.” But it is cheap education no matter what you call it.

Categories Betsy DeVos, Charter Schools, For-Profit, Fraud, Higher Education
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »