Archives for the month of: December, 2018

When word got out on short notice that Phyllis Bush and Donna Roof were getting married, former students of the retired teachers flocked to the courthouse to surround them with love.

That’s the ultimate reward of teaching: the love and respect of your students. It’s no substitute for professional pay. But money can’t buy it.

Politicians don’t get it. Billionaires don’t get it. Hedge fund managers don’t get it.

Teachers get it.

Love. The love of the hundreds and thousands of students whose lives they touched.

http://www.journalgazette.net/news/local/20181219/affection-for-couple-clear-in-no-time

The Network for Public Education Action Fund is delighted to endorse Jackie Goldberg for election to the Los Angeles Unified School District School Board.

Jackie is the ideal candidate to replace convicted felon and charter school founder Ref Rodriguez.

She has experience, knowledge, integrity, and wisdom.

The Network for Public Education Action has endorsed Jackie Goldberg for the District 5 seat on the Los Angeles Unified School District Board of Education.

Jackie has a long history as a public servant with a passionate voice in defense of public education. She previously served on the LAUSD board from 1983 to 1991, and the Los Angeles City Council from 1993-2000. She went on to serve in the California State Assembly from 2000-2006, where she chaired the Assembly Education Committee for several years.

With her decades of experience, Jackie has concluded that “the billionaires have stacked the deck against district public schools.” The 2017 LAUSD school board election was the most expensive in history, with almost $10,000,000 in outside spending coming from pro-charter groups.

By winning this election Jackie hopes to prevent a 4 to 7 majority controlled by the board members elected with pro-charter money.

Jackie has remained active with grassroots activism as a founding member of TEAch (Transparency, Equity, and Accountability for Charters), a group dedicated to increasing public accountability within the charter sector. She has also remained active as a community watchdog of the LAUSD board, delivering powerful public comment at meetings.

Jackie will be up against an avalanche of money in this election. The board and staff of NPE Action urge you to vote for Jackie Goldberg in the primary election on March 5, 2019. It will be up to us to show that people power can triumph over the billionaire’s agenda for LAUSD.

Today, as cities compete to lure multi-billion dollarcorporations woth tax breaks, its time to reflect on the true costs of these tax breaks and incentives.

Seth Sandronsky, a California-based investigative journalist, digs down and finds that public schools pay the bill.

“Public schools are losing. Private interests are winning. Here are the numbers. US public schools lost a total of $1.8 billion due to economic development tax incentives for corporations in 2017, according to a new report from Good Jobs First, a watchdog group in Washington, D.C. (goodjobsfirst.org/newmath).

“In this case, the term economic development conceals more than it reveals. At the end of the day, who wins and who loses when governments shift public tax dollars to corporate pockets comes into sharper focus with Good Jobs First unpacking the financial reports of 5,600 of America’s 13,500 independent public school districts across 28 states.

“Did somebody say the miracle of the marketplace? Well, government hands are all over this story, contrary to nonsense about the efficiency of market forces. The recent announcement of Amazon receiving billions of public tax dollars for its “HQ2” is a case in point.”

For some reason, Texas is now being besieged by charter operators, who see good pickings there and who want to act fast before another blue wave washes away the supporters of school choice, as the November blue wave washed away supporters of vouchers. The Texas legislature cut deeply into school funding after the 2008 recession and never restored what it cut. The legislature just doesn’t seem to care about funding public school, only charter and (someday) vouchers, even though 90% of the state’s children are in public schools. Someone should ask the Legislature about what they have in mind for the generation now in school. Do they want them to be productive citizens? Do they want them to be creators, innovators, doctors, scientists, artists, and engineers? Or do they expect those millions of children to be unskilled laborers?

Lorena Garcia is a superintendent in a small district in the Rio Grande Valley. She tells it like it is. She has the courage to stand up to the charter billionaires.

Lorena Garcia, assistant superintendent for human resources and support services at Mission CISD, sparked a lively debate over the level of support state lawmakers are providing charter schools.

Garcia brought up the subject of charters in a Q&A about public school finance at a luncheon held at the Cimarron Club in Mission.

“There does not seem to be much support for public education by the legislature. In addition to that there is a lot of talk about support for vouchers and private schools,” Garcia said, after hearing a presentation on public school finance.

“The accountability that these charter entities have is a lot lower than the high standards that public schools have to achieve. So, that is going to cut into that pie of funding that is available to public schools.”

Chandra Kring Villanueva, program director for economic opportunity at the Center for Public Policy Priorities, was one of the speakers at the luncheon. She welcomed Garcia’s comments.

“Charter schools and how they are funded is a huge concern for us because it really is inefficient to be running two parallel education systems,” Villanueva said.

“One of the things that we are seeing is that the growth in recaptured funding is almost the exact amount as we are spending for the charter system. So, a lot of us education advocates are really monitoring how the things are trending together. Recapture and charter are tied in a lot of different ways.”

Recaptured money is funding that a public school returns to the State of Texas. Those that have to do this, as part of the so-called Robin Hood equalized funding system, are deemed property-rich.

“Recapture is based on your wealth per student. So, if you are losing students to a charter school, it makes your wealth per student grow. That is one of the only reasons why Houston ISD fell into recapture. Because of their extremely high charter population. If those charter students were actually enrolled in Houston ISD, they would have gotten twice as much money from the state as their recapture payment was,” Villanueva said.

“So, there is a lot of concern that the legislature is basically using recapture to fuel the growth of charter schools without having to put any more dollars into it. Which in essence means our property tax dollars are going to these charter schools.”

Villanueva made the case that, in essence, local property tax dollars are going to charter schools. However, she said, local taxpayers are unable to vote for a charter’s board of directors, have no say on where they are located, nor when and where they build their campuses.

“So, there are some huge concerns around how charters are funded and the impact on schools.”

Villanueva claimed that when charters are taken out of the equation, the level of state funding for public education drops from 38 percent to 32 percent, noting that charter schools are 100 percent state-funded.

The for-profit college chain Education Corporation of America is closing down. This is the kind of college that Betsy DeVos adores, wants to deregulate, and hopes will grow. But this one is a goner, leaving students with lots of debt and no education.

“The Education Corporation of America, one of the largest for-profit college chains, announced last week it was immediately closing more than 70 campuses in 21 states. Between fifteen and twenty thousand students are now in the unenviable position of being thousands of dollars in debt with no completed degrees or certifications and, reportedly, little prospect of being able to transfer their academic credits to different schools.

“NBC reports that in some instances, students were told in the middle of class — some of them while in the middle of their certification exams — that their school no longer exists. Their student debt, however, sure does.”

I read this story with a growing sense of disgust. A businessman in Oklahoma opened a charter school in a small town to focus on career readiness and job training, functions already offered by the local public school.

This man, with no experience in education, lured 29 students to share his vision and abandon the community public school. He did so over the objections of the local school district.

Within the walls of the Academy of Seminole, eight rented rooms in a community college library, it can be hard to see why the little school has kicked up so much dust in this former oil boomtown, population 7,300. On a recent Friday, businessman and school founder Paul Campbell addressed the students, just 29 freshmen and sophomores, to tell them what it’s like to run a business.
What he dislikes? Making small talk at political events and “firing people.” What he enjoys? “I love doing something that no one thinks can be done. That’s why we’re sitting in this school.”

Campbell said the “thesis” of the school is that “on day one of your ninth grade, literally hour one … we start talking about what you want to do with your life.” Speakers have included a health care CEO, professional dancers and a speech pathologist. Academy students mapped out various careers they might pursue, and spent their first semester doing a research project on their chosen path. That focus on jobs is a direction in which more schools are headed, amid rising concern that young people are graduating unprepared for the workforce, especially in rural towns like this one. Last year Oklahoma joined a growing list of states requiring students to develop a career plan in order to graduate. And, in a sense, Campbell’s can-do, pro-business attitude fits in with the ethos of this working class, Trump-supporting town.

But while Campbell may dislike politicking, he’s had to do a lot of it to get his school off the ground and keep it going in the face of a chorus of concern from local residents. That’s because the Academy of Seminole is a rural charter school; its establishment is part of a small movement to bring this taxpayer-funded version of school choice to more remote corners of the country.

How much money will the local district lose to this charter?Will the public school lose a teacher or two? Will class sizes increase?

Oklahoma was singled out by the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities as the state where general per-student funding had fallen more than any other state—by 28.2% from 2008-2018.

Because of low funding, many districts in Oklahoma offer only four days a week of school.

And we are supposed to be impressed that some egotistical businessman in Seminole, Oklahoma, has opened a charter school for 29 students?

Mike Petrilli, writing from the comfort of his think-tank perch in D.C., is delighted about the opening of a charter in a town of less than 8,000 people, where the school budget is tight. “More power to him,” says Mike.

But others say residents are right to worry about the sprouting of charters in their hometowns. Schools often play an integral role in the life of a small community, offering a central meeting place, social services and additional support. If a charter grew popular enough to draw hundreds of kids and capture those students’ share of funding allocated by the state, it could erode not just schools but the fabric of communities. Bryan Mann, an assistant professor at the University of Alabama’s college of education, has studied charter schools in Pennsylvania and noted that, while the research on rural charters is still new, these schools could pose a threat to public education.

“Choice is great, but if having choice is undermining the dominant choice that the majority of families rely on and have relied on for decades or longer, then what good ultimately is that doing?” he said.

The original proposal envisioned that the school would open with 60 students and grow to 500. It opened with 32 and three dropped out. The owner plans to expand to become a Pre-K-12 school. Imagine those three- and four-year-olds, planning their futures as workers!

The funding for the charter school comes from the districts that lost students.

But guess who else paid to open a rural school with 29 students? We did.

The academy has had to make a number of changes since Campbell first pitched his idea. Not only has the school’s approach to career preparation been refined, but Campbell decided to forego the services of the charter operator, whose use was core to his application, instead relying on Hawthorne, the head of school, in part to save costs. While the charter received $600,000 in federal start-up money and $325,000 from the Walton Family Foundation, the school’s viability will depend on additional fundraising.

Betsy DeVos supplied $600,000 in federal funds to create this job-training institution to suck money out of underfunded public schools.

Here’s a reform that would make charter schools viable: no charter should be authorized over the objections of the local school board.

Last spring, teachers in Kentucky massed in the state Capitol to protest Governor Matt Bevin’s proposed changes to their pensions and future pensions. Despite their protests, pension reform was added to a sewer bill in the middle of the night and passed. That bill was declared unconstitutional by Kentucky courts.

Governor Bevin called s special session to try again, and once again teachers turned out against the bill, which looked a lot like the one that was overruled.

The special session just ended in failure, no bill.

https://lex18.com/news/covering-kentucky/2018/12/18/kentucky-house-republicans-abandon-special-session-without-pension-bill/

“Several critics of the pension plans immediately hailed the decision to end the special session.

“The governor’s attempt in the week before Christmas to cut the promised retirement of every teacher, police officer, firefighter, social worker, EMS and countless more public servants was wrong and cruel,” Kentucky Attorney General Andy Beshear, a Democrat who is running for governor in 2019, said in a statement. “Tonight, our values prevailed and partisanship took a backseat to what is right.”

“Kentucky Education Association President Stephanie Winkler also weighed in.

“Real and effective solutions to our pension systems will not be solved by political games and chaos. … It’s our hope that a unanimous rebuke by the state Supreme Court last week and an admonishment by legislators tonight will finally make that clear to the governor,” she said in a statement.

“House Minority Leader Rocky Adkins, like Beshear a Democratic candidate for governor in 2019, described the actions of his Republican counterparts as unprecedented.”

After the massacre of 17 students at the Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, last February, the Trump administration created a commission headed by Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos to come up with recommendations to make schools safe.

The report was released today and landed with a great thud.

Some of its proposals were already in place. Contrary to Trump’s demand, it did not recommend arming teachers. It did not call for age limits on access to guns. It recommended mental health measures but did not propose funding for what it thought necessary.

Politico summarized the report here.

The DeVos Commission said nothing about gun control. Its most consequential proposal was to rollback Obama discipline guidelines that instructed schools not to hand out punishments to black students that were disproportionate to those given to white students. This is a bizarre recommendation, since the shooter at Parkman had been expelled and was white. No connection between the crime and the “remedy.”

Randi Weingarten issued a comprehensive critique of this toothless report:

“The Federal Commission on School Safety took a horrendous year of school shooting tragedies and produced a report with a smorgasbord of recommendations—some of which we have championed for years—aimed at making our schools safer. Unfortunately, the report doesn’t address the root causes of the gun violence epidemic: too many guns in our communities and not enough investment in addressing the social-emotional health of our kids. And, sadly, the Trump administration has no coherent plan to address this crisis.

“While the report proposes some worthy strategies already recommended by students, teachers and school staff—including support for school counselors, cyberbullying prevention, extreme-risk protection orders, the troops-to-teachers program, and active shooter training—it does not contain a single proposal for new funding for these initiatives.

“What’s more, the commission appears to punt on the question of arming teachers, rather than taking a strong stance against it, even though parents, students and teachers agree: Putting more guns in schools only risks making schools less safe. But Betsy DeVos continually advocates for this lunacy. The report doesn’t recommend age restrictions on firearms and appears more concerned with the National Rifle Association and the school security industry than with the needs of the people in classrooms.

“But most curious and disappointing is the report’s use of the tragedy at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School to push an anti-civil rights agenda that won’t keep schools safe. The report suggests rolling back Obama-era school discipline guidance that was intended to help prevent the disproportionate suspension and expulsion of students of color, students with disabilities and LGBTQ youth—under the guise of making schools safer. The shooter at Stoneman Douglas had in fact been expelled and reported to law enforcement; rescinding discipline guidance and kicking kids out of school doesn’t prevent school shootings.

“Today, the commission and the Trump administration missed an opportunity to bring the country together. Parents, students and educators want schools to be safe. That requires fair discipline policies, but also a real investment in meaningful mental health supports and other key recommendations in the report, plus the advancement of commonsense gun safety reforms to help curb the gun violence epidemic in our country.”

In case you have been confused by Rudy Guiliani’s fast talk, here is a graphic explanation by Tom Toles in the Washington Post.

There has always been a problem with using the word “Reformer” to describe those who wanted to impose privatization on public education and strangle the public schools with high-stakes testing and mandates up the kazoo while deregulating the privately managed schools.

Now there is a small but growing number of former reformers who say they are not “reformers.” Robin Lake was one (she ran the Center for Reinventing Public Education for many years). Then along comes Chris Cerf.

Peter Greene analyzes Cerf’s discomfort with the language, mainly because for some reason, the word “reform” now is in bad repute. Whose fault was that? Maybe too many people began to understand that “reform” meant closing public schools and replacing them with unaccountable privately managed charter schools.

Cerf continues to believe all the reformer ideas were swell–charter schools, high-stakes testing, etc.–but misunderstood.

Greene writes:

Look, lots of ed reform figures have taken a moment to examine their choices and programs. Some, like Rick Hess, have pressed for uncomfortable truths all along, and some are just showing up at the party. But if reformsters like Perf think the solution is to insist that their ideas were awesome and they were just thwarted by a vast conspiracy of naughty public ed fans, they are going to stay stuck right where they are, the reformy equivalent of that fifty-year-old paunchy guy on the porch who is still telling anyone who will listen how he should have won that big football game in high school.

You guys screwed up. In some big ways, and some small ways. In avoidable ways, and in ways that are baked into your ideas. In lots of ways related to your amateur status coupled with your unwillingness to listen to trained professionals. You can face all of that, or you can just keep stamping your feet.

I recommend the former. Look, in public ed we confront our failures all the time, often in real time as we watch a lesson plan crash and burn right in front of us. Being able to face failure is a basic survival technique in the classroom. I recommend that Cerf and those like him try it out, because this kind of whiny self-justification with a touch of moral one-upmanship is not abroad look on anyone. I offer this advice in the spirit of the season because, really, if they ignore it, they will only disappear from view that much faster, which would not be the worst thing for those of us who support public ed.