Archives for category: Charter Schools

Mike Miles, former superintendent of Dallas public schools and former superintendent of a Colorado district, was turned down by the Colorado Springs school board when he applied to open a charter school in a former Macy’s department store in a large shopping mall.

Miles led the Dallas district for three tumultuous years, during which time there was a sizable teacher exodus and stagnant test scores, which he had pledged to raise. Miles is a military man who attended the unaccredited Broad Superintendents Academy.

“The district’s board rejected Miles’ 210-page proposal 6-1 on Wednesday night and relinquished charter authorization, which means Miles will need to petition the Colorado Charter School Institute, a state authorizer, for approval to open in the fall of 2019…

“District administrators and members of the District Accountability Committee raised numerous concerns about the proposal at a Nov. 14 board meeting, including the governance model, finances, not providing transportation for students and the location being in close proximity to marijuana dispensaries and alcohol outlets such as a Hooters restaurant.

“It would be in both of our respective interests” for D-11 to relinquish exclusive chartering authority and permit organizers to apply to CSI, D-11 Superintendent Michael Thomas said.

“I believe the conditional requirements and expectations that would need to be addressed would not be able to be done in a timely fashion,” he said Wednesday, in issuing a recommendation to deny the application.

“Miles agreed to the relinquishment, Thomas said.

“Board member Teresa Null cast the sole opposing vote, saying sending organizers to the state authorizing body won’t remove the concerns of D-11 representatives who reviewed and analyzed the application.

“We do not think this charter school can be ready for our students by next year, and going to CSI is not going to change that dynamic — they’re still not going to be ready,” Null said.

“Among her personal concerns: “They want to put a playground in a parking lot.”

“Coperni 3 would be the second school in a charter school network Miles is building under the name Third Future Schools. The first school in the network, Academy of Advanced Learning, opened in the fall of 2017 in Aurora, as part of Aurora Public Schools.”

State Superintendent-elect Tony Thurmond urges a halt to new charters unless there was new funding provided for them. He recognized, as few charter advocates do, that opening charters without funding them harms existing public schools.

https://www.politico.com/states/california/newsletters/politico-california-pro-preview/2018/11/20/thurmond-targets-charter-schools-137523

The charter industry, which opposes any accountability, transparency, or regulation, spent nearly $40 million trying to stop Thurmond.

The charter billionaires spent about $62 million to push their single issue in the state elections but lost the two big statewide races. They did better in legislative races, unfortunately, where it was easy to swamp their opponents.

Advocates for charter schools outspent almost everyone else trying to sway California elections in 2018.

Pro-charter groups helped break spending records trying to swing the race for Superintendent of Public Instruction, the most expensive down-ballot fight in California this year. They were also the top sources of outside spending in the race for governor — and even state Senate and Assembly races.
In total, charter school advocates made $62 million in independent expenditures on this year’s elections, according to a KPCC/LAist analysis of campaign finance data.

But most of that money was spent on losing efforts.

Last week, Marshall Tuck conceded the superintendent race to outgoing State Assemblyman Tony Thurmond. Pro-charter groups — most notably the advocacy group EdVoice — spent a total of $34 million trying to elect Tuck.

They were up against significant opposition: the state’s largest teachers unions and the California Democratic Party spent about $20 million to support Thurmond.

The loss comes after a disappointing gubernatorial primary in June. The political wing of the California Charter Schools Association spent $22 million trying to get former L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa into the general election for Governor. Villaraigosa didn’t even come close.

They will now curry favor with Gov.-Elect Newsom.

Pro-charter groups fared somewhat better in state legislative races.

Combined, EdVoice and the California Charter Schools Association spent more than $5.9 million on those races. CCSA Advocates was the largest single source of independent expenditures in state legislative races.

In a down-ballot state legislative race, an independent expenditure of several hundred thousand dollars “is a lot of money,” Sonenshein [of Cal State L.A.] said.

In all, charter groups spent money trying to sway 17 state Assembly or Senate contests. In 13 races, charter school groups supported the winning candidate; eight of these winners were safe incumbents who held their seat by a double-digit margin.

This is getting ridiculous. We know that billionaires like Betsy DeVos, the Koch brothers, Reed Hastings, and Michael Bloomberg have been underwriting candidates for local and state school boards.

Now Teach for America’s political action arm, called “Leaders in Education Fund,” which is part of LEE (Leadership for Educational Equity), is also intervening to elect local school board candidates.

Got that? TFA created LEE, which is part of Leaders in Education Fund, which funds candidates.

(Who supports LEE and TFA? The same billionaires who support charter schools: the Waltons, Eli Broad, Bill Gates, etc. One of the Waltons is on the board of LEE.) Any candidate funded by Leaders in Education Fund is funded by the Waltons and the rest of the billionaire privatizers.

Debbie Truong in the Washington Post writes about TFA intervention into a race in Alexandria, Virginia, where its preferred candidates spent ten times (10X) as much as the other candidates and won.

The winning candidates, both TFA alumni, insist that they are not planning to promote charters.

Why would TFA invest in local school boards? In Virginia, only school districts can authorize charter schools, and Virginia has only eight charter schools.

Why would TFA/LE/LEF/Waltons support candidates unless they intend to support TFA and charters?

Read the NPE/NPE Action report on the billionaires buying candidates for office, Hijacked by Billionaires. Of course, the report only scratches the surface, because it does not capture the full list of billionaires supporting privatization, like Republican Bill Bloomfield in California and the Koch brothers. One of the billionaires listed in the report, Arthur Rock, subsidizes TFA alumni who work as staff in Congressional offices, supplying “free” staff who are looking out for the interests of TFA.

John Thompson of Oklahoma attended the NPE Conference in Indianapolis and learned a lot about how allies in other cities and states are resisting the Corporate Goliaths invading public schools.

He writes:

“Previously, I overestimated how much of Goliath’s failure was due to the arrogance of power. Today’s Silicon Valley Robber Barons’ hubris can match that of their 19th century counterparts, but their control of data makes them uniquely dangerous. As the latest NPE presentations enlightened me on what is working for us Davids as we successfully resist Goliath, I was mostly struck by the evidence that he only continues to exist for the purposes of privatization, profits, and the monetization of data.

“Fortunately, the 2018 NPE conference was extremely positive, so I can move beyond my errors to a post which provides an overview of a) what I learned and b) some ideas on future messaging.”

Thompson attended many workshops and all the keynotes and he weaves together a coherent narrative, answering the question:

“Why do they [the Corporate Goliaths] keep infusing money into charters?

“The answer, it is now clear, is that they are monetizing data. Pearson testing company thinks it knows more about the children they test than their parents do. As Leonie Haimson has shown, Goliath has bought 400 identifiable data points on students. And Summit Learning says it will follow your child through her entire life.

“Pasi Sahlberg’s presentation on GERM, the Global Education Reform Movement, showed graphically how the corporate reform assault undermined schools around the world. He then described counter-attacks against GERM in New Zealand, Australia, Singapore, Liberia, Scotland, Chile, and elsewhere. Educators have a duty to reclaim our professional autonomy. But we also must be willing to state some hard truths.

“Sahlberg says that people want to believe that the kids are “alright.” But, globally, they face a threat that must be explicitly addressed. The well-being of students is declining as screen time increases. Students and teachers must push back against the Goliath which profits from more eyes being glued to digital devices.

“Susan Ochshorn and Denisha Jones brought this dangerous trend closer to home. They condemned children being placed in front of keyboards before they are ready. And this may be the narrative that will really take off. Silicon Valley elites don’t put their 4-year-olds in online courses.

“During the previous generation, Goliath used charters that increased segregation to supposedly undo the damage done by segregation, but most voters didn’t send their children to the high-poverty schools that were targeted. So, many people didn’t understand why those corporate reforms were doomed to fail. Surely the broader public will grasp the absurdity of placing 70 students and 2 teachers in “personalized” learning to address toxic stress that is made worse by premature exposure to too many hours in front of keyboards.

“Helen Gym’s account of victories in Philadelphia is also encouraging. Goliath won when they rushed implementation of policies without an open discussion of their theories. After the Reformers got so overconfident they consulted parents, they lost. In other words, to know Goliath’s agenda is to understand that they grasp very little about what students need and parents want.”

In 2016, Massachusetts voters decisively rejected a referendum to expand the charter sector. State officials don’t care. They are ignoring local resistance and going full speed ahead, as Citizens for Public Schools reports.

The push for charter school expansion in Massachusetts continues, despite the clear message sent by voters in 2016, when 62% said no to Question 2 and charter school expansion.

It’s time to speak out, this time against charter expansion proposals in New Bedford and Haverhill. Contact the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) by December 3 (the deadline for public comment) at charterschools@doe.mass.edu.

New Bedford’s Alma del Mar charter school is asking to expand by 1,188 seats, and Global Learning seeks 100 additional seats. This would cost New Bedford Public schools roughly $15 million a year, beyond the $14 million the district already loses to charter schools.

CPS Board Member and New Bedford School Committee member Joshua Amaral described the stakes for his community in a Commonwealth Magazine article titled “Ignore the charter school think tank crowd.” Amaral writes, “To put it simply, the district cannot afford a single additional charter seat, let alone a doubling of its charter enrollment.”

In Haverhill, the national Wildflower chain has applied to open a 240-seat Montessori charter school. The district already loses more than $3 million a year to a Montessori charter school and, like New Bedford, cannot afford to lose more.

New Bedford and Haverhill students, teachers and families need investments in democratically accountable schools that serve all children, not millions of dollars diverted to charter expansion

We saw at her confirmation hearing two years ago how ill-prepared Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos is when questioned persistently about her views and actions. We saw a repeat performance when she was questioned by Lesley Stahl on “60 Minutes.” This is a person who is unaccustomed to being held accountable.

Now, at least five committees in the new Democratic-controlled House of Representatives intend to question her about her many controversial efforts to protect for-profit colleges, not students; to roll back protections for transgender students; to put the burden of proof on rape victims, not their alleged assailants; and many more of her policies intended to weaken civil rights protections and the duty of government to defend the weak and vulnerable, not the ruthless and powerful.

For two years, Democrats watched with fury as Education Secretary Betsy DeVos sought to dismantle nearly every significant Obama administration education policy.

Now, they’re gearing up to fight back. Lots of them.

As many as five Democratic-led House committees next year could take on DeVos over a range of issues such as her rollback of regulations aimed at predatory for-profit colleges, the stalled processing of student loan forgiveness and a rewrite of campus sexual assault policies.

“Betsy DeVos has brought a special mix of incompetence and malevolence to Washington — and that’s rocket fuel for every committee in a new Congress that will finally provide oversight,” said Seth Frotman, who resigned as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s top student loan official earlier in protest of Trump administration policies likely to be examined by Democrats.

Even in a Republican-controlled Congress, DeVos had a strained relationship at times with some committees. Her main priorities, such as expanding school choice, were largely ignored as lawmakers hashed out government funding bills. Now she will have to answer to House Democrats wielding gavels, several of whom have long worked on education issues and have been among her most vocal critics.

She came to her job expecting Congress to allow her to shift $20 Billion from Title I to Vouchers. That never happened. Her only funding victory was an increase in funding for charter schools, which now get $450 million, which they certainly don’t need, since they are the plaything of the billionaires.

Many committees are waiting to interview her, including the House Education Committee, chaired by Rep. Bobby Scott of Virginia; the Appropriations subcommittee, chaired by Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut; and the Financial Services Committee, chaired by Rep.Maxine Waters of California.

I will be in Washington, D.C., on Thursday for a “discussion” about education. I put the scare quotes around discussion because the schedule is jam-packed, and there won’t be enough time for any in-depth discussion of anything. But hope springs eternal.

A few things on the program of interest.

What will Rahm Emanuel say about Chicago? Will he boast about the historic day in 2013 when he closed 50 public schools in a single day, displacing thousands of African-American children?

What will Arne Duncan tell us about how federal policy can reform the schools, after seven years of trying?

I understand this two-hour event will be live-streamed and available online.

WASHINGTON POST LIVE
Education in America
November 29, 2018
4:00 – 6:00 p.m.
Washington Post Live Center

4:00 p.m.
Opening Remarks

Kris Coratti,
Vice President
of Communications and Events, The Washington Post

4:05 p.m.
Educating in America’s Urban Cores: A View from Chicago
A case-study of the opportunities and challenges facing the city of Chicago’s public school system — from funding to demographics to violence in schools.

Rahm Emanuel,
Mayor, Chicago
@ChicagosMayor

Janice K. Jackson, EdD,
CEO, Chicago Public Schools @janicejackson

Moderated by
Jonathan Capehart,
Opinion Writer,
The Washington Post @CapehartJ

4:30 p.m.
The View from the
Ground: Tackling the Challenges of K-12 Schools
Educators and prominent
activists on the front lines of America’s K-12 classrooms offer perspectives on the social, academic, safety and resource challenges facing students and teachers, including the aftermath of this year’s nationwide teacher strikes. Speakers will also discuss
how access to technology affects student learning.

Lori Alhadeff,
Member, School
Board of Broward County, Florida @lorialhadeff

Geoffrey Canada,
President, Harlem
Children’s Zone

Mandy Manning,
2018 National Teacher of the Year, Joel E. Ferris High School, Spokane, Washington @MandyRheaWrites

Randi Weingarten,
President, American
Federation of Teachers @rweingarten

Moderated by
Nick Anderson,
National Education
Policy Reporter, The Washington Post @wpnick

4:55 p.m.
The Case for Social and Emotional Learning
The majority of students and young adults report that their schools are not excelling at developing their social and emotional learning (SEL) skills. This session will highlight the importance of SEL, direct from the viewpoints of today’s youth.

John Bridgeland,
Founder and CEO, Civic Enterprises

Interviewed
by Victoria Dinges,
Senior Vice President, Allstate Insurance Company

Content
by Allstate Insurance Company

5:10 p.m.
Education 360:
Defining the Debates
National education leaders debate the most pressing issues facing the U.S. education system, including school choice, standardized testing and federal, state and local funding for public schools. These experts will also discuss how well K-12 institutions are preparing students for higher
education and the jobs of the future.

Bridget Terry Long,
PhD, Dean, Graduate School of Education, Harvard University @bterrylong

Robert Pondiscio,
Senior Fellow and
Vice President for External Affairs, Thomas B. Fordham Institute @rpondiscio

Diane Ravitch, PhD,
Professor, New
York University and former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Education (1991-1993) @DianeRavitch

Moderated by
Valerie Strauss,
Education Reporter,
The Washington Post
@valeriestrauss

5:35 p.m.
The National Landscape:
Evaluating Federal and State Education Reform Efforts
Where do Washington and
the states go from here on education reform? Former U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan and former Michigan Gov. John Engler discuss the role of the federal and state governments in crafting education policy and look ahead to what’s next on the agenda
for the nation.

Arne Duncan,
Managing Partner, Emerson Collective and Former U.S. Secretary of Education (2009-2015) @arneduncan

John Engler,
President,
Michigan State
University and Former Republican Governor of Michigan (1991-2003) @MSUPresEngler

Moderated by
Christine Emba,
Opinion Columnist
and Editor, The Washington Post @ChristineEmba

Peter Goodman, who blogs as “Ed in the Apple,” usually writes knowledgeably about education politics in New York City and State.

In this interesting post, he asks the Question of the Day/Hour/Month/Year: Is Ed Reform dying?

Reformers are turning against testing; parents are catching on to the Charter School Hustle.

What next? Can Reformers save a dying brand?

Mike Petrilli, president of the Thomas B. Fordham think tank in D.C., penned a piece suggesting that Ed Reform was over, that it had reached a stalemate with its enemies, but that whatever it had done was here to stay. He called it “The End of Education Policy,” a very cheering thought. Now it’s time to zero in on practice, he wrote. I was happy to see an admission that Ed Reform had run out of gas, but I had no idea how he imagined that he or any of the other reformers would have a role in improving “practice,” unless he meant doubling down on the Common Core.

Peter Greene made sense of all this, as he always does.

He begins:

From time to time Mike Petrilli (Fordham Institute) grabs himself a big declaration and goes to town. Last week, the declaration was “We have reached the end of education policy.”

He frames this up with references to Francis Fukuyama’s book about the end of history, and I don’t know that he really ever sticks the landing on creating parallels between Fukuyama’s idea (which he acknowledges turned out to be wrong) and his thoughts about ed policy, but it establishes an idea about the scale he’s shooting for– something more sweeping and grandiose than if he’d compared ed policy to video game arcades or no-strings-attached sex.

His thesis?

We are now at the End of Education Policy, in the same way that we were at the End of History back in 1989. Our own Cold War pitted reformers against traditional education groups; we have fought each other to a draw, and reached something approaching homeostasis. Resistance to education reform has not collapsed like the Soviet Union did. Far from it. But there have been major changes that are now institutionalized and won’t be easily undone, at least for the next decade.

Okay. Well, first I’d argue that he has it backwards. It was reformsters who championed centralized top-down planning and the erasure of local governance, often accomplished with raw power and blunt force, so if somebody has to be the Soviet Union in this analogy, I think they fit the bill.

He ticks off the gains of the reformist movement. Charters are now fact of the landscape in many cities. Tax credit scholarships, a form of sideways voucher, are also established. He admits that the growth of these programs has slowed; he does not admit that these reform programs reach a tiny percentage of all US students.

One data point surprised me– one fifth of all new teachers are coming from alternative certification programs, which is really bad news for the teaching profession and for students. We’ll have to talk about this.

Testing, he says, in claiming a dubious victory, is less hated than it used to be, maybe? He makes some specious claims here about the underlying standards being stronger and the tests being more sophisticated and rigorous– none of that is true. He says that teacher evaluation systems have been “mostly defanged,” citing ESSA, but from where most teachers sit, there’s still plenty of fang right where it’s been. “School accountability systems,” he claims, are now less about accountability and more about transparency. No– test centered accountability continues to serve no useful purpose while warping and damaging educational programs across America.

The era of broad policy initiatives out of DC is over, says Petrilli. Hallelujah, says I. Only policy wonks would think it’s a great thing if state and federal bureaucrats crank out new policy initiatives every year. Every one of them eats up time and effort to implement that could be better spent actually educating students. The teaching profession is saturated with initiative fatigue, the exhaustion and cynicism that comes when high-powered educational amateurs stop in every year or two to tell you that they know have a great new way for you to do your job that will totally Fix Everything. One does not have to spend many years in the classroom to weary of the unending waves of bullshit. It would be awesome if those waves actually stopped for a while.

Petrilli’s claim is that they have, and that now is a time for tinkering with actual education practices, but his list sucks. “To implement the higher standards with fidelity” No. No no no no NO no no, and hell no. “With fidelity” is reform talk for “by squashing every ounce of individual initiative, thought, and professional judgment out of classroom teachers. “With fidelity” means “subordinating the professional judgment of trained educators to the unproven amateur-hour baloney of the Common Core writers.” “Improve teacher preparation and development” is a great goal, except that I don’t think that means “train teachers to do better test prep and go through their days with fidelity.” Then we have “To strengthen charter school oversight and quality,” which seems like a great idea, though “strengthen” assumes that there is anything there to strengthen in the first place, which in some states is simply not so (looking at you, train wreck Florida). Charters need to be reigned in– way in– and if that means that many operators will simply leave the charter school business, well, I can live with that. Work on the whole Career and Technical Education thing, a goal that I have a hard time getting excited about because in my corner of the world, we’ve been doing it well for fifty years. If you think CTE is a brand new thing, you are too ill-informed to be allowed anywhere near CTE policy.

That’s where he starts.

Now who will take the lead in changing practice, Greene asks. Not Petrilli. Not Bill Gates. Not Zuckerberg.

Greene writes:

It’s all on you.

That’s okay. As Jose Luis Vilson often says, we got this. Even if nobody is going to help us get it, we will still get it, because we have to, and because that’s why, mostly, we signed up for the gig.

Practice is where the action has always been. Education reformsters have tried to create a title of education reformers for themselves, but the real education reform, the real growth and change and experimentation and analysis of how to make things work better– that work has been going on every single day (including summers, thank you) since public schools opened their doors. Whether bureaucrats and legislators and thinky tank wonks or rich guys with too much time on their hands have been cranking out giant plans or just twiddling idly while waiting for their next brainstorm, teachers have been honing and perfecting their practice, growing and rising and advancing every single day of their career, doing everything they can think of to insure that this year’s students get a better shot than last year’s. Just one more reason that the whole “schools haven’t changed in 100 years” is both insulting and ignorant.

So thinky tanks and reformists and wealthy dilettantes and government bureaucrats can continue fiddling and analyzing their fiddlings as they search for the next great Big New Thing in policy. In the meantime, teachers have work to do.