Several elementary schools in San Jose, California, are on the chopping block. Meanwhile, charter schools are booming. Local school boards are helpless to stop the charter growth. If the local board says no to the charter, the charter appeals to the county board. If the county board says no, the charter appeals to the state board, which almost always says yes. Governor Jerry Brown appointed the state board. It is very charter friendly. Unless the next governor reins in the charter industry, it will wreck public education in California.
Archives for category: California
Karen Wolfe, parent activist in Los Angeles, writes here in response to an ill-informed article in the Napa Valley Register by columnist Dan Walters. I read Walters’ article and it did not reflect what I knew about California. He thinks that the angels of light are on the side of privatization, battling the mighty “education establishment.” He thinks that “civil rights groups” support the privatization of public schools. This doesn’t make sense, inasmuch as the billionaires and privatizers are out to destroy public education in California. Rather than say so myself, from a distance of 3,000 miles, I turned to someone, Karen Wolfe, who is up to date on the state of the “school wars,” to respond to Dan Walters’ views.
She wrote:
California’s school war flares up on three fronts
Dan Walters is right that there is a fierce battle over public education in the state of California that is sure to heat up as the 2018 elections draw nearer. However, the framing of an entrenched establishment pitted against altruistic reformers is naive or misleading.
The real fight is over who gets the money in the state’s second largest budget line and what that means for our notion of government.
Do we update our public school system around the protections and oversight built into its foundation? Or do we privatize the system, handing over money and children to a free-market of charter school choices on little more than a promise to be responsible and effective?
Setting aside for the moment that the purpose of public school is more than achievement on standardized tests, one factor to consider is that the charters aren’t doing any better than the traditional public schools, according to the often-cited CREDO study (Urban Charter Schools in California, 2015).
Cal State Sacramento’s Professor of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies, Julian Vasquez Heilig, told me that in many cases California charters have a negative impact on student learning. Even where any impact is positive, it is minuscule, he said. This is especially important when the push for more charters is compared to other education reforms like universal pre-kindergarten or class size reduction. Both of these have been found to show far larger positive impacts.
In fact, those are among the reforms sought by the Equity Coalition, a group referred to in the op ed. But the author doesn’t mention those reforms. Nor does he tell readers the primary objective of the group’s lawsuit: A larger overall education budget.
It seems no matter the topic of education policy, the so-called reformers claim that charter schools are the only answer.
This view puts them in close alignment with US Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos. Her home state provides a stark example of the failure of privatization. Education historian and author Diane Ravitch writes, “Since Michigan embraced the DeVos family’s ideas about choice, Michigan has steadily declined on the National Assessment of Educational Progress.” From 2003 to 2015, the state’s NAEP rankings on fourth grade reading and math have dropped from 28th to 41st, and from 27th to 42nd, respectively, she writes.
And what about the money?
Every day, new reports of financial scandals at charters are posted by Carol Burris, executive director of the Network for Public Education. A study last year by consumer watchdog In the Public Interest, found that California taxpayers have paid $2.5 billion for charter school facilities alone. Much of that went for buying or leasing facilities in areas that already had surplus classrooms. The Spending Blind report also underscored the CREDO findings, stating that the education offered at three fourths of the charters was worse than that provided at nearby district schools.
Walters also asserts that civil rights groups are behind the push for more charters. This, too, is a talking point of the privatizers. While it’s true that there is an affinity for charters among many civil rights groups, the nation’s oldest and foremost civil rights organization, the NAACP, has called for a moratorium on new charter schools. Following a nationwide series of public hearings, the NAACP said it “rejects the emphasis on charter schools as the vanguard approach for the education of children, instead of focusing attention, funding, and policy advocacy on improving existing, low performing public schools…”
In any discussion about education policy or politics, the well-informed will recognize the talking points in the carefully constructed narrative meant to accelerate the transfer of one of the most important functions of government into a market-based enterprise.
California’s election of a new State Superintendent next year will amplify the school wars. That race pits Tony Thurmond, a former school board member on the pro-public schools side, against Marshall Tuck, formerly of Bain Capital, on the privatizers side.
There is even more at stake in the race for Governor. Both front runners, Antonio Villaraigosa and Gavin Newsom, have ties to charter funders. Villaraigosa has a long track record of trying to advance the corporate reform agenda and Newsom’s education platform is less clear. Current State Treasurer John Chiang has called for greater transparency and accountability for charters to even the playing field with pure public schools.
The future of public education is at stake in the 2018 elections. Underneath the stories the candidates tell, the issue is, who do we trust more with California students: profit-seeking corporations or locally elected school boards?
Karen Wolfe is the Director of PSconnect, a community engagement program for public schools in Los Angeles.
In 2018, California will elect a new governor to replace Jerry Brown. Brown has been an ally to the charter industry, which has been allowed to proliferate with minimal accountability. This great blue state has put the future of public education at risk. Major funders—California’s Silicon Valley billionaires and of course Eli Broad—are all in for charters and privatization. Netflix founder Reed Hastings gives millions to the California Charter Schools Association, and he has asserted that elected school boards should be replaced by thousands of autonomous charter schools. Absent supervision and accountability, corruption is predictable.
Tom Ultican, who left Silicon Valley to become a high school teacher of physics and math, writes here about the governors’ race.
The candidate with the most money is Gavin Newsom, the former mayor of San Francisco. He has received campaign contributions from Silicon Valley, like Trump friend Peter Thiel. Strangely, he received the endorsement of the California Teachers Association, although Newsom publicly said that he was neither anti-teacher nor pro-teacher. His money comes from charter supporters, but Newsom will have the troops supplied by CTA.
CTA has to d3cide whether it will have a seat at the table or will be on the menu. The Vergara case demonstrated how eager the tech entrepreneurs are to destroy unions and teachers’ rights.
Tom Ultican explains why he, as an educator, will support State Treasurer John Chiang.
Chiang has collected the second largest pot of funding, Not from Silicon Valley billionaires, but from mostly Chinese-Americans.
Ultican writes:
“Because of the relentless attacks on public schools and educators, candidate views on education are key. Many self-styled “progressive democrats,” have adopted education positions attacking teachers’ unions and promoting privatization (Rahm Emanuel, Corey Booker, Antonio Villaraigosa). Some position statements promulgated by Chiang’s campaign:
In 1988, California voters approved Proposition 98, which requires a minimum percentage of the state budget to be spent on K-12 education. Unfortunately, while Proposition 98 was meant to create a constitutional “floor” for education spending, it has turned into a political ceiling. As a result, California is grossly under-invested in public education.”
“We also must protect the collective bargaining rights of our educators, classified employees, professors, early childhood educators and child care providers. It is critically important that the people who interact with our students and children every day have a seat at the table and a voice on the job to advocate for the best conditions possible for our children to learn.”
“We must also increase both the quantity and quality of California’s early childhood education programs and assure free access for all working families.
“We also know that small class sizes are the key to improving student learning. We need to expand the Class Size Reduction program so our students have every opportunity to learn.”
“Cities and states across the nation are jumping on board and are finding innovative solutions to provide two free years of community college. California needs to find a way to get to that place, where we make community college free while ensuring students are on the right path through participation and graduation.”
“To reclaim the promise of quality education, we must ensure that children and their families have access to wraparound services to meet their social, emotional and health needs.”
Read about the candidates. If you vote in California, be informed.
The first law authorizing charter schools was authorized by Minnesota in 1991, and the first charter school opened in St. Paul in 1992. The original idea of charters was that they would enroll students with high-needs, would try new approaches, and would share what they learned with the public schools. They were not intended to be competitors with public schools, but to be akin to research and development centers, abetting the work of the public schools.
Now, 25 years later, the charter sector has burgeoned into nearly 7,000 schools enrolling some three million students. Some charters are corporate chains. Some are religious in character. Some operate for profit. Some are owned and run by non-educators.
Instead of collaborating with public schools, most compete for students and resources. Instead of serving the neediest students, many choose the students who are likeliest to succeed.
It is time for a thorough inquiry into the status and condition of charter schools today, and that is what Carol Burris, executive director of the Network for Public Education, has done in this report.
An experienced high school principal, Burris has traveled the country, visiting charter schools and talking to parents, teachers, students, and administrators.
Not only has she examined many charters, she reviews the marketing of charters and their fiscal impact on traditional public schools. Policy makers have not expanded the funding at the state or local level to pay for new charters. Instead, they have cut funding for the public schools that typically enroll 85-90% of students. Thus, most students will have larger classes and fewer curriculum choices because of the funding taken away for charter schools. Burris also analyzes the report on charters by the NAACP and the response to it by charter advocates.
This is neither fair nor just nor wise.
This is the only post you will see today, except for a graphic that will pop up in an hour or so.
Take the time to read the entire report.
Let me know what you think.
At its meeting on November 7, the LAUSD board showed who is boss: the California Charter Schools Association.
Carl J. Petersen reports here on the meeting.
http://thewire.k12newsnetwork.com/2017/11/10/the-lausd-continues-to-reward-failure/
He begins:
“The California Charter School Association (CCSA) paid millions to purchase the LAUSD School Board, but their narrow majority is in danger. Not only is Ref Rodriguez, one of their hand-selected Board members, facing criminal charges related to his campaign, but the charter school chain he founded has accused him of having a conflict of interest while he was their Treasurer. This, in turn, exposed the charter organization’s lax financial controls. All of this has caused a rare sense of unity across the education divide; both the Los Angeles Times and United Teachers Los Angeles have both called for Rodriguez’ resignation.
“Having reintroduced the chaos back into the District that has been missing since the departure of Deasy, the charter industry played their next hand by blackmailing the District in an attempt to remove language that the LAUSD requires in each charter. If they did not get their way, 13 charters would move to the county or state where even less oversight is provided. Judging by the line of news trucks lined outside the Boardroom on Beaudry, the media was prepared for the November 7, special Board meeting to be full of drama.”
This announcement just arrived:
Contact: Brianna Carroll 650-219-6360 or Sheryl Carruth 562-818-1243
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
California Virtual Academies Teachers Authorize Strike
Educators at State’s Largest Online Charter Schools Network Hope to Move Stalled Contract Talks
Simi Valley[–- By over a 90% margin, educators at California Virtual Academies (CAVA) have voted overwhelmingly to authorize a strike after over a year trying to negotiate their first contract with CAVA administration. [California Virtual Educators United (CVEU) has been working to address teacher and student turnover by raising CAVA’s shockingly low, uncompetitive salaries and to ensure a manageable student to teacher ratio that supports quality instruction and learning. CAVA, which contracts with national online, for-profit charter giant K12, Inc., hires instructors at low pay to teach as many students as possible with low overhead, then funnels California tax-payer funding back to executives in Virginia and their investors to pay for management fees, technology, and other services. CVEU represents 450 CAVA teachers.
Ongoing sessions with a state mediator have so far failed to produce a settlement. While continuing to work and hope for a fair resolution, CAVA members see this week’s vote as a strong show of determination and unity. Additional mediation dates are scheduled for November 28 and 29th.
“Our members are deeply dedicated to the over 10,000 students we serve,” said CVEU president Brianna Carroll. “We believe in what we are doing and are working to negotiate changes that will benefit our students and stop the high turnover that is turning CAVA into a revolving door for teachers and enriching an out-of-state, for-profit company at the expense of better quality teaching and learning, and adequate resources for the kids best served by an online model.”
K12, Inc. and CAVA, who bitterly fought the unionization of CAVA teachers and their representation by the California Teachers Association, have been plagued by other issues reflecting poor management. Last year CAVA agreed to a $168.5 million settlement with the California Attorney General over concerns related to business practices, student performance, and use of public funds. Last month CAVA was required to pay back nearly $2 million to the State of California based on ongoing problems with the reporting of attendance, teacher to pupil ratios and student progress. CVEU believes its unionization and a strong contact settlement will help make kids, not profits, more of a priority for CAVA management.
Guess the teachers don’t realize that the K12 Inc. model relies on low-wage, non-union teachers with large classes.
Anthony Cody writes here about the political power of teachers and how it should be used.
Cody reports on a discussion between Barbara Madeloni of the Massachusetts Teachers Association and Eric Heins of the California Teachers Association at the Network for Public Education Conference last week in Oakland.
Barbara Madeloni believes in the importance of building a movement. It was that movement, working closely with parents that defeated a referendum to expand charter schools in the state last fall.
In California, the powerful California Teachers Association just gave its endorsement for governor to Gavin Newsom, even though he refused to take a position as between the charter lobby and public schools and couldn’t say whether he was for or against teachers.
This is what Newsom said some weeks earlier, in a public appearance:
“I’m not interested in the stale and raging debate about which side, which camp you’re on – are you with the charter people, are you anti-charter, are you with the teachers, are you anti-teacher. I’ve been hearing that damn debate for ten damn years. With all due respect, I got four kids. I have an eight year old, second grade. I have a five, three and a one year old. I’m not gonna wait around until they’ve all graduated to resolve whether Eli Broad was right or whether or not the CTA was wrong. I’m not interested in that debate. I’m interested in shaping a different conversation around a 21st century education system that brings people together, that could shape public opinion, not just here in the state, but could shape an agenda more broadly across the country, particularly in a time of Betsy DeVos and Donald Trump. We need that kind of leadership.”
With views like these, will Newsom remember that he was endorsed by the CTA? Will he care? Is he unsure whether he is for or against teachers? How can anyone who cares about education be against teachers? How can they be bored and indifferent to galloping privatization? It is views like these that laid the groundwork for Betsy DeVos.
The Los Angeles Times published an article about reactions to LAUSD board member Ref Rodriguez’ Legal problems.
It is time for him to leave the board.
Resign.
Enough.
What a model for children.
If teachers were under indictment for multiple crimes, he or she would have to get out of the classroom. Now.
Please note that the president of the California Charter Schools Association issued a statement expressing his concern but does not call on him to resign. The charters in Los Angeles are asking for new rules to speed up their renewals, Free them to shape their own suspension policies, and protect them from burdensome accountability, so they must hang on to their majority. Prominently featured in the article is Caprice Young, CEO of the Turkish Gulen charter chain called Magnolia. Some of its charters were not renewed, and Magnolia is hoping to reverse that deci$ion. Young was previously president of the California Charter School Association before taking charge of the Imam Fetullah Gulen’s Magnolia Charter chain.
This is a heartening story about the schools in Wine Country in California, which just suffered through horrifying fires.
Educators who lost their own homes were back on the job, to make sure the children had a safe space.
http://www.sfgate.com/education/article/Wine-Country-fires-Educators-some-of-whom-lost-12282966.php
This is what educators do.
“Principal Teresa Ruffoni greeted students at Crane Elementary School in Rohnert Park on Monday morning, their first day back in class after a series of deadly fires burned through thousands of homes in neighboring Santa Rosa and in other cities and towns across the region.
“What Ruffoni didn’t tell the children was that a week earlier she had grabbed a few of her most vital belongings and fled from flames that would soon consume her home in Hidden Valley Estates, a hard-hit subdivision in the hills of northern Santa Rosa.
“She was too focused on the students, and navigating an extraordinary period for education in Sonoma, Napa and Mendocino counties…
“Amid the chaos and uncertainty, district administrators and teachers have been scrambling to get schools back open, knowing it was a critical step to bring a sense of security and normalcy to children traumatized by the destruction.
“That’s why on Friday, Cotati-Rohnert Park Unified Superintendent Robert Haley gathered the entire district staff in a school gym.
“Do you want to try and reopen Monday?” he asked.
“The answer, he said, was a solid yes.
“I looked up, and front and center was a teacher with a smile on her face,” he said. “Her house burned down, but she was ready to help her colleagues get kids back in school.”
“Ruffoni, despite possessing only a hodgepodge of mismatched clothes grabbed in the dark of night, was ready to go, too.
“It felt like the right thing to do, Haley said, to help the whole county move forward.
“For many of our students, the place they feel safest other than at home is school,” Haley said. “The adults they trust more than anyone other than their parents are their teachers. That’s why we’re here today.”
Earlier today, I posted the question: Whatever happened to the audit of the California Virtual Academies, which was supposed to be released in March 2017?
The California Department of Education contacted me to say that the audit was released two days ago, and CDE ordered the Virtual Academies to repay nearly $2 Million in misspent funds.
Let me be clear: I don’t think that for-profit Virtual Charters should be allowed to exist. If districts want to offer online instruction, not for profit, that is their prerogative.
But the for-profits, especially K12 Inc. (founded by Michael Milken and known for paying its executives multimillion dollar salaries) recruit students constantly, have high attrition, and get poor results.
In light of Jesse Calefati’s stunning expose of K12 Inc. in the San Jose Mercury-News, I am surprised that these scam online academies got by with a tap on the hand. According to Calefati, the Virtual Academies have collected hundreds of millions from California taxpayers to run low-performing, ineffectual “schools.” ECOT in Ohio was audited and required to pay more than $60 Million. Excuse me, but a fine of less than $2 Million is trivial for these corporations. Chicken feed.
I hope that the fine of “less than $2 Million” is the beginning and not the end of the Audits. The for-profits are notorious for inflating enrollments and collecting money for phantom students.
Here is the audit.
Here are the articles that CDE sent.
CDE: Online Charter Schools Must Repay Misused State Dollars
By Richard Bammer
State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson on Monday said a pair of online charter schools must pay back nearly $2 million of improperly used Common Core education funds.
In a press release, he cited California Virtual Academies and three Insight Schools (together forming CAVA) must remit the dollars to the California Department of Education.
This latest among several other actions stems directly from an audit by the State Controller’s Office and commissioned by the CDE.
The Vacaville Reporter
http://www.thereporter.com/article/NG/20171010/NEWS/171019986
Former Lodi Virtual Academy Fined $2M
By Jennifer Bonnett
A virtual academy that once had a key role in the Lodi Unified School District has been fined close to $2 million by the state for falsifying enrollment figures.
State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson has announced that the California Virtual Academies and three Insight Schools (together CAVA) must remit nearly $2 million to the California Department of Education in improperly used Common Core education funds.
Lodi News-Sentinel
http://www.lodinews.com/news/article_a8ab29bc-ae42-11e7-8ded-03b98ff003ed.html
Virtual Charter Academies In California Must Refund Nearly $2 Million To State
By Louis Freedberg
As a result of a just released state audit, the California Department of Education says a network of virtual charter schools must refund nearly $2 million in improperly used state funds that were intended for implementation of the Common Core standards in English and math.
In addition, the department will require the schools to conduct a new audit of its average daily attendance records and a number of other actions.
“The California Department of Education is committed to ensuring public schools follow the laws and regulations that safeguard taxpayer funds,” said State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson. “It’s critical that our students receive the resources they need to succeed.”
EdSource
Virtual charter academies in California must refund nearly $2 million to state
California Fines Charter School Chain $2 Million
By Sharon Noguchi
In long-awaited results of a 1½-year investigation, California’s finance and education chiefs on Monday issued a critical audit of the online charter-school chain California Virtual Academies, finding several contractual violations and irregularities and imposing a nearly $2 million fine.
The report ordered the charter firm to provide documentation around student progress, student-teacher ratios and excess oversight fees, among other things. It also demanded California Virtual Academies produce an audited opinion on the accuracy of its average daily attendance — on which California bases its payments to public schools, including charters — and to pay the California Department of Education $1,995,148 for improperly handled funds.
Mercury News
Diane Ravitch's blog 