Archives for the month of: May, 2018

The Network for Public Education Action Fund worked closely with other advocacy groups to Block a proposal to convert Impact Aid for public schools into vouchers. The Trump administration just announced that it would not support the legislation, which was opposed by groups representing military families.

“The Trump administration does not support a proposal to use a portion of Impact Aid program funding to help expand school choice to military-connected children, an administration official told Education Week.

“Sources within the administration say they want to give military families more choices. But they don’t think robbing impact aid is the way to do it. Impact aid dollars are used to help school districts make up for a federal presence, such as Native American reservation or military base. Under Banks’ proposal, which is based on a paper written by the conservative Heritage Foundation, part of the funding would instead flow directly to families in the form of Education Savings Accounts or ESAs. These accounts can be used for a range of services, including private school tuition, dual enrollment courses, or tutoring.

“Banks had planned to introduce the bill as an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act, which is up for debate in Congress soon. Supporters, including the Heritage Foundation, say the legislation would expand education options to an important population of students and would help military retention rates.

“But detractors, including the National Association of Federally Impacted Schools, worry that the proposal could divert as much as $450 million from impact aid.

“That would create “unprecedented uncertainty” for federally impacted school, wrote NAFIS in a recent report. “The potential for such a significant funding reduction would severely hinder a school district’s ability to maintain the staff, programs, services, and infrastructure necessary to support military connected students, a vast majority of whom are educated in public school districts.”

Peter Greene says that Bill Bennett’s blast against teachers’ strikes boils down to this: Teachers, Know Your Place!

https://curmudgucation.blogspot.com/2018/05/bill-benett-teachers-know-your-place.html

Bennett and his co-author complained that teachers were hurting the children, and worse, using their perivileged role for “financial gain.” Oh my, they said, as they clutched their pearls!

Greene responded:

“Yes, it’s the old Think of the Children argument, which plays better than the real argument here, which is that teachers should know their roles and shut their holes. This paragraph also captures the belief in really low expectations for school (just teach ’em readin’ and ‘rithmetic). And the special hypocrisy of charter fans arguing that schools should not use children as a way to make money.

“But see– only such confusion would “drive mass school closures and disruptions right in the midst of a critical time in a school year.” One wonders when a better, unimportant time in the school year might come; one also enjoys the irony of choice fans decrying “disruption,” which is usually one of their favorite things. I thought disruption was supposed to be a good way to break moribund institutions out of their terrible rut.”

Peter Greene really takes the Bennett piece apart and shreds it.

Here is a small sample. I suggest you open the link and read it in its entirety.

“First, abrupt school closures interrupt and damage student progress. “Teaching time does matter, and we should be very reluctant to interrupt it.” Boy, that line makes great reading as I sit here in the middle of Pennsylvania’s two-week testing window, during which my classes are suspended and interrupted so that we can give the BS Test. I might also direct Bennett to the problem of charters that close without warning during the year.

“Bennett and Flak try to hit a quotable line here: “When coal miners strike they lay down their equipment. When teachers strike, they lay down their students’ minds.” So, in this analogy, my students have pickaxes for brains? My students are my tools? No, this is not a winner.

“Second, the old “if you want to be treated like a professional, act like it.” Which is a crappy argument, because you know what professionals do? They set a fee for their services, and if you want to hire them, you pay it. My plumber and my mechanic and my doctor and my lawyer do not charge me based on what I feel like paying them– they set their fees, and if I want my pipes fixed, I fork over the money.

“Bennett will add the old “teachers get summers off” argument for good measure. Fine. If you think we should have year-round school, do that. But don’t diss me and my professional brethren because you’re too cheap to pay for a full year’s worth of services. Yes, teachers can use the summer to “pursue their financial goals or other endeavors,” and I’m not sure what your point is. If you want more money, go get a job at the Tastee-Freeze?

“And also (this second point turns out to be several points that seem to add up to “teachers are a bunch of lazy unprofessional money-grubbers anyway”) Bennett wants to play blunt straight-shooter, saying “let’s be honest” and admit these strikes have been about “pursuing financial ends.” Which is unprofessional and unseemly.

“There is a time, place and manner for these fiscal discussion. Strikes during the school year are not it.

“Oh, bullshit. The teachers of Arizona and West Virginia and Oklahoma and Kentucky and Colorado and North Carolina have had all the discussions so very many times in a wide variety of places in every imaginable manner, and for their trouble they have gotten bupkus. Worse than bupkus– they’ve gotten disrespect and abuse and in the meantime they’ve gone back to their moldy classrooms to do their professional best to work in a crumbling environment without enough resources. Bennett doesn’t list the times and places and manners that would be more appropriate because he knows damn well whatever circumstances he describes, those teachers have already tried.

“Third, Bennett argues that some of these strikes have been about misdirected anger or invalid complaints, but teachers just want to “maneuver a sweeter deal.” Yes, those damn scam artists, striking on a lark just to make a buck.

“I give Bennett credit for just one thing– usually when folks start flinging these arguments around they try to cushion them by saying that teachers by themselves are just swell– it’s those damned unions. But no– Bennett and Flak go straight for the classroom teacher jugular.”

The Senate Judiciary Committee is likely to approve the nominations of judges for life-term appointments who refused to say whether they agreed with the decision in Brown v. Board of Education. I saw their testimony on television and was appalled. Democratic senators asked them if they agreed, and they said they could not answer because the matter might come before them on the federal court. This is appalling. They cannot say that they agree that laws that separate children by race are unconstitutional.

As civil rights activist Vanita Gupta writes, This is not a trick question. Both Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch were asked the same question and immediately agreed.

But Trump nominees refused to endorse this landmark of American law.

They are scoundrels. They do not deserve to be appointed judges for life.

They should have been asked whether they endorsed the Confederacy.

The U.S. Education Department’s accreditation advisory committee will discuss the conversion of for-profit colleges to non-profit status at a meeting from May 22-24. The chair of the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity (NACIQI) is Art Keiser, the chancellor and CEO of Keiser University. This Florida-based school converted from for-profit to non-profit status in 2011, which is the subject of the discussion. Some Senate Democrats, led by Senator Elizabeth Warren, have urged that he recuse himself, since he obviously has a conflict of interest. Secretary DeVos will decide whether he does. Or will he have the decency to do it himself? What could possibly be dubious about a college headed by its founder and namesake?

Keiser for many years was the face of for-profit higher education, even chaired the for-profit’s lobbying group in D.C., and now he in charge of regulating the industry? What a bad joke Betsy DeVos has pulled on the nation. Keiser led the way in converting his own namesake institution from for-profit to non-profit, but the Miami Herald reported that it was still lucrative.

Robert Shireman of the Century Foundation developed a very informative and important graphic about the sham of converting colleges from for-profit to non-profit. You should see it. The link is at the end of this post.

In his email to me, he noted the similarities between ostensibly non-profit charters that are actually managed by a for-profit, and “colleges” that convert to non-profit status yet remain for profit in fact.

He makes the following points:

1. The abuses of students and taxpayers have occurred predominantly at for-profit colleges.

2. That’s because removing investors from power positions in schools (being nonprofit) reduces the incentives for exploitative and predatory practices.

3. For-profit colleges want the “nonprofit” label but without properly separating profit from corporate control.

He adds, “These problems keep recurring over history. NACIQI’s leadership is needed to assure that nonprofits, at least, are safe for students and taxpayers.”

But, can NACIQI regulate these institutions, as it is supposed to do, when its chair heads an institution that is an exemplar of the institutions under investigation?

Read the report here.

Today is the 64th anniversary of the Brown v. Board decision of 1954. In many ways, that decision had a profound impact on American life. As an American who grew up in a rigidly segregated era and graduated from public high school in 1956, before the Brown decision was enforced in most of the South, I know how huge a change has occurred in American society. And yet we remain in many respects far too segregated, far too separate and unequal. The promise of Brown has not been realized.

I urge you to read this conversation between John Rogers, professor of education at UCLA, and Sandra Graham, who holds the UCLA chair in Education and Diversity. They remind us of why our society needs to reclaim the value of diversity. We must learn together, work together, and build a better society together.

At the last annual conference of the Network for Public Education in Oakland, esteemed journalist Nicole Hannah-Jones spoke eloquently about the power of integrated education. That is an ideal we must strive for and never abandon.

John Thompson, historian and teacher in Oklahoma City, has written a three-part series about superintendents “trained” by the unaccredited Broad Superintendents Academy, financed by the Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation.

He writes:

After less than two years on the job, another Broad-trained Oklahoma City School System superintendent resigned. I was struck by the many similarities between Aurora Lora’s (Broad class of 2015-16) term as superintendent and those of other Broad-trained reformers. Although I endorsed her efforts to advance gay rights and changing the names of schools named for Confederate generals, and even though she seemed to understand the need for a more holistic approach to schooling, trying to discuss education policy was extremely frustrating. The sincerity of those who disagreed was repeatedly dismissed, making the exchange of policy ideas difficult if not impossible.

In wake of Lora resignation, ‘we must become more civil’

And then came the Oklahoma teacher walkout and the conversations with educators who had similar experiences with Broad graduates. Although we appreciated Tulsa superintendent Deborah Gist’s (class of 2008) support for a teacher pay raise, she presided over a district with ten Broadies in leadership positions. (The hiring of another, from Denver, was announced last week, bringing the total to 11.) Despite the large number of Tulsa’s advantages in comparison to Oklahoma City, it is near the bottom of the nation’s urban schools in increasing student performance. When I hear from Tulsa teachers about the micromanaging imposed by the Broad-dominated administration, it’s hard to believe that their mandates haven’t undermined teaching and learning.

This prompted a survey of secondary sources, and an inventory of how and why other Broad graduates were dismissed or forced to resign. As with Oklahoma educators who finished each other’s sentences when discussing their Broad graduates, reporters across the nation used very similar language in describing the careers of their cities’ Broad superintendents. It was shocking to read how many of them played fast and loose with the facts before and after being hired, ruled their systems in similar ways, and left office in a comparable manner.

It would take a far more detailed study to determine whether Broad superintendents behave the way they do based on the personalities that they brought to the academy, as opposed to determining what it is about the organization that recruits such people and trains them to operate in such similar ways. I assume it is a combination of the two factors – it takes a certain type of mindset to advance in the corporate reform system, and there is something about the Broad world which turns out certain types of leaders.

Or should I say, turns out leadership outputs?

In 2007, the OKCPS hired a graduate of the Broad Superintendents’ Academy, John Q. Porter. The Broad Academy was run like a corporate executive training program, and it emphasized data, choice, and other market-driven policies. Broad superintendent candidates attended long weekend training sessions over a ten-week period. Their curriculum stressed instructional alignment, performance management systems, and leadership. Its management techniques emphasized “prioritizing and pacing work for optimal quality.”

Oklahoma City’s Broad graduate was unquestionably dedicated to the students, and he was a good enough sport to compete in my school’s first “Buffalo Chip Throwing Championship.” (Dressed in a fine business suit, the superintendent finished second, behind me, but unlike the champion buffalo feces thrower, he wore a plastic glove.) The superintendent enjoyed talking with my students, but he never seemed comfortable listening to teenagers when they disagreed with his policies. I never understood how a man, who was so committed to poor children of color, could be so unwilling to listen to the real experts on poor schools – the students whom he sought to help.

In one such meeting, the superintendent acknowledged that his experience had been in a suburban district that had nearly three times as much per student spending, but he said that his former district, Montgomery County, had more low income students than the OKCPS had students. I remained silent as my students tried to explain the difference between one of the nation’s top school systems where only a quarter of students were low income, and our schools where almost everyone was poor and most students were several years behind grade level. I was so proud of my students as they argued that poor kids in neighborhood schools could master the same high-quality material as kids in his old district, but that it would take time. Afterwards, my student leaders were blunt, saying that the superintendent had no idea of what he was rushing into.

At the same time, the principals whom I most admired were clearly intimidated by the new superintendent. Video cameras were installed in schools, not for supervising unsafe areas but as a first step toward monitoring routine activities. No memos, I was warned, should be sent by e-mail anymore. I wondered, perhaps naively, how policy discussions could be conducted without e-mail. Before long, however, it became clear that expressing dissent was no longer seen as appropriate and memos were no longer welcome.

According to assistant principals at my school, every teacher would now have to “be on the same page” in teaching at the same rate from the same textbook. My principal knew that I would not abide by that rule. Since I was an award-winning teacher who was then on his way to being selected the runner-up OKCPS Teacher of the Year, I had political leverage to make a deal. In case we had a visitor from the central office, my students would keep their textbooks open to the official page, regardless of whether they looked at it.

The superintendent confirmed to my students and me that he ultimately wanted a system where he could supervise classroom instruction by video throughout the district from his office. In the meantime, compliance was monitored by teams of central office staff. My visit was conducted by the former principal of the district’s nationally-ranked magnet school. This highly-paid professional continuously typed the details of our class’ instruction into his laptop. He obviously enjoyed the lesson, smiling at all of the best parts. When I tried to speak with the administrator, however, it was like we had never known each other. We later met in the hall, and started a real conversation. He complimented my lesson and relationships with students, but another central office administrator approached, and our discussion stopped mid-syllable.

A second post will describe published accounts of Broad superintendents’ behavior that show a very common and destructive pattern of abrasiveness, micromanaging, and playing fast and loose with many facts. Just as important, Broad seems to be doing its best to stop education conversations, mid-syllable, in schools across the nation.

Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg invited the public to offer their ideas, and Bertis Downs took them up on their offer. Bertis is a parent of students in the public schools of Athens, Georgia, where his daughters have thrived.

He starts his letter:

“I hear you guys are looking for feedback from people involved in public education — teachers, school board members, parents, and many others. I write to you as a public school parent.

“Since I spend time in my kids’ schools and other public schools, I talk to teachers, students, other parents, school board members and principals on a fairly regular basis. What I hear consistently is that the education policies of recent years, however good or bad the intentions, are disrupting public education — but not in a way that could be considered positive for anyone who truly wants to improve and transform our nation’s schools.

“Our teachers are at a breaking point. Mandated standardized testing remains out of control, with kids over-tested and teachers spending too much time on test prep. Many teachers are evaluated in a discredited method based on their students’ standardized test scores. Our teachers and schools have been beaten down through a narrative — that they don’t work at all — which you and other rich philanthropists have spent millions of dollars to perpetuate. These and other factors are contributing to a real crisis of morale among our educators…

“What we all need and want is pretty straightforward: schools that are the center of their community headed by strong leaders who foster and encourage a learning environment of mutual support and collaboration. That sounds a lot like the school your kids now attend, have attended, or you want them to attend, doesn’t it? (Yes, I know Mr. Zuckerberg has a very young daughter and two of the Gates children have already graduated from a private high school.)

“So why can’t the policies and politics you support mirror those priorities and practices for all our nation’s schoolchildren? Why have you funded efforts that have taken our schools in a different direction? You surely consider all of America’s kids just as worthy and deserving of good educations as your own kids.

“But what would you think if your kids’ schools pushed the mechanized, de-professionalized vision of “public education” that have come from school reforms and reformers whom you have supported? What if the private Lakeside Preps or Sidwell Friends had inexperienced teachers, large class sizes, excessive high-stakes testing, hiring and firing teachers based on test score results? How would you and other tuition-paying parents like that? Would you feel like you were getting your money’s worth?…

“If policies you have supported are such a good idea, why haven’t they been adopted in the schools either you or other reformers have supported? I think we can figure out the answer to that: those policies are not what will result in a stable, talented, dedicated teaching corps, the kind of teachers any great educational enterprise needs at its core.

“So since you are seeking honest feedback, here’s mine: Why not see now, or in the future, if your own kids want to try your local public schools? Then take the leap of faith so many of us do every morning when we send our children off for their school day at the neighborhood school. I happen to know Seattle and Silicon Valley schools have some great teachers and great schools. There are plenty, and not only the acclaimed teacher Jesse Hagopian at Garfield High School in Seattle. I bet your neighborhood public schools would be plenty good (although the teacher morale might be a bit on the low side these days).

“Your kids, and those of your reformer colleagues, would do just fine and the schools could certainly use the infusion of enthusiasm and social capital you would bring to PTA meetings and school council meetings. I think you would be amazed how much you’d learn and how much your kids would learn — in the classroom and beyond. A teacher I know in Raleigh, North Carolina, does a beautiful job of articulating some of the advantages of a public school experience especially for affluent kids: “Why Affluent Parents Should Demand Diverse Schools for their Children.” Read it if you will. My kids have benefited in some of these same ways as well.

“The really great thing about our public schools is that they are resilient. Despite the beatdown they have been subjected to over the years, despite the drubbing they take in the media and through federal and state policies, most of our public schools do a good job of educating our kids. And this is thanks to the committed and gifted teachers still teaching year after year.

“My own kids have had great teachers in Athens public schools, wonderful extracurricular opportunities, great friends, and bright futures as products of their dynamic and caring school communities. Your children would be okay in public schools too — in fact, I would contend most advantaged kids actually receive a better education as a result of the social fabric of a thriving public school. Cultural diversity is inherent in a typical, regular school setting like the ones my kids attend — and they are better off for that.”

There’s more. Open the link and read Bertis’s sound advice to Bill and Mark.

If they had sent their own children to public schools, they would have a greater appreciation for their strengths and needs. They wouldn’t suggest reinventing them every other day with their latest flash in the night.

Bottom line, Bill and Mark, join us in supporting our public schools. They are the future. Get on the right side of history.

Bertis Downs is a strong advocate for public schools because his children attended them. He is also a member of the board of the Network for Public Education, and I am proud to call him my friend.

Betsy DeVos is opposed to separation of church and state. She thinks that state bans that prohibit the funding of religious schools should be ended. In a speech yesterday in New York City to the Alfred E. Smith Society, which is allied with the Archdiocese of New York, she said that such bans originated in anti-Catholic bigotry and should be eliminated.

DeVos noted that these amendments are still on the books in 37 states. And though she didn’t get into this in her speech, that includes her home state of Michigan. Back in 2000, DeVos helped lead an effort to change the state’s constitution to allow for school vouchers. It failed.

She said that “there’s hope that Blaine amendments won’t be around much longer.” She noted that last year, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional for a state-funded playground restoration program in Columbia, Mo., to exclude a facility on the grounds of a church. (That case is Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia, Mo. v. Comer . More about it here.) School choice advocates are hoping that ruling will prod state lawmakers to re-examine Blaine amendments.

“These amendments should be assigned to the ash heap of history and this ‘last acceptable prejudice’ should be stamped out once and for all,” DeVos said.

But Maggie Garrett, the legislative director at Americans United for the Separation of Church, a nonprofit organization in Washington, has a different take on the state constituional amendments, which she referred to as “no aid” clauses.

“Like with many things, Betsy Devos has her facts wrong,” Garrett said. “It’s a simplistic and inaccurate view of the history. There were many reasons why people support no-aid causes, many of them were legitimate.” And she noted that states continue to support such amendments. Recenty, for instance, Oklahoma tried to strike its clause through a state referendum, but the effort was resoundingly defeated

And she said that DeVos is “overstating” the impact of the Trinity Lutheran decision, which, in Garrett’s view, applied narrowly to playground resurfacing.

Federal Role in School Choice

DeVos also gave a shout-out to states—including , Florida, Illinois, and Pennsylvania—that have created so-called “tax credit scholarship programs,” in which individuals and corporations can get a tax break for donating to scholarship granting organizations.

DeVos worked behind the scenes last year to get a similar, federal program included in a tax overhaul bill, but was ultimately unsuccessful, sources say. Still, school choice advocates haven’t given up on the idea.

In her speech, though, DeVos acknowledged that a new, federal school choice program might be tough to enact, and even undesirable.

“A top-down solution emanating from Washington would only grow government … a new federal office to oversee your private schools and your scholarship organizations. An office staffed with more unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats tasked to make decisions families should be free to make for themselves. Just imagine for a moment how that might impact you under an administration hostile to your faith! ” she said. “So, when it comes to education, no solution—not even ones we like—should be dictated by Washington, D.C.”

She also conceded that Congress isn’t too keen on the idea. “In addition, leaders on both sides of the aisle in Congress—friend and foe alike—have made it abundantly clear that any bill mandating choice to every state would never reach the president’s desk,” DeVos added.

DeVos is right that the Blaine amendments were created at a time of anti-Catholic bigotry, but they have grown popular over time because most Americans do not want their tax dollars used to support religious schools. Whenever Blaine amendments have been taken to the public in state referenda, they are overwhelmingly defeated. As the nation has grown more diverse in religious practice, Americans have repeatedly rejected efforts to subsidize religious schools.

The best protection of religious liberty, as the Founders understood, is to keep it separate from government. When religious institutions take government money, government regulation will in time follow.

In the nearly two dozen state referenda intended to repeal prohibitions on public funding of religious schools, none has passed. The rejections have been overwhelming. In Michigan, when Dick and Betsy DeVos paid for a repeal effort, the public said no by a margin of 69-31%. Betsy learned nothing from that defeat.

In Florida, Jeb Bush and Michelle Rhee campaigned for a “Religious Liberty amendment” to allow public funding of religious schools, and it went down 55-45%. If they had called it a referendum to permit public funding of religious schools, it probably would have gone down by 70-30%.

The only way that voucher supporters get their way is by concealing what they want, calling vouchers by euphemisms. In Florida, the state circumvented the state constitution and the results of referendum by calling their voucher program “Education Savings Accounts” or “Tuition Tax Credits.” Only by lying can they push vouchers. The public said no, and they did it anyway.

The fact is that the American people do not support vouchers–not for Evangelicals, not for Orthodox Jews, not for Muslims, and not for any other religious group.

The issue in New York State is whether the public should pay for Orthodox Jewish schools where children do not learn English, or science, or mathematics, but take instruction in Yiddish.

The public doesn’t want to pay for it.

Let’s see what happens in November in Arizona, where the Koch brothers and the DeVos family are scrambling to persuade the public to pay for vouchers.

In every state, let the issue go to the public. When they did it in Florida, the public said no, and the Bush-DeVos crowd ignored the public. How much longer must be deal with their subterfuge, obstinacy, arrogance, and lies?

North Carolina joined the wave of teacher protests against underfunding.

Read about their protest hereand here (great photo)and here (where teachers cornered the legislator who called them “thugs”).

In the last link from the local paper:

“Rep. Mark Brody spent a lot of time Wednesday explaining that when he wrote “union thugs” were behind the rally that brought thousands of educators to Raleigh, he wasn’t talking about individual teachers.

“It was not intended that way,” he told one group.

“Brody, a Monroe Republican, said he was referring to the National Education Association in his Facebook post.

“Teachers made it a point to find Brody on Wednesday to tell him that they were hurt, shocked or offended when they heard about his comments.

“I’m a grandmother, not a thug,” said Ira Reed. She works for the Charlotte-Mecklenburg arm of the N.C. Association of Educators, retiring from work in local school districts after 39 years.

“Reed defended unions after Brody said his strong opposition to public employee unions were at the root of his “thugs” Facebook post.

“I’ve been schooled a lot in the last couple of hours,” Brody said. “I support the message that you’re bringing. I just don’t support the method.”

“Brody said teachers shouldn’t have had their rally on a school day. At least 42 school districts, including the state’s largest, canceled classes Wednesday.

“During the wide-ranging conversation, Brody agreed with Reed that teacher “pay-for-performance” was wrong. He said also that he wants to eliminate end-of-grade exams, eliminate Common Core standards and return control of school calendars to the local districts.”

Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article211269714.html#storylink=cpy

Tennessee has had three straight years of computer breakdowns and other problems with its testing vendor, Questar. (Questar is also the test provider for New York State, perhaps others.)

The state is so disgusted by Questar’s performance that Governor Haslam said he might switch the contract from Questar to ETS.

That’s a good one! As testing guru Fred Smith informed me, ETS owns Questar.

ETS is not problem free, either. “The changes highlight a possible strategic shift for ETS whose reputation came under fire last year when the nonprofit had to pay $20.7 million dollars in damages and upgrades after multiple testing problems in Texas.”

Would someone in Tennessee please let Governor Haslam and Commissioner McQueen know?

Questar is the for-profit face of nonprofit ETS. Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee.

A distinction without a difference.