Archives for the month of: January, 2019

Gary Rubinstein raises an interesting question: where are the kids who were “saved” by ed reform?

Where are the kids who graduated from Urban Prep in Chicago, the ones that Arne Duncan claimed to “save”?

Where are the kids featured in “Waiting for ‘Superman’”? Remember, they were “saved” from their public schools and a Catholic school by miraculous charter schools.

Then there was the boy saved by a TFA teacher who taught him rugby, which got the boy into college and the teacher on Forbes’ 30 Under 30 list. Apparently, the boy is homeless now.

How long do the “saved” children stay saved?

He asks for your help:

“You’d think that Davis Guggenheim, the director of ‘Waiting For Superman’ would keep in touch with his subjects — see if they graduated high school — see how they’re doing.

“My own private detective skills led me to find one of them, Daisy Esparza, on Twitter. I tried to contact her, but didn’t get a response. The other three, I wasn’t able to find anything. Maybe they are on Instagram. If anyone knows anything — six degrees of separation and all that — leave a comment.”

John Merrow deplores the willingness of billionaire Reed Hastings to pull one of its programs at the request of the Saudi government.

Merrow warns that Hastings is setting a dangerous precedent, where any government can demand censorship of any program that offends its laws or sensibilities. And Netflix will cave.

Merrow goes on to tell interesting insider stories about how Davis Guggenheim basically tried to appropriate Merrow’s footage of Michelle Rhee firing a principal on air to use in his propaganda film “Waiting for ‘Superman.'” Merrow expected to receive a reasonable payment for his work, and Guggenheim, with Hastings’ support, basically told him to take a walk or get lost or something. Eventually, Merrow’s production team did get paid, but he realized what unprincipled people he was dealing with. He wondered whether Guggenheim would edit his slick propaganda film which painted Rhee as a goddess of school reform, to acknowledge the cheating scandal that happened on her watch. Of course not!

Legislator Joe McNamara called for statewide adoption of the Common Core.

http://www.golocalprov.com/live/rep-joe-mcnamara-absenteeism-standards-live

Hello, Rip Van Winkle!

Rhode Island won Race to the Top funding eight years years ago and agreed to adopt the Common Core then.

Did they or didn’t they?

Has the CC been forgotten so soon? Lost? Strayed?

What is at stake in the looming teachers’ strike in Los Angeles?

This article in Capital & Main provides a good summary.

A teacher walkout would cast the strike as a challenge to the creeping absorption of public schools by charter management organizations.

If Los Angeles’ public school teachers go on strike Monday, they will face off against a school district headed by superintendent Austin Beutner, a multimillionaire investment banker and former L.A. Times publisher with no experience in education policy. Perhaps more important, this strike will play out on an education landscape that has radically changed since 1989, when the United Teachers Los Angeles union last walked out. Foremost has been the national rise of charter schools — which, in California, are tax-supported, nonprofit schools that operate within public school districts, yet with far less oversight and transparency than traditional schools. Only a fraction of charter schools are unionized, a situation preferred by the charters’ most influential supporters, who include some of California’s wealthiest philanthropists.

Read More About the Potential ‘Meta-Strike’

For 21 months negotiations have ground on between UTLA and the second-largest district in the nation. (The Los Angeles Unified School District enrolls 640,000 students.) The more nuts-and-bolts issues on the table include union demands for a 6.5 percent pay raise, a limit to class sizes (that can now hover around 38 pupils per classroom), and a push for more support staff such as nurses and librarians.

Kent Wong, executive director of the University of California, Los Angeles’ Labor Center, notes that UTLA’s demands have moved away from larger raises and toward more funding to alleviate the deep education cuts that have been made over the years.

“It is important to understand the bigger forces at work here,” said Wong, who added that the pro-charter forces have invested millions of dollars to elect a pro-charter majority on the Los Angeles school board to shift resources from public schools to charters.

To be clear, the union is fighting for the survival of public education and against the forces of privatization.

Now is the time for all those involved to decide: Which side are you on? The plutocrats or the working teachers and other educators in public schools?

Which side are YOU on?

Here are the new members of the board of NPE Action. This is the board that endorses candidates in political races and engages in educational activity to heighten awareness of the importance of protecting and improving public education for all our children.

Please welcome Sue Legg, Dountonia Batts, and Dan Greenberg!

They are a remarkable threesome, with deep experience in Florida, Indiana, and Ohio.

You can help our work by donating now–any amount, from $1 to $1 million (you could be the first person ever to make a seven-figure donation to NPE Action!).

We are not the plaything of the plutocrats.

We are educators, parents, students, and other citizens fighting against privatization and in favor of great public schools for all!

Leonie Haimson knows the research on class size, and she explains here why Los Angeles teachers are right to strike for smaller classes. The higher the needs of the students, the more they need smaller classes. Yet in our society, only the very wealthiest students attend schools where class sizes may be as low as 12 or 15.

She writes:

Though some people make the claim that class size doesn’t really matter for a great teacher, it does. Research conclusively shows that small classes benefit all students, but especially disadvantaged students of color, who reap twice the benefit from small classes.

In the Hill newspaper, former U.S. education secretary Arne Duncan, who worked under former president Barack Obama, wrote an op-ed in opposition to the strike and in defense of the district’s position in which he made several questionable claims. The first was to support the district’s statement that LAUSD has smaller average classes than any other large California district but San Francisco. He wrote:

“On class size, Los Angeles Unified has an average of 26 students per class. Of the 10 largest school districts in California, only one has a smaller average class size than Los Angeles.”

There is conflicting data on this, but suffice it to say that information on the LAUSD website supports the union’s position that average class sizes are probably far larger than 26 in every grade but K-3, with averages of more than 30 students per class in grades 4 through 8, and more than 40 in high school classes.

She adds:

The argument currently between the union and the district is not about average class sizes but maximum class sizes — and more specifically, whether the district should adhere to any limits on class size at all.

There is a waiver in the current contract that allows the district to ignore any and all class size caps, as long as they claim financial necessity — and the administration has take advantage of this waiver every single year since the great recession in 2009. That year, the district issued massive teacher layoffs, which increased class sizes in nearly every school. Since then, the administration has continued to use this loophole in the contract to unilaterally decide to violate previously agreed-upon contractual caps, despite the fact that the district has experienced budget surpluses for many years in a row.

Haimson is founder of a group called Class Size Matters, and she knows the research better than anyone else I know.

This is one of those common occurrences when teachers know what their students need. And they know it better than the non-educator/equity investor who now is in charge of the Los Angeles schools or the basketball player who used to be Secretary of Education.

Gavin Newsom is moving quickly to establish a reputation as the nation’s most progressive governor. He has pledged medical insurance for all, including undocumented people. He pledged a dramatic expansion of pre-K. And he goes even further in his first budget message.

Gov. Gavin Newsom unveiled a $209-billion budget on Thursday that boosts funding for public schools and healthcare programs and includes significant one-time spending to combat the state’s homeless epidemic and prepare for future natural disasters…

The governor promised to balance his ambitious campaign platform with the need to protect California’s finances in the event of an economic slide. The spending in his proposal reflects that approach. Much of it would not be for ongoing services, a page borrowed from the playbook of his predecessor, Gov. Jerry Brown.

“The message we are advancing here is discipline,” Newsom said.

The plan sent to the Legislature for the fiscal year that begins in July seeks a 4% boost in the state’s general fund spending over current levels. Some increases were expected — the budget is built on a series of mandates that earmark revenues or programs where costs are determined by the number of eligible Californians who enroll. Almost all of the projected $2.3 billion in higher state spending for schools, for example, is driven by California’s constitutional requirement governing education finance.

But other key spending proposals suggest the new Democratic governor views his victory last November as a clear mandate an expansive agenda that will focus first on efforts aimed at young children and poor families.

“At a time where folks seem to be backing away, we’re going to lean in” to fund social services programs, Newsom said.

Newsom’s budget proposes a $1-billion “working families tax credit,” more than double the size of the state’s existing tax break for low-income workers. The budget would noticeably expand eligibility for the tax break to those who earn up to $15 an hour, estimated by the administration to add up to 400,000 additional families.

The governor also will ask lawmakers to increase monthly welfare assistance grants under the state’s CalWORKS program, building on an effort led by lawmakers over the past two years.
Efforts to help ease California’s housing and homelessness crises would also be bolstered under the spending plan, with $500 million to be set aside to help local governments build shelters and add services to help the homeless.

A number of proposals in the new governor’s budget reflect relatively small, targeted infusions of cash. The Newsom administration believes those initiatives will provide a foundation for new or expanded services, many of which would need to be funded over the course of several years.

Some of the phased-in efforts were outlined in the days leading up to Newsom’s inauguration on Monday. The governor will ask lawmakers to spend $1.8 billion, mostly in one-time expenses, to improve early childhood education and encourage more schools to provide full-day kindergarten. He will also ask for early steps toward a sweeping expansion of California’s paid family leave for new parents. And Newsom has embraced calls for a second year of tuition-free community college for any student who wants it, a $40-million proposal that builds on existing law that covers costs for the first year.

The budget also offers details on a promise Newsom made hours after taking the oath of office: full access to Medi-Cal, the state’s low-income healthcare program, for anyone up to age 26 who is in the U.S. illegally. Those who are 19 or younger are already covered and the budget proposal, which would be the first of its kind in the nation, puts the estimated cost for the first year at $260 million, dollars that must come from the state given federal restrictions based on immigration status.

Even without federal funding, the effort has drawn the ire of conservative lawmakers. On Tuesday, U.S. Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) vowed to lead an effort in Washington to block Newsom from expanding healthcare access to more immigrants without legal status. Cassidy tweeted that California shouldn’t use “American citizens’ money” for the effort. Newsom fired back on Twitter that healthcare should be a “basic right.”

The governor is also proposing to help some of the communities devastated by recent wildfires, including a payback of lost property tax revenues when homes were destroyed.

The long list of new ideas is made possible by a continued strong economy, marking the seventh consecutive year in which tax revenue collections are expected to outpace official estimates. It is a remarkable run in a state where deficit-plagued budgets were once commonplace, helping plunge credit ratings and voter approval of lawmakers to historic lows.

Newsom’s budget would add more money to the state’s “rainy day” reserve fund. Voters expanded the fund through a 2014 ballot measure and imposed strict rules on how it can be spent. The governor seeks to sock away up to almost $20 billion in the fund by the end of his four-year term. The balance is projected to hit $15 billion by next summer.

But the more that Newsom and Democratic lawmakers rely on the unrestricted reserves, the higher the stakes for their progressive policy agenda. Analysts have pointed out that if the national economy continues to produce solid results through this summer, it will tie the record — 10 years — for the longest recovery in modern history, double the length of average economic expansions.

Last month, officials reported the state’s unemployment rate remained low at 4.1%, with more than 3 million California jobs created since the beginning of the current economic upswing.

The entire nation’s education system suffers from the arrogance of Bill Gates. Because he is so very very rich, he thinks he knows everything, and when he gets an idea, he imposes on the entire nation.

He has spent billions on his reimagining of American education since 2000, and has nothing to show for it.

He spent over $2 billion on Common Core; he paid for everything, and he even paid off hundreds of millions or more for every education organization the foundation could think of to declare it was the best thing ever.

Peter Greene explains Gates’s latest idea here.

Arizona has celebrated its role in the charter gold rush and is often considered “the wild west” of chartering. The laws are lax, the schools are deregulated, and there is little or no oversight.

A new report by the Grand Canyon Institute says that as many as 100 charter schools in the state are at risk of closing.

The Arizona Republic reports:

Following the abrupt closure of at least three Arizona charter schools over the past year, a new report concludes more than 100 of the state’s charters are in danger of closing because of excessive debt and other financial troubles.

It’s a “near certainty” that more than 50 of the state’s 544 charter schools will close in the near future, according to the report by the Grand Canyon Institute, a self-described centrist think tank.

As a whole, Arizona’s 544 charter schools owe more to creditors than they’re worth as businesses contracted with the state to educate kindergarten to 12th-grade students, the report states. “Like any business, an overleveraged charter is financially vulnerable and could fail if it then suffers an income loss,” the report states.

“You will see a bunch of charters folding suddenly,” said Curt Cardine, the study’s main author and a former charter executive for EdKey Inc., a large Arizona charter chain that had a $7.74 million net deficit as of June 30, 2018.

Here is a link to the Grand Canyon report.

President Franklin Delano Roosevelt delivered his State of the Union address on January 11, 1944.

Seventy-five years ago today.

He included what was then called the “Economic Bill of Rights.”

It’s good to remember a time long ago when we had a national leader with a vision of a just and fair society, a vision that we remain very far from achieving. It’s good to remember a time when we had a national leader who was intelligent and articulate, surrounded by others who cared deeply about social and economic progress. It’s good to remember a time long ago when America meant something other than rampant individualism, greed, me-first, me-only, competition, and gun violence. It’s good to remember when America was motivated by ideals of the common good and the just and decent society. That was the America of my childhood. I miss it. I hope it can be recaptured.

FDR said:

It is our duty now to begin to lay the plans and determine the strategy for the winning of a lasting peace and the establishment of an American standard of living higher than ever before known. We cannot be content, no matter how high that general standard of living may be, if some fraction of our people—whether it be one-third or one-fifth or one-tenth—is ill-fed, ill-clothed, ill-housed, and insecure.

This Republic had its beginning, and grew to its present strength, under the protection of certain inalienable political rights—among them the right of free speech, free press, free worship, trial by jury, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures. They were our rights to life and liberty.

As our nation has grown in size and stature, however—as our industrial economy expanded—these political rights proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness.

We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.”[3] People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.

In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

The right of every family to a decent home;

The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

America’s own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for all our citizens. For unless there is security here at home there cannot be lasting peace in the world.