Archives for category: Charter Schools

 

EdWeek reports that Congress’s new budget ignored the funding proposals by the Trump administration’s to slash education spending and shift large sums of money to choice. 

Congratulations to a bipartisan coalition in a congress that stopped Trump and DeVos from performing radical surgery on useful federal programs.

“Lawmakers sent a message to President Donald Trump and Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos in their bill to fund the federal government: We’re not the biggest fans of your big education ideas.

“Congress would increase spending at the U.S. Department of Education by $2.6 billion over previously enacted levels in fiscal year 2018, up to $70.9 billion, under a new omnibus spending bill that could finally resolve a months-long logjam on Capitol Hill.

“In addition, funding for Title I, the biggest pot of federal money for public schools, which is earmarked for disadvantaged students, would increase by $300 million from fiscal 2017 enacted spending, up to $15.8 billion.

“The fiscal 2018 spending bill, released late Wednesday, doesn’t contain several key changes sought by Trump in his first budget plan. In fact, Trump’s budget plan for fiscal 2018 would have cut discretionary education spending by $9.2 billion. So Congress’ bill is a significant rebuke of sorts to the president’s education vision.

“In fact, the spending bill leaves out a $250 million private school choice initiative the president and DeVos sought, as well as a $1 billion program designed to encourage open enrollment in districts.

“Title II, which provides professional development to educators, would be flat-funded at roughly $2.1 billion. The Trump budget pitch for fiscal 2018 eliminated Title II entirely—it was the single biggest cut to K-12 Trump sought for fiscal 2018. And Title IV, a block grant for districts that can fund a diverse set of needs from school safety to ed-tech, would receive $1.1 billion, a big increase from its curent funding level of $400 million. Trump also sought to eliminate Title IV.

“Funding for 21st Century Community Learning Centers would rise up by $20 million up to $1.2 billion; that’s another program the Trump budget proposal axed. In addition, special education grants would go up by $299 million to $13.1 billion. And federal aid to charter schools would increase to $400 million, a $58 million boost…

”The top Senate Democrat for education, Sen. Patty Murray of Washington state, praised the bipartisan agreement to dismiss the “extreme ideas to privatize our nation’s public schools and dismantle the Department of Education” from DeVos.”

Too bad that the federal government will put more money into charters. Democrats still fail to realize the dangers of privatization posed by privately managed charters, which take public money but fight accountability and oversight. Nor do they seem alarmed that public schools are being eliminated in cities like Indianapolis and Washington, D.C.

 

The Center for American Progress published a useful review of voucher research, which concludes that going to a voucher school is equivalent to losing 1/3 of a year of schooling. Over the past year or so, I have posted the individual studies of vouchers as they appeared, and it is helpful to have them summarized in one place.

The authors of this research review—Ulrich Boser, Meg Bender, and Erin Roth—are senior analysts at CAP. They have done a good job in pulling together the many studies and analyzing the negative effects of vouchers on children. Researchers do not agree on the wisdom of converting test score gains or losses into “days of learning,” a strategy invented by researchers at CREDO, but the authors here use the device against the choice advocates who use it to bash public schools.

CAP is a puzzle to me. Throughout the Obama years, it was a safe haven and cheerleading squad for everything associated with the Obama administration, including the failed, odious, and ineffective Race to the Top.

As this carefully researched paper makes clear, CAP opposes vouchers. But where is CAP on charters? Is it still defending the Obama-Duncan line that school choice is good and traditional public schools are not? Is it willing to do the same research-based review of charters that it did of vouchers?

Does CAP still believe in school choice? Does it support half of the Trump-DeVos agenda? Or will it help return the Democratic Party to its roots by acknowledging the importance of strong public schools, democratically governed, subject to state and federal laws, doors open to all?

 

 

 

This is a good article in the New York Daily News by Alyssa Katz, of the Daily News about Cynthia Nixon’s challenge to Andrew Cuomo in the Democratic primary in New York.

She says that Cynthia Nixon should not be written off.

Cuomo has raised $30 million, almost all of it from fat cats and Wall Street.

Nixon, unlike Cuomo, is a genuine progressive.

Cuomo has helped Republicans retain control of the State Senate, even though Democrats have a numerical majority. Cuomo has allied himself with a breakaway group of rightwing Democrats (the Independent Democratic Caucus), who side with the Republicans and keep the Republicans in power. At Cuomo’s last election, he persuaded the Working Families Party to endorse him by promising to help Democrats win back the Senate. The day after he won the WFP endorsement, he broke his promise. That is why the leader of the State Senate is a rightwing Republican, John Flanagan, who defeats every progressive measure.

Nixon promises to change Albany’s culture of corruption. One of Cuomo’s closest aides was recently convicted of taking bribes.

She is way ahead of Cuomo on education issues. She went to public school, and she sends her own children to public schools. She understands that the state has failed to fund the public schools in response to court orders. She knows that Cuomo does the bidding of the charter industry, who have given generously to Cuomo. She knows that Cuomo supports vouchers, in a blatant appeal to religious groups. She remembers that Cuomo promised to “break up the public education monopoly” by funding billionaire-backed charters.

Cynthia is intelligent, quick on her feet, and unafraid of Cuomo, who likes to bully people.

At Cuomo’s last Democratic primary four years ago, Zephyr Teachout won 34% of the vote, with no money or media exposure or  name recognition. She swept upstate New York. Now she is treasurer of Cynthia Nixon’s campaign.

If Nixon can win Teachout’s 34% by building on her New York City appeal, and add to it with the free media and name recognition that Teachout never had, Cuomo should worry.

 

 

 

The Carpe Diem charter school in San Antonio announced that it was closing its doors in June. The charter chain relies heavily on “personalized learning” and “blended learning,” which means a lot of instruction takes place on computer screens. It failed to meet academic standards two years in a row and was not likely to improve in its third year.

Carpe Diem was part of the initial cohort of schools recruited by Choose to Succeed, a school choice campaign that sought to attract high-performing charter districts to San Antonio. While the other Choose to Succeed districts — KIPP San Antonio, BASIS, Great Hearts Academies, IDEA Public Schools and Rocketship Education — built campuses across the city, Carpe Diem floundered. Its enrollment hovered between 200 and 250 students at its single campus on the West Side.

Former Mayor Julian Castro embraced charter schools and promised to have a large proportion of the students in the city enrolled in them. He created the campaign that welcomed the big corporate charter chains to San Antonio. The new Mayor, Ron Nuremberg, is not hostile to charters but has emphasized that charters should be complements to high quality public schools, not replacements.

 

Michigan has a major problem. Test scores on NAEP and state exams have fallen signicantly over the past decade for every demographic, the state spends $1 Billion on charter schools with no accountability, Detroit is the worst performing city in the nation on NAEP.

The leaders of the state’s business community looked at the crisis and decided that the state needs to stick to its current policies and do more of the same. but with greater intensity.

Clearly, the business elite decided to ignore studies such as this one by Professor David Arsen of Michigan State University, which concluded that state policies promoting competition and choice were causing fiscal stress and instability in traditional districts. Even a small parasite can do terrible damage to a large body.

 

Ever since the School Choice Movement got momentum in the early 1990s, its proponents have claimed that charters and vouchers would “save poor kids from failing schools.” Their metric, of course, was scores on standardized test scores, and they welcomed No Child Left Behind and its successor Race to the Top. They were certain that choice schools—free to select their students, free to kick out students, free from bureaucracy, free from unions, free to pay differential pay to teachers—would prove their value by generating sky-high test scores.

There are some charter schools that get high scores, but most don’t. Most studies find that some charters get high scores, some get the same scores as nearby schools, and some are far worse than the so-called “failing schools.”

Recent voucher studies have converged on the finding that students who use vouchers actually lose ground as compared to their peers who won a voucher but didn’t use it. The more optimistic say that the voucher students make up the lost ground in 3-4 years, but they don’t take into account the attrition of the weakest students from the voucher schools.

A new paper by three school choice advocates concludes that test scores are not the best measure of success (whoa! Who knew?). Other long-term impacts, they say, matter more, like graduation rates. Why are they moving the goal posts? Voucher programs show no academic gains, but they do show higher graduation rates, so that’s what really matters. There is a trick here, however. Every voucher program has a high rate of attrition, which pro-choice researchers ignore or downplay. The “higher graduation rates” in evaluations of voucher programs in Milwaukee and D.C. do not acknowledge the high number of kids who started ninth grade and didn’t make it to the end of twelfth grade.

Patrick Wolf of the Department of Educational Reform at the University of Arkansas (funded primarily by the Walton Family Foundation) conducted the official evaluations of both Milwaukee and the District of Columbia. In his initial report about Milwaukee, he wrote that the attrition rate was 75%, but decided that was an error and revised the attrition rate to 56%. Either number is huge. Huge and huger. 

The survivors had a higher graduation rate than the students in the Milwaukee Public Schools, which included the kids who dropped out of the voucher schools.

Wolf’s D.C. evaluation does not break out the attrition rate, but it is likely to be significant. William Mathis of the National Education Policy Center reviewed Wolf’s Congressionally mandated evaluation of the D.C. voucher program but could not determine with certainty how many students had dropped out before graduating, but it appears to be nearly three-quarters.

All of this is background to Secretary Betsy DeVos’ nonchalant response to the latest [2017] negative evaluation of the D.C voucher program.  She never expected vouchers to raise test scores, she says. And it doesn’t matter.

 

 

 

Paramount Collegiate Academy in Sacramento, California, closed its doors in mid-February. Parents received notice on the same day that the school closed, leaving students to find another placement in mid-year.

The charter school had been turned down by the school district, turned down by the county board of education, but approved over their objections by the state board of education, which has never seen a charter it can’t approve.

Parents started showing up at San Juan Unified School District asking to enroll their children after they received a letter from the El Camino Avenue school announcing it would be closing that same day. The letter said the school board was initiating bankruptcy proceedings…

The letter said that the board voted to close the school in a special meeting because of financial problems caused by low enrollment and undisclosed issues with a new landlord.

Fortunately for the students, the public schools are available to take them back. They would have little chance of getting into another charter in mid-year.

California needs a governor who will appoint a state board of education that is not a doormat for charter operators.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/education/article199107149.html#storylink=cpy

 

Earlier today, I posted an article criticizing Michigan’s floundering and unaccountable charter schools, based on a report by Education Trust Midwest. I have long known EdTrust as a DC-based organization heavily funded by the Gates Foundation as a cheerleader for high-stakes Testing as the remedy for low test scores of black and brown children. Last night, I saw a tweet that referenced the PIE Network, a collection of 70 corporate education reform groups spread across the nation, all committed to the testing and privatization network. There in Michigan was Education Trust Midwest. Check it and seee which groups in your state are part of this insidious network.

In a comment posted earlier on the blog, Nancy Flanagan, a veteran teacher and blogger, offers reasons not to trust EdTrust on the topic of charter schools.

She writes:

“I once was on the dias with Amber Arellano for a panel discussion on improving MI schools. The setting was an event for Oakland County school boards. Oakland County is Michigan’s richest county, and most of its public school districts are well-regarded, among the top-scoring districts in the state. The audience was elected school board members for these PUBLIC school districts, people who were presumably focused on improving the educational offerings and succcesses in the districts they represented.

“And what did Amber Arellano, Education Trust Midwest’s glamorous and charismatic CEO want to talk about? Charter schools and increasing choice. She framed her remarks by noting the number of failed charters in nearby Detroit. Left unsaid, but hanging in the air: Charters in Oakland County wouldn’t fail, because, well… let’s just say that the student populations would be different. Oakland County kids would benefit from an array of boutique charters for students’ individual passions and interests. Oakland County charters would be managed by innovative educators.

“That was her message. I was stunned. Wasn’t this audience dedicated to preserving public education?? Evidently not, as she was surrounded, after the program, by would-be innovators and entrepreneurs, wanting her advice on how to capitalize on MI’s charter laws.

“Her chief talking point is reflected in the report: You, too, can start a charter, but to sustain it, you must generate “good data.”

“This is the next logical step in Michigan’s utterly failed charter movement (driven by terrible legislation): First, we attract families to charters in areas (like Detroit) where public schools are in intense poverty and have been mismanaged by the state. The low-hanging fruit. Then, we go after the school districts that aren’t in trouble, while pointing fingers at the charters (and charter operators) who are taking on the most troubled kids. We can do better, we tell them.

“The purpose of this report is to spread the charter movement into solidly performing public districts who have thus far resisted the lure of the boutique charter, by once again contrasting (mostly white) children of privilege with children in struggling, underfunded schools in our poorest cities and rural areas.”

 

 

Tom Ultican shows how The Mind Trust has dutifully implemented the rightwing agenda in Indianapolis. Fattened with big contributions from far-right foundations, the Mind Trust has done  a thorough job of undermining public education in that city. Now its leader, David Harris, has decided to create yet another national corporate reform organization, having established his bona fides with the Walton Family Foundation and the Arnold Foundation. Walton loves charters and hates unions. Ex-Enron John Arnold loves charters and hates public sector pensions.

Republicans in the State Capitol must love David Harris. He cleverly uses his Democratic credentials to pursue the Trump-DeVos-Pence agenda of privatization.

 

This story was published in 2016. It remains the best single description of the chaos that free-market advocates have inflicted on the children of Detroit.

Please read it. Don’t skim it. Read it.

Detroit is a city with many choices and very few good choices. It is a city overrun with charter schools. Many of them operate for profit. The companies profit, the children lose.

“Michigan leapt at the promise of charter schools 23 years ago, betting big that choice and competition would improve public schools. It got competition, and chaos.

”Detroit schools have long been in decline academically and financially. But over the past five years, divisive politics and educational ideology and a scramble for money have combined to produced a public education fiasco that is perhaps unparalleled in the United States.

“While the idea was to foster academic competition, the unchecked growth of charters has created a glut of schools competing for some of the nation’s poorest students, enticing them to enroll with cash bonuses, laptops, raffle tickets for iPads and bicycles. Leaders of charter and traditional schools alike say they are being cannibalized, fighting so hard over students and the limited public dollars that follow them that no one thrives.

“Detroit now has a bigger share of students in charters than any American city except New Orleans, which turned almost all its schools into charters after Hurricane Katrina. But half the charters perform only as well, or worse than, Detroit’s traditional public schools.

“The point was to raise all schools,” said Scott Romney, a lawyer and board member of New Detroit, a civic group formed after the 1967 race riots here. “Instead, we’ve had a total and complete collapse of education in this city…”

“The 1993 state law permitting charter schools was not brought on by academic or financial crisis in Detroit — those would come later — but by a free-market-inclined governor, John Engler. An early warrior against public employee unions, he embraced the idea of creating schools that were publicly financed but independently run to force public schools to innovate.

“To throw the competition wide open, Michigan allowed an unusually large number of institutions, more than any other state, to create charters: public school districts, community colleges and universities. It gave those institutions a financial incentive: a 3 percent share of the dollars that go to the charter schools. And only they — not the governor, not the state commissioner or board of education — could shut down failing schools.

“For-profit companies seized on the opportunity; they now operate about 80 percent of charters in Michigan, far more than in any other state. The companies and those who grant the charters became major lobbying forces for unfettered growth of the schools, as did some of the state’s biggest Republican donors.

“Sometimes, they were one and the same, as with J. C. Huizenga, a Grand Rapids entrepreneur who founded Michigan’s largest charter school operator, the for-profit National Heritage Academies. Two of the biggest players in Michigan politics, Betsy and Dick DeVos — she the former head of the state Republican Party, he the heir to the Amway fortune and a 2006 candidate for governor — established the Great Lakes Education Project, which became the state’s most pugnacious protector of the charter school prerogative…

”Operators were lining up to get into the city, and in 2011, after a conservative wave returned the governor’s office and the Legislature to Republican control for the first time in eight years, the Legislature abolished a cap that had limited the number of charter schools that universities could create to 150.

“Some charter school backers pushed for a so-called smart cap that would allow only successful charters to expand. But they could not agree on what success should look like, and ultimately settled for assurances from lawmakers that they could add quality controls after the cap was lifted.

“In fact, the law repealed a longstanding requirement that the State Department of Education issue yearly reports monitoring charter school performance.

“At the same time, the law included a provision that seemed to benefit Mr. Huizenga, whose company profits from buying buildings and renting them back to the charters it operates. Earlier that year he had lost a tax appeal in which he argued that a for-profit company should not have to pay taxes on properties leased to schools. The new law granted for-profit charter companies the exemption he had sought.

“Just as universities were allowed to charter more schools, Gov. Rick Snyder created a state-run district, with new charters, to try to turn around the city’s worst schools. Detroit was soon awash in choice, but not quality.

“Twenty-four charter schools have opened in the city since the cap was lifted in 2011. Eighteen charters whose existing schools were at or below the district’s dismal performance expanded or opened new schools…

”With about $1.1 billion in state tax dollars going to charter schools, those that grant the charters get about $33 million. Those institutions are often far from the schools; one, Bay Mills Community College, is in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, nearly 350 miles away — as far from Detroit as Portland, Me., is from New York City…

”“People here had so much confidence in choice and choice alone to close the achievement gap,” said Amber Arellano, the executive director of the Education Trust Midwest, which advocates higher academic standards. “Instead, we’re replicating failure.”

Some children have attended three, four, five different charters. They compete for the kids and the money.

When there was a bipartisan effort in the legislature to establish accountability, the DeVos family fought it and won.