Archives for the month of: February, 2019
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Valerie Strauss: The Pushback Against Charters Is Getting Stronger

By dianeravitch
February 12, 2019 //
22

 

Valerie Strauss notes on her blog “The Answer Sheet” that charters are losing their luster. With the ascent of Choice Champion Betsy DeVos as Secretary of Education, Democrats are losing interest in charters. 

Almost 90% are non-union, and Democrats are not as keen about charters as they were when Obama was president. DeVos has made clear that her goal is privatization, and charter schools advance her goal. Today, Democrats running for office are backing away from charters.

The number of charters is not growing as it once did.

Most embarrassing are the escalating charter scandals. The public has begun to realize the absurdity of giving out public money without oversight or accountability.

There is most definitely a backlash. The NAACP call for a moratorium was part of the backlash. So was the referendum in Massachusetts in 2016, where voters overwhelmingly rejected an effort to lift the cap on charters.

Part of the backlash stems from the realization that more money for charters means less money for public schools. Another part is the public revulsion against the billionaires behind the charter movement, whether its DeVos or Bill Gates or the Waltons or the Koch brothers.

No matter what lies are spread, most Americans don’t want to abandon their community public schools to entrepreneurs and corporations.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Education Reform, Funding, Privatization

Fred Klonsky: Denver Teachers Strike Over Low Wages, Merit Pay That Forces Teachers to Compete for Money

By dianeravitch
February 11, 2019 //
11

 

We will have more commentary on the Denver teacherss’ strike. Here, Fred Klonsky reminds us of the much-ballyhooed, but ultimately failed merit pay called ProComp, that substituted merit pay for adequate salaries. 

Don’t pay attention to Democratic Senator Michael Bennett, who claims to favor the teachers but was superintendent of the Denver public schools who launched corporate reform and lost many millions in tricky financial deals while he was in charge. He was anti-union when he was superintendent and is a big supporter of VAM.

Categories Colorado, Corporate Reform, Denver, Education Industry, Merit pay, Teacher Pay, Teachers, Unions

Virginia: #Red4Ed Fights a Valiant Uphill Battle

By dianeravitch
February 11, 2019 //
16

 

 

While the state of Virginia is engulfed in a crisis of leadership, friends of public education are pushing to launch  a statewide protest on behalf of public education, reports Rachel Levy. 

After years of underfunding, grassroots activists have begun their campaign, hoping to ignite a movement that leads to equitable movement. The leadership crisis makes the battle for #Red4Ed even harder in what issuer to be an uphill battle.

Levy writes:

“The #Red4Ed movement has kicked off in Virginia: On January 28, as many as 5,000 public school teachers, educators, workers, parents, students, and other stakeholders marched on the Virginia state capitol in Richmond to demand fully funded public schools. The march and rally, organized by Virginia Educators United, a “grassroots campaign” of teachers, staff members, parents and community members, was one of the largest to descend on the state capitol in the last century.

“The well-organized event was supported by strategic use of social media and a user-friendly website. The group’s demands include restoring funding for education to pre-2008 recession levels, increasing teacher pay to national averages, paying education support professionals competitive wages, recruitment and retention of highly qualified teachers and more teachers of color, more funding for school infrastructure costs, and ensuring sufficient numbers of support staff like counselors and social workers….

“There is broad, bipartisan support for public education in Virginia, despite terrible funding. This support is not a sign that Virginia as a whole is getting “bluer.” In fact, support for school privatization is stronger in places like Richmond with more socially liberal but gentrifying, market-friendly forces. The problem is also that in more conservative, traditionally Republican-voting areas, while support for the institution of public education is strong, support for the policies that will make public schools more equitable, integrated, and better funded is not. And in more conservative areas, there is an inherent discomfort with advocacy and activism—I know from my own research that most people seem to understand advocacy to mean being supportive and uncritical of decision-makers.

“At the rally on January 28, David Jeck, superintendent of Fauquier County public schools, stated that, “the localities are not at fault here.” But such a statement lets wealthier communities off the hook. Local districts in Virginia have also made cuts to education, and did not restore pre-recession funding. And local districts in Virginia are hindered by restrictive proffer policies that make it difficult to collect revenues from developers or otherwise leverage sufficient taxes on businesses and non-personal property. Better-heeled parents support their local public schools not by advocating for more funding, but by funneling donations and in-kind donations directly to their school via parent groups and local businesses and foundations.

”At the state level, the structure of the General Assembly itself poses obstacles. Virginia has a part-time “citizen” legislature. And even though in 2017 a record number of women, people of color, and progressives were elected to the House of Delegates, the capacity of citizens, such as those connected with Virginia Educators United, to engage in advocacy is limited. Participants must be available at any time, including during weekends, holidays, early mornings, and late nights when the General Assembly is in session (for forty-five days and ninety days, alternatively). This means that most such advocacy efforts are left to professional lobbyists, organizations, and associations.”

It will take widespread support to get the attention of the legislature to the state’s crisis of funding.

 

 

Categories Accountability, Education Reform, Funding, Privatization, Resistance, Virginia

Fred Smith: More Reasons for Parents in New York to Opt Out Again

By dianeravitch
February 11, 2019 //
33

 

Fred Smith is a testing expert in New York who worked for the NYC Board of Education for many years. He advises the opt out movement.

He writes:

“For five years, 2012 – 2016, Pearson Inc. had a free ride that cost taxpayers $38 million for tests aligned with the Common Core blah blah. Pearson was shielded in completing its run by the State Education Department, which allowed the company to operate without having to provide information about how its exams were functioning. There would be no timely or complete disclosure of data about test materials, such as item statistics, thwarting the opportunity for independent review of their quality; a gag order that prevented teachers from discussing flaws in the exams; top-down engenderment of fear and confusion among parents abetted by compliant superintendents and too many jittery administrators, denying parents information about their right to opt out, effectively keeping most parents marching along blindly to the annual testing beat; and all the while Pearson and NYSED flouting professional standards for educational testing, while most of the academic world watched silently.

“But by 2014 and 2015 a growing opt out movement arose on Long Island and upstate outside of New York City—brilliantly spearheaded by a few indignant parents activists who summoned the courage to say “NO” and drew on a well of leadership skills and organizing ability–the extent to which, perhaps, they did not know they possessed. And 20% of the children targeted for the tests sat them out. Evidence finally obtained from the state and the city revealed that the opposition the exams was fully justified. I urge readers of this influential tide-turning blog to Google a series of reports (“Tests Are Turning Our Kids Into Zeroes”) posted by the Benjamin Center for Public Policy Initiatives at SUNY, New Paltz.

“So where does that leave us? I would hope that parents and other interested parties draw upon our experience with Pearson. A two-stage plan of action is needed as Questar (Pearson’s successor) is about to enter the third year of its five-year, $44 million agreement with SED this April. Before this occurs, a reasonable demand by parents and advocates would be for immediate information about how Questar’s exams worked in 2017 and 2018. To date, such information has not been forthcoming. Lack of transparency and lack of accountability must no longer be accepted as SOP. Stage 2 would follow: If, in two weeks, we don’t get information that we know is already in hand, that should help drive home the message that opting out in April is a rational alternative and a direct way for the voice of parents to be heard. I believe that pushing back against the tests could unify grass roots groups throughout the city on a number of issues that focus the well-being of all children.”

Categories Education Industry, Education Reform, New York, Opt Out, Parent Groups, Students, Testing

Jesse Hagopian: What the Los Angeles Teachers Won

By dianeravitch
February 11, 2019 //
1

 

Jesse Hagopian, a teacher activist in Seattle, immersed himself in the UTLA Strike in Los Angeles to learn what teachers won. He interviewed Gillian Russom, a history teacher at Roosevelt High School and member of the United Teachers of Los Angeles Board of Directors, about how the strike was organized, the significant gains it made for students, and implications for the ongoing uprising of teachers around the country..

This is what he learned.  

The key lesson is that the model was the zchicago strike of 2012. Even though Karen Lewis stepped down due to her health issues, she and her vision continues to inspire teachers.

There’s been a long history around the country of progressive caucuses fighting for unions to be more active, and to have a broader vision and a broader set of alliances in our struggles. The Chicago 2012 strike and the work of CORE—Caucus of Rank and File Educators—leading up to that strike really helped to educate so many of us around the country and clarified our direction. I’ve been a teacher and union activist in Los Angeles for eighteen years and I studied what worked in Chicago and joined together with others to help bring those lessons here to LA.

In 2013, we pushed for a referendum within our union calling for a campaign for the “Schools LA Students Deserve.” This was modeled off of the Chicago teachers who based their strike around their own “schools our students deserve,” aiming to draw in parents, students, and the community.

Our agenda for union transformation basically came down to transforming the union from a top-down service model to an organizing model. We were crafting our agenda of union demands in conversation with community allies so that it would be an agenda that would draw the active participation of people beyond our own union membership. Up until 2014, we still had a model of one union rep for every school, including massive high schools of like 100 teachers.

 

 

Categories Chicago, Los Angeles, Resistance, Teachers, Unions

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: Is It Easy to be a Bad Guy?

By dianeravitch
February 11, 2019 //
61

 

 This is a short and fascinating video clip in which Congressman Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez questions a panel of lobbyists about the ethics rules that govern members of Congress and that make it legal to accept donations from industry, own stock in those industries, and get very rich.

Categories Education Reform, Ethics

Denver: Teachers Likely to Strike Due to Low Pay

By dianeravitch
February 11, 2019 //
20

Denver teachers are likely to go out on strike, CNN reports, due to absurdly low salaries. 

They can’t afford to live in the city where they teach.

A city and state that refuses to pay a decent middle-class wage to its teachers doesn’t care about its children or its future.

Of course, Denver is the city that Corporate Reformers admire because it has adopted the “portfolio model” of charters intermingled with public schools, instead of paying its teachers appropriately.

CNN reports:

For 14 months, teachers in Denver have been negotiating with Denver Public Schools for more pay. On Saturday, the Denver Classroom Teachers Association said talks had broken off and they’ll walk on Monday.

Yes, it’s about money, many have told CNN. But it’s also about the uncertainty of living paycheck to paycheck. It’s about the necessity of taking on a second or third job. It’s about the untenability of carrying on this way much longer.
Katie McOwen has had to make some tough decisions when it comes to money.
At the end of this month, she’s giving up her one-bedroom apartment and will move into a friend’s basement. The move sacrifices some of her independence, but it affords her some wiggle room with her finances.
The sixth-grade math teacher at Place Bridge Academy in Denver said she makes about $50,000 per year. After paying $1,050 in rent, plus student loan payments, bills and other expenses, there’s not much left over. She also nannies during the summers to supplement income.
“I really am living paycheck to paycheck right now,” McOwen said. “If my car broke down or anything, I would be really hurting.”
McOwen is lucky that she doesn’t have to make car payments. She drives a 2000 Honda Accord, which just hit 310,000 miles. It works now, but she worries about the future.
“I know if something really happens, I will be in big, big trouble,” she said.
Why? Because she wouldn’t be able to go to work.
The 35-year-old is originally from West Virginia, the state that launched a teacher strike and inspired similar movements across the United States last year. Her mother and sisters, who also live in Denver, have talked about moving back east, or somewhere near there, to find a more affordable life.
“My option was to either move there or I’ve been contemplating moving into a camper van,” she said with a laugh. “I knew something was going to have to change. It was either to move completely out of Denver or to bunk with my friend.”

 

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Denver, Education Industry, Portfolio District, Privatization, Teacher Pay, Teachers

A Parent in California: What’s Wrong with Charter Schools?

By dianeravitch
February 10, 2019 //
12

In this post, a parent activist in Northern California succinctly described the case against charter schools.


Charter schools take resources away from the public schools, harming public schools and their students. All charter schools do this – whether they’re opportunistic and for-profit or presenting themselves as public, progressive and enlightened.

Charter schools are free to pick and choose and exclude or kick out any student they want. They’re not supposed to, but in real life there’s no enforcement. Many impose demanding application processes, or use mandatory “intake counseling,” or require work hours or financial donations from families – so that only the children of motivated, supportive, compliant families get in. Charter schools publicly deny this, but within many charter schools, the selectivity is well known and viewed as a benefit. Admittedly, families in those schools like that feature – with the more challenging students kept out of the charter – but it’s not fair or honest, and it harms public schools and their students.

Charter schools are often forced into school districts against the districts’ will. School boards’ ability to reject a charter application is limited by law; and if a school board rejects a charter application, the applicant can appeal to the county board of education and the California state board of education. Then the school district winds up with a charter forced upon it, taking resources from the existing public schools. Often this means the district must close a public school.

Anyone can apply to open and operate a charter school, and get public funding for it. The process is designed to work in their favor. They don’t have to have to be educators or show that they’re competent or honest. They may be well-meaning but unqualified and incompetent, or they may be crooks. Imagine allowing this with police stations, fire stations, public bus systems or parks.

Part of a school district’s job is to provide the right number of schools to serve the number of students in the district. When charter schools are forced into the district, that often requires existing public schools to close. Again, that harms the district and its students.

California law (Prop. 39) requires school districts to provide space for charter schools, even if the district didn’t want the charter. Charter schools are often forced into existing public schools (this is called co-location), taking space and amenities away from their students and creating conflict. This is a contentious issue in other states too.

Charter schools can be opened by almost anyone and get little oversight, so they’re ripe for corruption, looting, nepotism, fraud and self-dealing. Corruption happens in public school districts too, but charter schools offer an extra tempting opportunity for crooks, and the history of charters in California and nationwide shows that wrongdoers often grab that opportunity.

Charter schools, backed by billionaire-funded pro-privatization support and PR machinery, have positioned themselves as an enemy to school districts, public schools and teachers, sending their damaging message to politicians and the media. These charter backers pour millions into electing charter-friendly candidates. Tearing down our public school system and our teachers, as the charter sector does endlessly, harms our public schools and their students.

The charter sector tends to sort itself into two kinds of schools. Charter schools serving low-income students of color often impose military-style discipline and rigid rules – hands folded on the desk, eyes tracking the speaker, punishment for tiny dress code violations, a focus on public humiliation. By contrast, some charter schools serving children of privilege are designed to isolate the school from a district so that lower-income kids aren’t assigned to the school. Charter schools overall have been found to increase school segregation.

Charter schools overall serve far fewer children with disabilities and English-language learners than public schools. Even those designed to serve children with disabilities serve far fewer children with the types of disabilities that are most challenging and expensive to work with, such as children with severe autism or who are severely emotionally disturbed.

Despite the many advantages charter schools enjoy, they don’t do any better overall than public schools. The rallying cry for charter schools used to be that the “competition” would improve public schools, but that hasn’t happened. In charter schools’ more than 20 years of existence, they haven’t overall brought better education to impoverished communities.

*Note: This commentary applies to California charter schools and California charter laws. Many of the issues apply to charter schools in most or all other states where they exist.

Categories Accountability, California, Charter Schools, Education Industry, Privatization

Angie Sullivan: “Reform” in Nevada is Teacher-Hatred

By dianeravitch
February 10, 2019 //
11

Angie Sullivan manages to write a regular eloquent letter to every legislator in Nevada.

She teaches young children in a high-poverty school in Las Vegas.

Here is her latest:

 

I think the Nevada State School Board is moving in the wrong direction and causing a lot of issues in CCSD.  
My priority would NOT be reform.  
Reform is code for:   HATE THE TEACHER. 
It does not work and it makes us mad.  
Reform is  “teacher hate”  bought by millionaire and billionaire eduphilantrophists.   It is also known as union busting.  We do not need another well-funded group that hates the people in the classroom.  You have abused us for a couple of decades and nearly ruined your school system.  Enough. 
 
Reform has a bad taint across the nation because it is associated with disruption and destruction.  Nothing of value replaced the chaos.  It is not enough to starve and destroy – you still have 320,000 students.  Most districts are abandoning failed reform systems which were expensive and not research based in the first place. 
Reform is a disguised attack teacher working conditions and due process.  The assumption being teachers caused the issue –  when the administration was failing.  Wrong target.  Hit the right place next time. 
Business management is not education leadership. 
Leadership creates synergy and productivity.  Management makes everyone scared and sad. 
Reform means mandates, demands, and crushing job tasks for teachers.  Regressively taxing teacher time and money.  Driving thousands from their education careers by using excessive burdens.  
Leadership should include folks with actual public school experience.   Someone who has studied education preferable.  This seems logical but we have not had someone like that – for awhile.  And it shows.  
Reform means leaders with a background in communications are paid well to attack teachers in the media.  If you ask reformers for their background – it is not often education.  It is usually sales.  Or marketing. 
Those who are associated with reform – are usually not educators, lead from the top instead of gaining labor buy-in, and misuse the funds.  
Reform means expensive computer programs but less staff to care for children.   Computer software is not capable of replacing a human being.  
We do not need to buy anymore $500 million systems.  A corporation should not be allowed to control the district.  
Reform means money changes hands in dirtydowntown and numbers are dark to keep it covered. 
We do not need more testing. Testing is not instruction.  Testing is not learning.  
Reform means authentic care and learning are ignored while schools focus all resources on testing.  Kids are more than a score.  
We do not need to attack Vegas neighborhood schools. 
Reform means takeover and turnaround for public schools in minority at-risk Vegas instead of actually addressing the real failing schools (Rural and Charters – both are predominantly white).  Brown folks are easier to attack.  Enough with the racism.  
We do not need or privatize or sell our schools to for-profit corporations.  
Reform means $350 million in Nevada Charters creating the worst performing, non-graduating, for-profit corporate, and bankrupt system in the state.  
We do not need any more consultants.
Reform means young folks imported from Tennessee, Chicago, Oakland to preach to old grizzled teaching veterans.  A nice suit does not mean you know a thing.   And they open their mouths and it is confirmed – nothing.  I am sure they are paid well.  
We do not anymore reformers.   They just do not know what they are doing.  We tried it their way for a couple of decades and millions of kids suffered.  
How about some good old education leadership?  
 
Clean the house of corruption.  Void bad deals.  Cancel bad contracts.   Review leases.  
 
Shut down the charters.  
 
Get the finances in order.  
 
And hire a fully prepared, skilled and dedicated teacher for every classroom – who is then retained by good working conditions.   Supplies.  Reasonable class size.  
 
Teaching needs to happen.  Not junk science bought by someone on a ship while drunk.  
It’s not exciting.   It works.  
The Teacher,
Angie. 
PS.  Nevada State Board Memers should not  be given $10 million contracts.  We should make a law that puts folks in jail for that.   But would we have a board left?  
Categories Accountability, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Education Reform, Privatization, Teachers

Henry Levin: Want Lower Test Scores and More Segregation? Try School Choice!

By dianeravitch
February 10, 2019 //
6

In this article, published in 2017, Economist Henry Levin explains the international failure of school choice.

The main effect of school choice is to privilege the advantaged and harm the have-nots.

Categories Inequality, Injustice, International, School Choice, Segregation
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »