Archives for the month of: May, 2019

i know we should ignore Trump but it’s hard to do that when one day he threatens to send 100,000 troops to Iran, and the next day he says he’s not. He honors the fascist leader of Hungary, Viktor Orbán, and claims he’s widely respected for what he’s accomplished, like stifling a free press and attacking Hungary’s nascent democratic institutions while attacking immigrants, Muslims, and crushing dissent. According to the Washington Post, the U.S Ambassador to Hungary, a friend of Trump’s, Orbán and Trump are “like twins.”

But about that war thing, read Robert Kuttner and subscribe to The American Prospect.

 

ON TAP Today from the American Prospect
May 17, 2019

Kuttner on TAP

Trump’s Itchy Trigger Finger. Earlier in the week, we were hearing from unnamed administration sources about small patrol boats of the Iranian Navy armed with missiles preparing to attack American warships.

 

Are you kidding? Why in the world would Iran pull such a stunt and bring the U.S. into a war? This Trumped-up provocation has all the credibility of the phony Gulf of Tonkin incident, which Trump is probably too illiterate to know anything about. For that matter, it has all the credibility of George W. Bush’s faked pretext for war with Iraq.

 

But wait, that was in the last news cycle, 48 hours ago—an eternity ago. In today’s news cycle, Trump is walking it all back. He doesn’t want war with Iran after all.

 

This is also reminiscent of Trump’s two-year folie a deux with North Korea’s Kim Jong Un, who went from being Little Rocket Man to being a great statesman and back again without so much as a by-your-leave, and without any change in North Korea’s actual policies.

 

It’s bad enough that Trump is promoting lunatic and contradictory policies on everything else from immigration to infrastructure to tariffs. But on the foreign policy front, his ignorant trifling, short attention span, pirouettes, and double reverses could end with all of us getting blown to bits.

 

And if Trump imagines that he might lose the 2020 election, the risk of an entirely fake national security crisis only grows. But hey, let’s exhale and take it one day at a time. We’ve averted a war for this news cycle. Grateful for small favors. ~ ROBERT KUTTNER

Follow Robert Kuttner on Twitter



In the Approaching Last Act, Netanyahu Is Disgraced—Or Israel Is
Netanyahu’s tragical drama, decades in the making, could now end one of two ways. By GERSHOM GORENBERG
The Man Who Put Public-Employee Unions on the Map
Saturday is the 100th birthday of Jerry Wurf, who turned AFSCME into a powerhouse and a champion of equal rights. By PETER DREIER
A Trumpified Census Won’t Limit Its Undercount to Undocumented Latinos
The citizenship question will lead to undercounting millions of Latino, Asian, and immigrant households, many with legal status—and nowhere more so than in California. By JUDITH LEWIS MERNIT


 

The American Prospect: Liberal Intelligence
Your Tax-Deductible Donation Supports Independent Journalism!

 

Copyright (C) 2019 The American Prospect. All rights reserved.

THE AMERICAN PROSPECT | 1225 I Street NW, Suite 600 | Washington, D.C. 20005 | U.S.A.

If you no longer wish to receive email from us, please unsubscribe.

 

 

The NYC Department of Education wanted to close PS 25 in Brooklyn to make room for a Success Academy charter middle school, but parents and activists fought them in court. Yesterday the Resistance won.

PS 25 will stay open!

PS 25 is a high-poverty, high-performing school.

It has small classes, and Leonie Haimson says it demonstrates the importance of class size. 

Leonie and her small-but-mighty organization Class Size Matters was in the thick of the fight, supporting the. parents of PS 25 against the Powers of the city, the DOE, and Eva.

Leonie writes here on the NYC Parents blog:

Today we won our fight to keep PS 25 open!  DOE had tried to close the school last year, despite the fact that it is an excellent zoned neighborhood school in Bed Stuy that gets stellar results despite a highly disadvantaged student body: 27% kids with special needs, 18 % English language learners, 92% Black and Hispanic, and a 96% economic need index- which combines measures of poverty, public assistance and homelessness. And yet the school performs as well as the citywide average in ELA (46% proficient vs. 46% citywide) and far above the city average in math (71% proficient compared to 47% citywide), according to the DOE’s performance dashboard.

Last year, as I pointed out in my open letter to Chancellor Carranza, published in the Washington Post, the school had the fourth highest rating of any elementary school in the city according to it’s “impact score”, which measures achievement and attendance compared to schools with students of a similar demographic background.  And yet under Carmen Farina, the DOE tried to close the school anyway because of its low enrollment.

At the same time, it was as a result of its low enrollment that PS 25 students had the benefit of very small classes, ranging from 10 to 18 per class – which was one of the main reasons for its success, along with excellent, experienced teachers and a collaborative principal. This year, class sizes at PS 25 are even smaller: 8 to 16 students per class. In essence, the school has served as a natural experiment in class size, showing the heights at which disadvantaged students can achieve if given the right conditions and a real opportunity to learn.

Yet despite the great track record of the school, in February 2018, at the recommendation of then-Chancellor Farina, the Panel for Educational Policy voted 8-5 to close it, with the eight mayoral appointees all rubber-stamping the proposal.  The following month, I helped PS 25 parents file a lawsuit to prevent its closing, with the assistance of Laura Barbieri, our pro bono attorney from Advocates for Justice.

Our primary legal hook was that the Community Education Council in District 16 had never voted to approve closing the school,  which would be required according to NY Ed Law section 2590-E and Chancellor’s regulations A-185, since PS 25 is a zoned school and the district CEC has to pre-approve any changes in zoning.  On May 24, Judge Katherine Levine of the Kings County Supreme Court granted the parents a temporary restraining order, and said the school should stay open for at least year, while she examined the legal issues more closely.

The Judge scheduled another court hearing today, May 16 at 11 AM, nearly a year later.  Right before hand, yesterday afternoon, the city’s attorney called our attorney Laura Barbieri.  She asked Laura to agree to a postponement of the hearing.

Then unexpectedly, the city backed down and agreed to keep the school open for at least another year.

The charter vultures will have to settle somewhere else.

 

Chalkbeat’s Philissa Cramer reports that Betty Rosa, Chancellor of the New York Board of Regents, wrote that it is time to reconsider the Regents exams.  

Students must pass five Regents exams to graduate high school.

New York is one of only 11 states with high school exit exams.

Board of Regents Chancellor Betty Rosa published a column in an online newspaperaccessible to members of the New York State School Boards Association suggesting that the state could one day do away with the graduation tests it has used since the mid-1800’s.

“Regents exams have been the gold standard for over a century – and with good reason,” Rosa wrote in February. “But our systems must be continually reviewed, renewed, and occasionally revised in order to best serve our students and the people of this great state….

The column laid out no timeline for possible changes. (State education officials did not answer additional questions.) Rosa wrote that she would ask the two-year-old Regents Research Work Group, launched to identify ways to diversify New York schools, to study the state’s graduation requirements. Part of the group’s charge, she said, would be to “examine current research and practice to determine … whether state exit exams improve student achievement, graduation rates, and college readiness.”

The research on that point is clear. As Matt Barnum reported in 2016, studies have found that graduation tests do not result in better-prepared graduates and actually harm some students, especially low-income students of color.

For much of their history, the Regents exams were intended for the college-bound. Students who did not take the Regents exams could graduate by taking a competency test of basic skills. In 1996, State Commissioner Richard Mills pushed through the idea that all high school students should be required to pass the Regents exams. He and the Board of Regents assumed that setting the bar higher would raise achievement for all.

Once a mark of distinction, the Regents exams were watered down when they became a universal requirement.

A single standard for all will never be a high standard. The failure rate would be politically intolerable.

 

 

Howard Blume writes in the Los Angeles Times about the new political landscape in education after Jackie Goldberg’s landslide election to the LAUSD school board.

Jackie met with Superintendent Austin Beutner, and both pledged to work for the passage of Measure EE, a tax proposal that would raise $500 million in new revenues for the public schools.

More than anything else, Goldberg is stressing the need for better funding — a point of agreement among many combatants in the education wars, including charter supporters.

We’ve been starving schools,” Goldberg said during an appearance Wednesday at Micheltorena Street Elementary in Silver Lake. “It is a crime that we are not investing in children the way they did when I was a kid….”

Goldberg’s win turned around a losing streak for the teachers union. Until Tuesday’s election, charter school supporters, fueled by wealthy donors, were outspending the unions in L.A. school board contests. And in July 2017, candidates they backed claimed a board majority.

Charters are privately operated, mostly nonunion and compete with district schools for students and the funding that follows them. They enroll close to 1 in 5 district students. It will not be easy to find the way forward on charters, because most rules governing their expansion and oversight are made at the state level.

While the L.A. teachers union has remained a political force, its influence in local board elections was being eclipsed by charters.

With its success Tuesday, the teachers union might be riding something of a national wave, said Julie Marsh, professor at USC’s Rossier School of Education.

“We’re seeing some shifts in the narrative around charter schools,” Marsh said. Charter backers long have pointed to the bipartisan appeal of these schools, but their embrace by President Trump and his polarizing Education secretary, Betsy DeVos, “make it difficult for Democrats to associate with these reforms….”

Goldberg insisted Wednesday — as she has before — that she has no agenda to push Beutner out.

Her presence, however, could circumscribe Beutner’s long-awaited district reorganization. In campaign appearances, Goldberg said she suspected Beutner of secretly crafting a plan that would favor charter school expansion. As evidence, she and others cited the work that consultants for Beutner had done in other districts. She vowed to oppose any such effort.

In recent appearances, Beutner has emphasized that he envisions helping district-run schools operate more efficiently and effectively.

As a candidate, Goldberg had much in common with board member George McKenna, who also had a strong base even without the teachers union. He too allied with the union to win office against a well-funded opponent.

McKenna’s win, in 2014, contributed to the departure of then-Supt. John Deasy because he defeated an opponent who’d strongly supported Deasy.

Goldberg, like McKenna, is no union vassal, although her preferred policies align closely with those of United Teachers Los Angeles. In reality, all seven board members are more nuanced in their beliefs than the stark contrasts represented by their supporters.

 

The Southern Education Foundation posted a very handy analysis of the education budgets of southern states. 

Florida’s budget is a big win for Jeb Bush and Betsy Devos. Governor Ron DeSantis has proposed a small increase in funding for K-12 public schools (about 5%), but the outlay for vouchers will grow by 50% from 2018-2020, and the outlay for charter facilities will triple in the same time period. Spending on colleges, universities, and Historically Black Colleges and Universities is flat.

In Louisiana, Governor John Bel Edwards has flat funded most everything, including vouchers, but has proposed $101 million to give every teacher a pay raise. He is one of only two Democratic governors in the south.

In all of the southern states, the vast majority of students attend public schools from K-12. In states with charters and vouchers, the vast majority of students will be shortchanged so that a small minority can attend charter schools and religious schools. Their “freedom” comes at the cost of equity for all.

Georgia’s Governor Brian Kemp has added nearly $500 million for teacher pay raises. There is also a curious $2.2 million for a “chief turnaround officer.” I wonder how the state will find that magician.

In Mississippi, Governor Phil Bryant has flat funded most everything, but added $25 million for teacher pay raises. I guess he is satisfied with the status quo.

In Alabama, Governor Kay Ivey proposes a 29% increase in funding for Pre-K, a 4% increase in teacher pay, a small increase for higher education and HBCUs, and a small increase (under 10%  for K-12) schools.

Tennessee’s Governor Bill Lee adds new money for charters and vouchers, since privatization is his highest priority. From 2018-2020, K-12 public schools get a small increase; vouchers are introduced with a new allocation of $25,450,000; $71 million is budgeted in 2020 for teacher pay raises; Pre-K is flat funded; higher education gets a small increase; and there is a new appropriation of $30 million for school safety.

In South Carolina, Governor McMaster flat funds K-12 public education and Pre-K; he adds $48.3 million for safety and school resource officers; and introduces $100 million for something I can’t interpret, a “Rural School District Economic Development Closing Fund.” He also includes a $12 million boost for the state’s virtual charter, despite a mountain of evidence that such schools are low-performing and often nothing more than scams.

In North Carolina, the other Southern Democratic governor is Roy Cooper. He proposes to flat fund charters and vouchers. He proposes $216 million for teacher pay raises and a fund of $10 million for retaining and recruiting teachers. Pre-K gets a big boost, and K-12 public schools get a small increase. He also adds new programs of $40 million for wraparound services and $15 million for school safety.

Remember, these are budget proposals and they must be approved by the Legislature in each state.

 

 

 

 

Rucker Johnson, economist and professor of public policy at Berkeley, has written an important new book called Children of the Dream: Why School Integration Works. 

It arrives at an opportune moment, as the Disruption Movement (AKA Reformers, Deformers) has decided that school segregation is a very good thing indeed, because charters are more segregated than public schools. A charter operator in Minnesota recently argued in comments here that segregation was just fine so long as it was voluntary. That was to rationalize the fact that Minneapolis has purposely segregated charters for children who are black, white (“German immersion”), Hmong, Hispanic, and Somali. Most recently, a charter supporter said that it was time to abandon the promise of the Brown decision, because it had not been realized.

In short, embrace the status quo, don’t fight it.

It is thus refreshing to read Rucker Johnson, who briefly summarizes his findings in an article at Valerie Strauss’s “Answer Sheet.”

Do not be content with reading the summary. The book is rich with history and anecdote, as well as Johnson’s meticulous research about the long-term and significant benefits of school integration.

He writes:

How did we get here? How has de facto Jim Crow been nurtured back to health?

Policy amnesia. We have forgotten the efficacy of the boldest suite of education policies this country has ever tried: school desegregation, school funding reform and Head Start.

School desegregation and related policies are commonly misperceived as failed social engineering that shuffled children around for many years, with no real benefit. The truth is that significant efforts to integrate schools occurred only for about 15 years, and peaked in 1988. In this period, we witnessed the greatest racial convergence of achievement gaps, educational attainment, earnings and health status.

Using nationally representative longitudinal data spanning more than four decades, I analyze the life outcomes of cohorts tracked from birth to adulthood across several generations, from the children of Brown to Brown’s grandchildren. The slow and uneven pace of desegregation, school funding reforms, and Head Start programs across the country created a natural “policy lab,” that allowed for rigorous, empirical evaluation of integration, school funding and Head Start.

The research findings are clear: African Americans experienced dramatic improvements in educational attainment, earnings and health status — and this improvement that did not come at the expense of whites.

Sixty-five years after the Brown decision, our nation is at an inflection point. Do we intend to pursue the goal of  equal educational opportunity for all or do we want to cling to the discredited policies of our apartheid past?

Do we listen to those with a vision for progress or to those who embrace a failed and corrosive status quo?

Rucker Johnson explains the way forward. Read his book. Send a copy to your members of Congress.

 

You may hear choice zealots boasting about Jeb Bush’s “Florida Model.” As Tom Ultican explains here, they are delusional or  just making stuff up (to put it politely). 

Ultican relies on Sue Legg’s excellent report and digs down to show that the motivation behind Jeb’s so-called A+ plan was profits and religion, not education.

Jeb Bush and his friends have made Florida into a low-performing mess that can’t attract or retain teachers. But it has become a magnet for profiteers, grifters, and fundamentalists.

Ultican writes:

When the A+ Program was adopted in 1999, Florida had consistently scored among the bottom third of US states on standardized testing. The following two data sets indicate no improvement and Florida now scoring in the bottom fourth…

Last year, 21 percent of Florida’s students were enrolled in private and charter schools. The Florida tax credit scholarships (FTCS) went to 1,700 private schools and were awarded to over 100,000 students. Most of those students are in religious schools. Splitting public funding between three systems – public, charter and private – has insured mediocrity in all three systems.

Privatization Politics and Profiteering

To understand Florida’s education reform, it is important to realize that its father, Jeb Bush, is the most doctrinal conservative in the Bush family. He fought for six years to keep feeding tubes inserted into Terri Schiavo, a woman in a persistently vegetative state. Jeb was the Governor who signed the nation’s first “Stand Your Ground” self-defense law. During his first unsuccessful run for governor in 1994, Bush ‘“declared himself a ‘head-banging conservative’; vowed to ‘club this government into submission’; and warned that ‘we are transforming our society to a collectivist policy.”’

This is a deeply researched and eye-popping post.

Read it to arm yourself against rightwing propaganda.

The Florida Model is an abject failure.

 

Grant Frost writes here about the plans of the new Conservative premier of Alberta to fix the schools by introducing charters and market competition. Grant attended the last NPE conference in Indianapolis. He makes clear here what has been muddy in the U.S. Privatization of public schools is a conservative goal.

Frost writes:

There is a very famous anecdote about McDonald’s founder Ray Kroc and his take on business. According to legend, after speaking with an MBA class at the University of Texas in 1974, Kroc accepted an invitation to join some of the students for few few beers. During that rather laid-back social event, Kroc asked the MBA students, “What business am I in?” — to which all the students replied, quite obviously: “The hamburger business.” Kroc paused (presumably for dramatic effect) and told them they were wrong. He was not in the hamburger business. He was in the real-estate business.

Every McDonald’s restaurant that I have ever seen sits on a prime piece of real estate in whichever town it’s implanted itself. By some accounts, McDonald’s is the largest owner of real estate in the world — most of it, of course, purchased using the proceeds from the sales of the aforementioned hamburgers. But, in the end, the burgers are just the means to the end.

Now, take that same business model and apply it to local public schools. Once Kenney allows charter school operators to own property, the same premise will come into play.

Charter schools, it should be remembered, are set up to operate outside the public system. They are offered up as alternatives to traditional schools, usually after a fairly long and substantive campaign has been undertaken to convince the general population that traditional schools are failing….

The beauty in this for the edu-preneurs is that once the public buys in, parents will line up around the block to get their kids into the charter school, even in the face of evidence that the public system is actually doing well. After all, parents want what is best for their kids, and using another business strategy called FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) charter school proponents find it relatively easy to exploit parental unease.

And, of course, every single student comes to the door of the new charter school with a backpack full of taxpayer dollars in the form of per-student funding, a percentage of which can now be used by the charter school backers to buy a piece of what is undoubtedly prime real estate.

So, among all the rhetoric coming from Kenney about pipelines, the environment and student GSAs, this is one little nugget that — should it be acted upon — will open up the Canadian education system in ways that we could never have imagined possible a generation ago. Canadian schools will be open for business, with the ground they sit upon being the ultimate prize.

Welcome, Alberta, to the era of McEducation. It probably will not be long before the rest of us follow your lead.

 

The National Education Association released its 2019 report card on the charter industry, and the findings were dismal.

As one would expect, public money+weak regulation+lax oversight=fraud, waste, and abuse.

Of the 44 states that allow charters schools (plus D.C. and Puerto Rico), only five jurisdictions rate “mediocre” or better.

The report, titled “State Charter Laws: NEA Report Card,” concludes found that nearly every state (44 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico currently have charter schools) is failing to require adequate oversight over the charter school sector. Statutes in forty states received “F” grades. Five states that have laws requiring some oversight received “mediocre” ratings, with grades ranging from “D” to “C-“.

Maryland is the only state that received an “adequate” rating – a grade of “B-”.

The report card’s grades were based on four tenets that the NEA set forth in its 2017 report:

  1. Charters must be genuinely public schools in every respect.
  2. Charters must be accountable to the public via open and transparent governance.
  3. Charters must be approved, overseen, and evaluated by local school boards.
  4. Charters must be providers of high quality education for their students.

Almost every state’s charters received a grade of F.

There have recently been comments posted on this blog insisting that Minnesota actually does have “public charter schools,” but the NEA assigns a grade of F to the charters in that state.

Overall, it’s not a pretty picture.

According to the NEA report, a number of states do not require even the most rudimentary, commonsense protections that parents and communities rightly insist upon for all other taxpayer-funded schools.  Furthermore, many states don’t bother to require charter school teachers to meet the same certification requirements as public school teachers. And in too many states, charter school operators are allowed to establish a school, almost no questions asked. Community input is either not solicited or ignored, or both. In addition, they are often given the green light despite the absence of any analysis determining if such a school is even necessary.

The report notes the growing backlash against charters, as the public realizes that they do not cost less, they are not more accountable, and they do not produce better education than the public schools they displace.

The teachers’ strikes of the past year have targeted charters as part of the Trump-DeVos-ALEC plan for privatization of public education, and striking teachers have demanded a moratorium (California) or no charter law at all (West Virginia).

The charter industry desperately needs accountability, the one thing it promised when its advocates began touting the virtues of charters in the late 1980s. That promise has not been kept, and now the charter industry threatens the financial stability of public education.

 

 

 

Gary Rubinstein thought that Ohio paid more money than any other state to Teach for America, at the rate of $20,000 per recruit.

Chicken feed!

One state paid TFA $90,000 for each recruit! 

He writes:

A few days ago I wrote about how Texas pays TFA $5.5 million for 400 recruits, or about $15,000 per recruit.  Yesterday I wroteabout how Ohio paid $2 million to TFA for 100 recruits, or about $20,000 per recruit.  As TFA is in about 40 states, I wondered what state is paying the highest amount per recruit.  I got a tip today for one that I think cannot be beat.

The state of Kansas paid TFA $270,000 for a total of 3 recruits.  First they had a $520,000 contract for 12 recruits which would be about $40,000 per recruit.  But when TFA only delivered 3 recruits, they had to give back $250,000.  As a result, they ended up paying TFA a staggering $90,000 per recruit.

Under former Governor Brownback, Kansas cut taxes on the hope that low taxes would spur economic growth. It didn’t. It starved public services.

Kansans finally got fed up with the Republican strategy, and last November the voters elected Democratic state senator Laura Kelly, replacing the Trumpite Governor Kris Kobach.

Governor Kelly, cut this absurd expenditure for temp teachers and use the money to fund your public schools and your career teachers.

Toto, I Have A Feeling We’re Not In The State That Paid TFA A Finder’s Fee Of $90K Per Recruit Anymore