Archives for category: California
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

California: Marshall Tuck Lowered Standards to Raise Graduation Rate

By dianeravitch
October 3, 2018 //
8

For the future of American education, the most consequential election this November will take place in California, where charter school champion Marshall Tuck faces off against pro-public school candidate Tony Thurmond.

The billionaires and the Republican Party have joined forces behind Tuck.

The California Teachers Association and the state Democratic Party Support Tony Thurmond.

Both men are Democrats, but Thurmond received the votes of 95% of delegates to the annual meeting of the state Democratic Party. Tuck has been endorsed by Arne Duncan.

Marshall Tuck was in the financial industry, then took over the Green Dot charter chain, then ran Mayor Villagairosa’s chain of schools. Thurmond is a social worker and a state legislator.

The billionaires have donated nearly $14 million to Tuck’s campaign, compared to the nearly $4 million that the CTA has given Thurmond.

Erika Jones writes here about Marshall Tuck’s claims to fame, and how he raised graduation rates by lowering standards.

Jones writes:

“Tuck was a Wall Street banker before taking over as the chief operating officer for the Green Dot charter school chain. In 2008, Tuck left Green Dot to become CEO of the Partnership for Los Angeles Schools, a small group of public schools that Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa took over after his failed coup to take over all Los Angeles Unified schools.

“Despite receiving millions in private funding, Partnership schools underperformed compared to the district’s schools with similar demographics during Tuck’s tenure in 2009. Tuck’s failed leadership resulted in landslide votes of “no confidence” from teachers at eight of 10 schools he oversaw.

“Tuck claims to have significantly raised graduation rates at Partnership high schools, but the truth is that he just lowered the bar for students to graduate, rather than improving student learning.

“While the graduation rate at Santee Education Complex increased from 56.34 percent in 2009-10 to 69.29 percent in 2012-13, what Tuck did to get these numbers was to lower standards. So it’s not surprising that readiness for college dropped from 61.9 percent to 21.9 percent under Tuck. At David Starr Jordan High School, a similar pattern emerges: graduation rates improved 12 percent between the 2009-10 and 2012-13 school years, but college readiness dropped from 63.7 percent to 18.6 percent.

“At the biggest school in his district, Roosevelt Senior High, graduation rates fell from 67.43 percent in 2009-10 to 53.44 percent in 2012-13, while college readiness dropped from 52.8 percent to 21 percent.

“Due to Tuck’s unreasonable and inflexible mandates, parents at Ritter Elementary School, together with the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, filed a complaint in 2009 after Tuck cut dual language immersion programs. Ritter’s student population was 42 percent English learners at the time.

“This year, Tuck was forced under pressure from Equality California, the largest state LGBT organization in the nation, to return a campaign contribution from the major backer of Proposition 8, which temporarily made same-sex marriage illegal in California in 2008.”

Every parent of a child in public school in California, every teacher, every graduate of a public school, every progressive, every citizen committed to the public good should vote for Tony Thurmond. He is committed to improving public schools whose doors are open to all students, not to the expansion and enrichment of the privatization movement.

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

California: Antioch Unified School District Approves Two Charters, Gives Up $25 Million for Its Own Public Schools

By dianeravitch
September 30, 2018 //
13

The school board of Antioch Unified School District in California had an extended discussion about whether to approve two new charter schools. The discussion was often heated. The district made the decision knowing that the two charters will draw away $25 million from its own public schools. The board staff urged the board to reject the charters.

It makes for interesting reading.

The lead petitioner stressed the district’s low test scores and the urgency of change.

On Wednesday, the Antioch Unified School District approved charter petitions for East Bay Tech Middle School Academy and High School Academy on 3-2 votes in a meeting that lasted more than 5-hours.

As a result, District staff anticipate losing $25 million in revenue over the next several years.

In favor was Debra Vinson, Chrystal Sawyer-White and Walter Ruehlig. Opposed were Gary Hack and Diane Gibson-Gray.

The vote came after staff recommended the Board deny the petition based on an analysis by legal council in which numerous deficiencies were identified in the petition along with concerns related to the petition and the proposed Charter School’s operations. HE also stated that that more than one of the legal grounds for denial were met. Specifically, the petition does not provide a reasonably comprehensive description of several essential charter elements and the petitioners are demonstrably unlikely to successfully implement the proposed education program.

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

California: Charter School in Contra Costa County Mired in Financial Mess

By dianeravitch
September 30, 2018 //
8

The Clayton Valley Charter High School was audited, and the results were appalling. Actually, they were what you would expect when a private organization gets public funds and is unsupervised and when the state law ignores conflicts of interest and nepotism.

The article appears in the Mercury News Behind a paywall. It begins like this:

CLAYTON — The married top leaders of Clayton Valley Charter High School raked in almost $850,000 in less than two years before leaving the school last spring, a county investigation found.

The probe also revealed that the couple misused school funds, hired people in secret and created positions without the school board’s approval.

An audit report released Friday evening as part of the agenda for the Contra Costa County Board of Education’s Oct. 3 meeting states that the charter school “has not been following best practices” when it comes to “management hiring practices, vendor service contracts, legal fees and credit card purchases.”

The report expresses “concern” over former executive director David Linzey’s salary and benefits and states that his contract was vulnerable to potential “manipulation.”

Signed by a school board member, Linzey’s contract included a base salary of $23,986 per month, plus 10 “floating” work days at $1,115 per month, for an annual package of $301,212. According to the audit, an amendment in 2015 eliminated payments for health benefits and a car allowance and instead added that money to the salary base, which would have potentially increased pension benefits upon retirement.

An annual salary increase of 3 percent a year and a clause that ensured Linzey would get a raise whenever employee unions got them were also worked into the contract, the audit says. Linzey’s compensation between July 1, 2016 and May 5, 2018 totaled $555,109, and while a provision in his contract called for board “evaluations” of his performance, there is no record that ever happened, according to the audit.

The audit also notes that the school board approved the hiring of Linzey’s wife, Eileen Linzey, as chief program officer without posting the open position or holding interviews. Her income from February 2017 through May 2018 totaled $296,047. The Linzeys’ household income from July 1, 2016 to May 15, 2018 totaled $849,776.

In addition, according to the audit, there was no record of the board creating the assistant superintendent position that Concord City Council member Ron Leone took in December 2017 and held during the first half of 2018 for $681 a day while running for county superintendent of schools. After failing to win the seat in this year’s primary, Leone resigned from the position in the same month.

Linzey signed Leone’s employment contract in November 2017 — when hiring was supposed to be approved by the school’s governing board — and no interviews were held or job listings posted. There was no record of the board approving the hire, the report found.

The audit also discovered that of the school’s five listed management positions — operations director, fiscal director, admissions officer, SIS coordinator and human resources director — all except the admissions officer were paid more than the salary schedule’s “highest range.” The management salary schedule was also not recorded as having been approved by the board.

The auditing firm hired by the county, Christy White Associates, recommends that the charter school requires board approval of new positions, hiring and terminations, as well as salary changes. It also urges the school to be more transparent about salaries and more competitive in its hiring process.

The Contra Costa County Office of Education hired the firm last May to audit the charter school’s financial and hiring practices, just as news broke that the Linzeys had left amid long-running criticisms from parents and school staff over questionable spending.

At the time, the school declined to state the nature of the Linzeys’ departure, but the audit report states the couple “resigned” in June.

The report also reveals that upward of $40,000 in school money was used to pay lawyers who helped create a new charter school in Antioch — East Bay Tech Academy.

The audit also found that the charter’s California Credit Union credit cards incurred $610,000 in expenses between July 1, 2016 and May 15, 2018, despite an annual group limit of $50,000. And, the report found, school staff bought supplies without submitting receipts and purchased gift cards without identifying recipients. Receipts for meals were not itemized to show whether alcohol was purchased.

In response to the audit, a letter from the Clayton Valley Charter High School board of directors notes that some of its recommendations have been followed — including implementing a public and competitive hiring process for management and ensuring the board approves all hires — and it is addressing the others. The letter says school officials will publish a new management salary schedule and remove the executive director’s ability to pay more than the amounts listed.

The school board in its letter also said it is working with the newly formed board of the East Bay Tech Academy to “codify in writing” a plan to reimburse Clayton Valley for the legal fees it paid to set up the new school.

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

California: Tony Thurmond Needs Our Help As Billionaires Swarm to Aid Marshall Tuck

By dianeravitch
September 26, 2018 //
15

Tony Thurmond, candidate for State Superintendent of Public Instruction, needs our help. The charter industry and billionaires are showering millions of dollars on his opponent Marshall Tuck. Despite the widespread graft and corruption in California’s charter industry, the billionaires want to continue expanding their “market share” of students and draining resources from the public schools.

Please donate whatever you can to Tony Thurmond’s campaign.

The race for state superintendent has become the key race in the state because the gubernatorial race appears to be a slam dunk for Gavin Newsom, the Democratic candidate, who is leading his little-known Republican opponent by double digits.

Tuck has been endorsed by Arne Duncan and the state Republican Party.

Thurmond has been endorsed by the California Teachers Association and the Los Angeles Times.

Think of this race as the Public School Candidate vs. the Charter School Candidate, and it explains why the usual herd of billionaires are supporting Tuck. If they can capture this key spot, California’s public schools will be in deep trouble.

“With seven weeks to go before Election Day, fundraising for Tuck has already surpassed what his supporters raised in the former school administrator’s unsuccessful run for superintendent four years ago.

“This is going to be the most expensive election, period,” said Sherry Bebitch Jeffe, a professor at the University of Southern California’s Sol Price School of Public Policy…

“Thurmond is a former social worker, school board member and council member in Richmond. Tuck is the former president of Green Dot Public Schools, a charter school organization based in Los Angeles, and CEO of the Partnership for Los Angeles Schools, a district-city initiative that runs 18 district schools.

“Tuck will benefit from $10.8 million raised by an independent expenditure committee backing him as of Monday, compared to $4.9 million raised by an independent committee supporting Thurmond.

“In addition, Tuck raised $3.1 million in direct contributions to his campaign through June 30, the most recent reporting deadline, outpacing Thurmond’s $2.1 million in direct contributions…

“Wealthy donors pushing to expand charter schools in California have driven much of the spending to support Tuck so far by pouring large donations into the Sacramento political advocacy organization EdVoice For The Kids PAC, which runs the committee backing Tuck. Although EdVoice has donated to dozens of candidates over the past two years, nearly 90 percent of the money it gave as of the most recent reporting date went to its Tuck committee, which calls itself Students, Parents and Teachers supporting Marshall Tuck for Superintendent of Public Instruction 2018, a project of EdVoice. EdVoice officials did not respond to an interview request.

“Contributors to EdVoice include venture capitalist Arthur Rock, who gave $3 million, real estate developer Bill Bloomfield who gave $2.9 million and philanthropist Eli Broad who gave $1.3 million….

“Neither candidate can be simply characterized as “pro-charter” or “anti-charter.” Each has said there is a role for effective charter schools in public education and that the schools need greater transparency and oversight. They both support a ban on for-profit charter schools that was recently signed into law.

“But Tuck and Thurmond have differed over how to handle the growth of California’s charter schools, which in some areas have attracted students and state funding from traditional school districts. Thurmond has hinted he could support a moratorium on new charter schools. Tuck opposes that idea and has instead called for the state to keep in place funding for districts affected by charter school growth for a time, so those districts can adjust to lower enrollment.”

There is the key difference between them. Tuck wants to manage the continued shrinkage of public schools, while Thurmond wants to stop the shrinkage and rebuild public schools.

Here is a Tuck supporter:

“Rebecca Morgan — a former Bank of America executive and former Republican state senator from the South Bay — cited Tuck’s time in Los Angeles, where he led Green Dot Public Schools, a charter school network, and the Partnership for Los Angeles Schools, as one of the reasons she supports him. Morgan has contributed $500,000 to EdVoice.

“Marshall has proven that he understands education and he knows how to turn around school districts, as he has done in Los Angeles,” Morgan said. “He is not in the pocket of any organization, as Thurmond is with the teachers union.”

“Asked how much more she is willing to spend to elect Tuck, Morgan said, “Lots.””

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

Carol Burris: Is California’s Ban on For-Profit Charters Real or A Hoax?

By dianeravitch
September 19, 2018 //
9

When the California Charter Schools Association celebrates the passage of a bill banning for-profit charters, it raises questions about how much the law matters.

Carol Burris has closely studied waste, fraud, and abuse in California’s charter sector. Her report, “Charters and Consequesnces” is must reading for anyone who wants to see how non-profits facilitate corrupt practice when there is neither accountability, transparency, nor oversight.

This is her review of the ban on for-profit charters, which affects a tiny number of charters in the state. Those few for-profits, she predicts, will find a way to work around the new law.

California charter law needs to be reformed, from top to bottom, to protect children and taxpayers, as well as to stop the charter raid on state funding that is intended for public schools.

Categories Accountability, California, Charter Schools, Education Industry, For-Profit, Privatization, Virtual Charter Schools

California: Law Professor Lauds Ban on For-Profit Charters

By dianeravitch
September 15, 2018 //
2

Law professor Derek Black writes that California’s ban on for-profit charters is stronger than skeptics expected. It bans not only for-profit charters, but does not permit non-profits to hire for-profit management companies, a common ruse in many states.

He writes:

“One of the major critiques of charter schools, although not the only one, is that they allow private entities to profit off the education of children. Some say the possibility of profits is a good idea because it brings new players into the education “market,” incentivizes efficiency, and creates competition that might drive down the cost of quality education. In theory, I suppose that is possible, but in reality, we have seen far more evidence to the contrary. And the possibility of profit taking without sufficient state oversight also opens the door to downright corruptions. Preston Green has done an excellent job of tracking scandal and corruption in the charter school sector. I argue here, however, that what we call “corruption” is often actually legal when charters do it. The self-serving contracts and leases are the type of behavior that would land public school officials in jail, but which are relatively common with some charter school operators.

“That is what makes California’s new statute barring for-profit charter school operators so significant. On their face, most charter schools are non-profit. Many states will not issue a charter to a for profit entity. If Big Box Stores, Inc., for instance, applies to operate a charter in Kentucky, they state will reject it. This, however, does relatively little to block for profit entities. All Big Box Stores, Inc. needs to do is form a non-profit. They can call it Big Box Academies. If Big Box Academies gets a charter, it can then simply enter into a contract with Big Box Store, Inc. to supply all the labor and supplies for the charter school. In fact, non-profit charters regularly turn over their entire budget to for-profit management companies. Those companies can then take as much profit as they can manage. As Tom Kelley has shown, they develop “sweeps” contracts that are so egregious that the charter schools are probably running afoul of non-profit rules.

“California’s new charter law takes a big bite out of this problem. It makes it clear that only non-profits can receive a charter in the state. It also prohibits those non-profit charters from transferring responsibility and management to a for-profit entity…

“With that said, there is still more to be done to ensure that non-profit charters are acting like non-profits. The California law stops charters from acting purely as shell companies for outside entities, but they don’t stop non-profit charters from paying their upper level staff and management unreasonably high salaries while paying their teachers unreasonably low ones. They also don’t stop non-profit charters from entering into unreasonable leases. As Tom Kelley has shown, exorbitant leases appear to be one of the biggest profit-taking mechanisms. No non-profit acting in its and its students’ own best interests would every enter into some of these lease agreements. California’s new statute prohibits for-profit management, but it does not prohibit lease deals that are not on the up-and-up. To be clear, the point of leasing out one’s land is to make money. So leases that send profits to landlords are not inherently problematic. But California should not think its job is done with this statute. It still needs to exercise enough oversight to ferret out problematic contracts and leases and ensure that state money is spent on students.”

Categories Accountability, California, Charter Schools, Education Industry, For-Profit, Privatization

Sacramento: Principal of Rhee-Johnson Charter School Quits in Protest

By dianeravitch
September 12, 2018 //
9

The principal of Sacramento Charter High School resigned in protest, siding with the students who were demonstrating against teacher turnover, a change in the dress code, and other arbitrary rules.

The school is part of the St. Hope Charter Chain, founded by former Sacramento Mayor (and basketball star) Kevin Johnson, and managed by him and his wife Michelle Rhee.

“Sacramento Charter High School’s top administrator has resigned just days after students left classes in protest and she blasted St. Hope administrators for what she said was the school’s “sustained history of neglect from above” and their “reactionary finger-pointing” in their handling of the student walkout.

“Christina Smith in a strongly worded one-page letter dated Monday and obtained Wednesday by The Sacramento Bee, threw her support behind the students, saying the demonstrations and the blame laid at Smith’s feet in its wake by leaders of St. Hope Public Schools, which runs the charter high school, were among the tipping points that led to her resignation as the school’s site lead…

“Some 100 students staged four days of walkouts frustrated that student-led changes to the campus’ handbook approved at the end of the 2017-2018 school year were set aside by St. Hope officials and that students were ordered by the officials to wear costly school-mandated uniforms.

“We feel like we’re being stripped of our voices,” said senior Keishay Swygert during Friday’s demonstration, part of four days of protest against St. Hope administrators. “We want our school back.”

“Other students on Wednesday bemoaned a high teacher turnover rate, a lack of textbooks, arbitrary rule-making by school leaders and an environment that does not properly prepare its students for college.”

Read more here: https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/education/article218292925.html#storylink=cpy

Categories Accountability, California, Charter Schools, Education Industry, Education Reform, Principals, Privatization, Students

Students Walk Out at Sacramento Charter High School to Protest Teacher Firings and Arbitrary Policies

By dianeravitch
September 9, 2018 //
23

Students protested at Sacramento Charter High School, operated by St. Hope’s Charter chain, led by former mayor Kevin Johnson and his wife Michelle Rhee. They were angry about Teacher firings over the summer and arbitrary rules, like requiring students to wear long pants when the temperature reached 100.

Charter operators can’t push high school students around as easily as little kids.

Here’s some history about Sacramento Charter High School.

“Founded in 1856, Sacramento High School moved several times. In 1922, construction began at its current location on 34th Street. It opened at this location in 1924 and continuously served the growing neighborhoods of Downtown Sacramento, Midtown, East Sacramento, River Park, College Greens, Tahoe Park and Oak Park until 2003.

“The school was closed by the SCUSD School Board in June 2003, over the objections of many students, parents and teachers. The new charter high school, which opened in September 2003, kept the same school colors, purple and white, and the dragon mascot but not the Visual and Performing Arts Center (VAPAC) which had been one of the school’s unique features for many years. Sacramento Charter High School is governed by a private Board of Directors from St. Hope Public Schools.”

Categories Accountability, California, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Discipline, Education Industry, Education Reform, Privatization, Resistance, Rhee, Michelle, Students

California: State Board of Education Rejects Rocketship Charter Expansion Plan!

By dianeravitch
September 8, 2018 //
6

Best news of the day!

The charter-friendly State Board of Education turned down Rocketship expansion plan, after 25 speakers denounce it. Chair of board voted to support.

“In a 9-1 vote, the board agreed with the California Department of Education’s recommendation to deny the charter organization’s petition to establish a new school in San Pablo near Richmond, which the West Contra Costa Unified school board and Contra Costa County board of education had also denied. Citing concerns about the charter school’s financial and educational plans, some board members said Rocketship – which operates 10 schools in San Jose, one in Antioch, one in Concord and one in Redwood City where the company is headquartered – may be trying to expand beyond its capacity. Board President Michael Kirst voted against denying the appeal.

“Board members said they were especially concerned about problems associated with the Rocketship Futuro Academy charter school, which opened in Concord two years ago, with the State Board’s approval. The California Department of Education has sent six letters of concern to the school, which is located in the Mt. Diablo district, related to finances and other issues. Rocketship said they expected new philanthropic support which would improve the school’s finances.

“Chief Deputy Superintendent Glen Price, who was sitting in for State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson, said the California Department of Education was concerned about the lack of students with disabilities in Rocketship schools, lack of information about its English learner program, high suspension rates among some student groups, and its governance model, which includes charter school board meetings held in San Jose. Price, who lives in Contra Costa County, said meetings that far away were “counter to all of our objectives for parent and stakeholder engagement.””

Even with the billionaires’ support, charter schools are becoming toxic.

Resistance works.

Charter schools divert money from public schools.

Categories California, Charter Schools, Education Reform, Funding, Resistance

Good News! Governor Brown Signs Bill Banning For-Profit Charters! (With a Caveat)

By dianeravitch
September 7, 2018 //
17

Julian Vasquez Heilig reports that Governor Jerry Brown signed legislation to ban for-profit charters. This is very good news. In 2015,he vetoed such a bill.

Now, here’s hoping that the Legislature can pass (and the governor will sign) a bill requiring accountability and transparency in all charters, including a ban on nepotism and conflicts of interest.

The momentum for this legislation was reignited by great reporting on K12 Inc. by reporter Jesse Calefati of the San Jose Mercury News in 2016. Give credit where it is due. Be thankful for freedom of the press!

PS:

An ally in California says this is not as big a deal as it seems. She writes:

“I just can’t understand all of the excitement about this given that there really aren’t any for profit charters left in CA anyway. This bill was approved by the Callifornia Charter Schools Association who were already celebrating and promoting that there are no for profit charters in CA. For profit charters have never really been an issue in CA, we have barely had any in the past. Of course, the vast majority of online charters contract to k12 and we all know they are a huge profit machine.”

http://www.ccsa.org/blog/2018/08/california-charter-schools-association-celebrates-landmark-legislation-banning-for-profit-charter-sc.html

Categories Accountability, California, Charter Schools, Education Industry, For-Profit, Fraud, Freedom of the Press, K12 Inc., Privatization
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »