Archives for category: Betsy DeVos

What we have learned about Betsy DeVos is this.

She doesn’t like public schools, unless they are “great schools,” which they seldom are, because they are government schools, dead ends, and godless.

In this article, Emma Brown of the Washington Post describes the schools that DeVos loves: they are religious; they are Christian; they don’t have to be accountable to the state; their teachers don’t have to be certified; if they fail, they aren’t closed; if they teach creationism, that’s fine.

Florida has channeled billions of taxpayer dollars into scholarships for poor children to attend private schools over the past 15 years, using tax credits to build a laboratory for school choice that the Trump administration holds up as a model for the nation.


The voucherlike program, the largest of its kind in the country, helps pay tuition for nearly 100,000 students from low-income families.
But there is scant evidence that these students fare better academically than their peers in public schools.

And there is a perennial debate about whether the state should support private schools that are mostly religious, do not require teachers to hold credentials and are not required to meet minimal performance standards. Florida private schools must administer one of several standardized tests to scholarship recipients, but there are no consequences for consistently poor results.


“After the students leave us, the public loses any sense of accountability or scrutiny of the outcomes,” said Alberto Carvalho, the superintendent of Miami-Dade County public schools. He wonders what happens to the 25,000 students from the county who receive the scholarships. “It’s very difficult to gauge whether they’re hitting the mark.”


Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, a longtime advocate for school choice, does not seem to be bothered by that complaint.




Students play chess during an enrichment class at Academy Prep, a private middle school in Tampa that includes students from low-income families who receive tax-credit scholarships to attend. Academy Prep students go to school 11 hours per day and nearly 11 months per year. She is driven instead by the faith that children need and deserve alternatives to traditional public schools. At a recent public forum, DeVos said her record in office should be graded on expansion of choice-friendly policies. She did not embrace a suggestion that she be judged on academic outcomes. “I’m not a numbers person,” she said.


In a nutshell, that explains how the Trump administration wants to change the terms of the debate over education policy in the United States.


In the past quarter-century, Republican and Democratic administrations focused on holding schools and educators accountable for student performance.


Now, President Trump and DeVos seem concerned less with measuring whether schools help students learn and more with whether parents have an opportunity to pick a school for their children. They have pledged billions of dollars to that end. And they have visited private schools in Florida to underline their support for funding private-school tuition through tax credits…


On Thursday, DeVos visited another Florida private school to highlight the program. Christian Academy for Reaching Excellence (CARE) Elementary is “an awesome example of the opportunities provided through the Florida tax-credit scholarship,” DeVos told reporters. She said that the administration is working on how to expand choice nationally and that there is a “possibility” its efforts might be patterned on Florida’s tax-credit program, according to Politico.


Florida’s program, created in 2001 with the full-throated support of then-Gov. Jeb Bush (R), was one of the first to harness corporate tax credits to help low-income families pay private school tuition. Sixteen other states have enacted variations on the idea.




In a speech on March 29, Education Secretary Betsy DeVos said school choice will expand options for students like ride-sharing apps did for commuters.


Using tax credits to fund the scholarships, instead of direct payments from public treasuries, enabled lawmakers to work around state bans on the use of public funds to support religious institutions. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that tax-credit programs are constitutional.


Taking the idea to the federal level is one of the clearest ways Trump could make good on his promise to supercharge private-school choice across the country. If embedded in a larger tax bill that the GOP-held Congress passes via the budget reconciliation process, it would be protected from a Senate filibuster and therefore would require only 51 votes instead of the 60 usually required to pass legislation.


Vouchers are popular with the Republican majority on Capitol Hill but anathema to most Democrats. The Republican-controlled Congress in 2004 approved a voucher program that provides direct federal funding to help poor children in the District of Columbia attend private schools.



In Florida’s tax-credit program, businesses receive a dollar-for-dollar credit when they donate to nonprofit scholarship-granting organizations. A corporation that owes $50,000 in Florida taxes, for example, could donate $50,000 and pay nothing to the state. The nonprofit then dispenses money to students for tuition at participating private schools, although in some cases, the payment from the state does not cover the full cost of a private education.


Private schools do not need to be accredited to participate. They must show only that they’ve been in business for three years; that they comply with anti-discrimination and health and safety laws; and that they employ teachers who have gone through a background check and hold a bachelor’s degree, three years’ experience or “special skills.”


About 82 percent of scholarship recipients attend religious schools, according to state data. Many teach creationism instead of evolution and require students and parents to adhere to certain principles of religious doctrine.


The Family Life Academy in Archer, Fla., requires parents to subscribe to “corporal correction,” according to its handbook, and to sign a form giving the school permission to paddle their children. Colonial Christian School of Homestead, Fla., makes clear in its handbook that students will be expelled if they engage in homosexual conduct.


Critics say the public shouldn’t subsidize religious instruction, even indirectly. Supporters dismiss that argument.
“No one is coerced to go to a faith-based school. It’s a free decision,” said Doug Tuthill of Step Up for Students, which administers most Florida scholarships. “All the program does is provide the resources so they can exercise that freedom.”


The program is projected to receive more than half a billion dollars this year that otherwise would have gone to Florida’s treasury. But a 2010 analysis found it saves Florida money because each scholarship costs less than the state would spend to educate the same child in public school. The scholarship is now worth $5,886 per year.



In contrast, a federal tax credit would not save money for the federal government.


For more than 15 years, Florida has been out front in the movement to hold public schools accountable for academic results. It was one of the first states to use the results of standardized math and reading tests to grade every public school on an A to F scale, with rewards for the best-rated and sanctions for the worst. As in other states, annual report cards laid out how students at each school fared on the tests, with performance broken down by race and socioeconomic status.


But Florida exempts private schools from that accountability regime, even if they participate in the scholarship program.


Schools must give scholarship students standardized tests, but the outcomes are largely irrelevant. No matter how poorly a private school performs, it can continue receiving scholarship dollars.


The state commissions an annual report on the performance of scholarship students as a group, but their performance can’t be compared with that of poor children in public schools, who take a battery of different tests.


And parents seeking test data from a particular private school are likely to find none: Scores are reported separately only for private schools with at least 30 scholarship recipients. In the 2014-15 school year, just 198 of more than 1,600 participating schools met that threshold.


The stakes for parents are high: Although a disproportionate number of the state’s best schools are private, so are a disproportionate share of its worst, according to Northwestern University economist David Figlio, who has studied Florida’s tax-credit scholarships and produced the annual program report for six years.
“ There are some schools that, year in and year out, seemed to be adding considerable value, and other schools year in and year out that seemed to be leaving kids to fall further behind,” Figlio said.


Private-school results are translated into year-to-year changes in “national percentile rank,” a figure that offers insight into how students compare with others in the same grade nationwide. As a group, Florida scholarship students see no change in their percentile rank from one year to the next, which means that they’re learning at about the same pace as students nationwide.



But that average masks an enormous range.


At Lincoln-Marti Community Agency 23, a school of English-language learners in Miami, students on average scored 9 percentile points lower in math in 2015 than they had scored in 2014, and 5 percentile points lower in reading.


The school received $1.4 million from the tax-credit program this year to educate more than 250 students. Demetrio Perez, general counsel for Lincoln-Marti, said the test results offer an incomplete picture of performance. 
“The biggest measure of accountability is that parents have a meaningful choice,” Perez said. “If a parent is not satisfied with the educational program at a school, that parent can take his or her child to another school.”


At Okeechobee Christian Academy in Okeechobee, Fla., scores also show students losing ground. Principal Melissa King said the academy is constantly trying to improve. “Our core belief is to support these parents in raising up the next generation to advance the Kingdom of God,” King said.


Backers say the program forces public schools to improve. Figlio’s research found evidence for that idea: modest test-score increases at public schools facing the most intense competition.


Students who receive scholarships come from families with an average income of $24,000 per year. Many of those parents say the assistance has given their kids a shot at a better life.
“You only have one chance to either do well by your children or to ruin them, and I was trying to give them the best opportunity they could have,” said Linzi Morris, a mother of six scholarship recipients.
 All six have attended Academy Prep Center of Tampa, a middle school that she said provided top-notch academics as well as music, art, monthly weekend field trips, chess and other extracurriculars. Three are now in college, she said, and the other three are headed there.


Academy Prep students go to school 11 hours per day and nearly 11 months per year, far longer than the typical student. To pay for that, the school raises more than $1 million per year in donations to supplement the scholarships. In all, the program costs $17,000 per student.

 The investment appears to pay off: Students at the school learn faster than their peers nationwide, and 98 percent who finish eighth grade go on to graduate from high school, according to school officials. Eighty-four percent enroll in college.


Lincoln Tamayo, the school’s principal, said it doesn’t make sense to allow schools to continue receiving scholarship dollars if they fail to help children.
“Schools of all stripes, whether they be private or public charter or traditional public, are not immune from mediocrity,” he said. “The anvil’s got to drop somewhere.”


The nonpartisan group In the Public Interest has released a major new report on wasteful spending on charter schools in California. It is called Spending Blind: The Failure of Policy Planning in California’s Charter School Facility Funding.

The bottom line is that California spends on charter schools without planning, without supervision, and without accountability. Vast sums of public money have disappeared, as charters close or mismanage funds. Every attempt to impose accountability on the charter industry has been vetoed by Governor Brown. The State Board of Education, which the governor appoints, does not demand accountability. California thinks of itself as a blue state, but when it comes to education funding, it is a Trump/DeVos state.

The key findings:

The report’s key findings include:

Over the past 15 years, California charter schools have received more than $2.5 billion in tax dollars or taxpayer subsidized funds to lease, build, or buy school buildings.

Nearly 450 charter schools have opened in places that already had enough classroom space for all students—and this overproduction of schools was made possible by generous public support, including $111 million in rent, lease, or mortgage payments picked up by taxpayers, $135 million in general obligation bonds, and $425 million in private investments subsidized with tax credits or tax exemptions.

For three-quarters of California charter schools, the quality of education on offer—based on state and charter industry standards—is worse than that of a nearby traditional public school that serves a demographically similar population. Taxpayers have provided these schools with an estimated three-quarters of a billion dollars in direct funding and an additional $1.1 billion in taxpayer-subsidized financing.

Even by the charter industry’s standards, the worst charter schools receive generous facility funding. The California Charter Schools Association identified 161 charter schools that ranked in the bottom 10% of schools serving comparable populations last year, but even these schools received more than $200 million in tax dollars and tax-subsidized funding.

At least 30% of charter schools were both opened in places that had no need for additional seats and also failed to provide an education superior to that available in nearby public schools. This number is almost certainly underestimated, but even at this rate, Californians provided these schools combined facilities funding of more than $750 million, at a net cost to taxpayers of nearly $400 million.

Public facilities funding has been disproportionately concentrated among the less than one-third of schools that are owned by Charter Management Organizations (CMOs) that operate chains of between three and 30 schools. An even more disproportionate share of funding has been taken by just four large CMO chains—Aspire, KIPP, Alliance, and Animo/Green Dot.

Since 2009, the 253 schools found by the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California to maintain discriminatory enrollment policies have been awarded a collective $75 million under the SB740 program, $120 million in general obligation bonds, and $150 million in conduit bond financing.

CMOs have used public tax dollars to buy private property. The Alliance College-Ready Public Schools network of charter schools, for instance, has benefited from more than $110 million in federal and state taxpayer support for its facilities, which are not owned by the public, but are part of a growing empire of privately owned Los Angeles-area real estate now worth in excess of $200 million.

This squandering of public funds is outrageous. Will the Legislature and the Governor demand accountability?

Mercedes Schneider explores a paper published by Carl Davis of the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, in which he explains how tax credits for vouchers allow the rich to cut their taxes and make a profit. With such an alluring inducement by the states and the federal government, people of great means are able to reduce their taxes and undermine public schools at the same time. And, as they do great harm to the majority of children enrolled in increasingly underfunded public schools, they will be celebrated as “philanthropists,” when they are, in reality, raiders of the public good.

Davis’ paper begins like this:

<blockquote>One of the most important functions of government is to maintain a high-quality public education system. In many states, however, this objective is being undermined by tax credits and deductions that redirect public dollars for K-12 education toward private schools. Twenty states currently divert a total of over $1 billion per year toward private schools via special tax credits and deductions. These tax subsidies are essentially backdoor voucher programs, or “neovouchers,” as they use the tax code to provide what amount to private school vouchers even when traditional voucher programs are unpopular with the public or outright unconstitutional.

Because of the ways that state and federal tax law interact, the subsidies offered in ten of these states turn the concept of a charitable “donation” on its head by offering upper-income taxpayers a risk-free profit on contributions they make to fund private school scholarships. In these cases, even taxpayers who would not ordinarily be interested in contributing to private schools may find the incentive too strong to ignore.

The Washington Post reported that the government is spending about $1 million per month for Betsy DeVos’s security.

How many people are assigned to protect her?

The government already owns the vehicles.

Assume the full amount is the cost of personnel.

Assume that a security guard earns $48,000 per year.

One month of his or her time is $4,000.

How many security guards are protecting her?

This is not a trick question.

Show your work.

I worked for Lamar Alexander when he was Secretary of Education. He had a car and driver. He did not have a security detail.

The cost of Betsy DeVos’s security team is $1 million per month. She is protected by federal marshals, whose agency is reimbursed by the U.S. Department of Education.

This outlay comes as DeVos and Trump seek a multi-billion dollar reduction in the budget of the Department. They want to cut after-school programs and dozens of others that are needed by children in poverty.

Why doesn’t she pay for her own security? She is worth $5.4 billion. She can afford it. Why should poor kids tighten their belts and do with less while she travels in style on the taxpayers’ million?

Yesterday the Maryland General Assembly voted to override Governor Larry Hogan’s veto of a bill meant to protect public schools against the privatization agenda of Betsy DeVos.

Maryland has a rightwing Republican Governor, Larry Hogan, who has appointed a pro-privatization state board of education.

But Maryland also has a legislature controlled by Democrats. They hold a veto-proof majority.

The legislature passed an anti-privatization bill called the “Protect Our Schools Act,” intended to block state takeovers and the Trump/DeVos agenda.

Governor Hogan vetoed the bill on Wednesday, saying it would prevent the state from identifying low-performing schools and taking them over (and privatizing them). His appointed state board agreed with him.

Yesterday, the Democratic-controlled legislature overrode Hogan’s veto.

The governor is angry:

The bill [that he vetoed] would set standards for how the state would identify low-performing schools that Hogan says rely too little on standardized tests. And it would prevent the state from taking several actions to improve those schools, including converting them to charter schools, bringing in private management, giving the students vouchers to attend private schools or putting the schools into a special statewide “recovery” school district.

Hogan and members of the state school board argue that the bill would tie their hands as they try to rescue low-performing schools.

Let it be stipulated that neither the governor nor any member of the state school board has EVER rescued a low-performing school.

Congratulations to the educators and parents and students of Maryland for defeating Governor Hogan’s effort to impose the DeVos agenda on the state’s public schools.

Russ Walsh has written an important post, which is a call to arms for all of us who care about public education and don’t want it to be turned into a free-market consumer good.

Last week on his show, Real Time, Bill Maher introduced the Yale professor and author, Timothy Snyder, whose new book is entitled, On Tyranny. The book outlines 20 lessons we can learn from the rise of fascism and communism in the 20th century to make sure the same does not happen to us in the 21st century. Lesson #2 caught my ear immediately: Defend Institutions. Snyder says

It is institutions that help us to preserve decency. They need our help as well. Do not speak of “our institutions” unless you make them yours by acting on their behalf. Institutions do not protect themselves. They fall one after the other unless each is defended from the beginning. So choose an institution you care about – a court, a newspaper, a law, a labor union – and take its side.

OK, Professor Snyder, I choose public education as my institution to defend.

One way we can be sure that Trump and his minions are coming after our institutions is to see who the Tweeter-in-chief has chosen to head up various government departments. Almost to a person (Pruitt, Perry, Price), people who are opposed to the very institutions they are leading have been put in charge. If public education is to survive, we are going to have to fight for it. We cannot sit back and wait for this current nightmare to pass because by the time we wake up, it may be too late. It should be clear to all of us that the institution of public education is under a very real threat from the authoritarian Trump administration and its anti-public schools Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos.

The appointment of DeVos was the clearest indication from the new Trump administration that public education would be under siege. Next came the Trump budget proposal that, as Jeff Bryant reports here, strips money from after-school programs for poor children, reduces the overall budget of the department by 13%, but still finds billions of dollars for various school choice schemes.

Russ says:

Be informed.

Speak up.

Get involved.

Our institutions are under assault. One of the most vulnerable of these institutions is public education. If we do not fight for it, we will lose it. If we do fight for it, perhaps we can turn the conversation about schools around and focus on what is really causing our educational problems – income inequity, prejudice, and segregation.

Jennifer Berkshire writes that Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos is visiting the Florida charter called SLAM started by misogynist rapper Pitbull. It is part of the controversial for-profit charter chain Academica, which was investigated last year by the UlS. Department of Education.

Berkshire interviews Preston Green about The problems of cronyism, conflicts of interest, and corruption that accompany deregulation.

Meanwhile, DeVos will bring the gospel of deregulation and choice without accountability to the converted.

A useful reminder: Join the Network for Public Education to fight DeVos’ efforts to destroy public education.

This is one of the very first reactions to the Trump-DeVos (and Scott Walker) agenda to destroy public education.

RESISTANCE! It works, especially at the ballot box.


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: April 4, 2017
CONTACT: Marina Dimitrijevic

STUDENTS, WISCONSIN WORKING FAMILIES PARTY SWEEP MILWAUKEE; STATEWIDE EDUCATION ELECTIONS

Milwaukee board tilts to public education majority opposing corporate operators; profiteering

MILWAUKEE – The Milwaukee Board of School Directors now has a pro-public education majority with tonight’s election of all Wisconsin Working Families Party-endorsed candidates. Tony Baez, who is the new District Six representative on the board, along with incumbents Larry Miller and Annie Woodward, can now begin to eradicate the corporate profiteering that is draining resources from our schools while failing to deliver quality education for our children. Together with other advocates on the board, they have the ability to transform how education is delivered in Milwaukee. Working Families Party also supported Tony Evers in his successful run for a third term as the state’s superintendent of public instruction.

“This election is part of the resistance to the dangerous troika of Donald Trump, Scott Walker, and Betsy DeVos. If Wisconsin Working Families and our partners, including the teacher’s union, had not been involved, corporate interests and privatizers could have succeeded in tipping the balance of the school board, carrying out the Trump agenda and destroying our public schools,” said Marina Dimitrijevic, executive director of Wisconsin Working Families Party. “While the anti-public school forces recruited and funded candidates, they lost because voters want quality public schools for all students. We are building a template and record of taking on corporate operators and winning.”

Wisconsin Working Families Party worked for months to elect a slate of public school champions who will advocate for more resources for our school system, fight off unaccountable voucher expansion, and put forth an aggressive policy agenda that trusts teachers, invests in our student’s success, and adds to the quality of life for working families in Milwaukee.

“The Wisconsin Working Families Party saw that a District Six victory could be key to creating a pro-public school majority on the school board as well as having a dedicated voice for Latino students. They recruited me to run, supporting me throughout the election progress. I’m proud to work with Working Families because we share a vision and a drive to support and deliver a quality education to all of the students in our diverse city,” said Dr. Tony Baez, the newly elected District Six member of the board. “Thanks to Working Families’ campaign support and community organizing, we’ve turned the tide in Milwaukee against privatization and charter schools.”

Beyond assisting the candidates, Wisconsin Working Families Party mobilized volunteers and members using grassroots people power to help our endorsed candidates win. More than 60 people volunteered for several Saturday canvasses, contacting more than 2,000 voters through canvassing or phone calls. The organization also sent mailers to educate voters about the candidates and the issues in the campaign.

“Wisconsin Working Families Party recognized that this election posed a unique opportunity for change on the school board, held onto that vision, and ran until we won,” said Kim Schroeder, president of the Milwaukee Teachers’ Education Association. “This election is a clear repudiation of the vouchers and corporatization that have drained out schools and failed our students. We have a template of how to organize and win.”

This election marks the second successful Wisconsin Working Families Party campaign to elect a pro-public education majority to school boards. In April, 2016, Wisconsin WFP worked with the Racine Education Association to elect eight of nine candidates to the Racine United School Board after Wisconsin’s legislative Republicans forced through a restructure of Racine’s school district governance.

Costly experiments with vouchers and charter schools have not yielded promised results. A study by the Public Policy Forum found that Wisconsin Knowledge and Concepts Examination test scores for voucher students lag behind those of MPS students, particularly for voucher students who attend predominantly voucher-funded schools. And schools with high concentrations of voucher students have lower WKCE test scores than their public school counterparts.

###

The Working Families Party is a grassroots political organization. With chapters in Wisconsin and a dozen other states, as well as a membership that spans the nation, the Working Families Party works to advance public policies that make a difference in the lives of working people, like raising the minimum wage, stopping bad trade deals, taking on Wall Street, tackling climate change, and combating racial injustice. Working Families brings these issues to the ballot box and the halls of government at the federal, state and local levels.

After watching Betsy DeVos’s Senate confirmation hearings, most of us wondered about her qualifications to be Secretary of Education. She didn’t know much about federal law or policy or programs.

Michael Klonsky sums up her resume here.

http://michaelklonsky.blogspot.com/2017/04/devos-resume.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed:+mikeklonsky+(SmallTalk)&m=1

Simply put, she and her family were major donors to the Republican party and to the Trump campaign. More than that, the DeVos family are the royalty of rightwing evangelicals.