Archives for category: Charter Schools

 

 

This is a very interesting article that appeared in the New York Times. It was written by Stanley Greenberg and Anna Greenberg. He, I recall, was a pollster and advisor to Bill Clinton.

 

They credit Obama with major accomplishments, but note that over 1,000 Democrats list office during his two terms, and Republicans took control of most states. His personal popularity did not help his party. Now Republicans will control the White House and both houses of Congress.

 

One of his great errors, they write, was neglecting his base.  As Republicans passed anti-union laws, Ibama remained silent.

 

The Greenbergs fail to mention that Obama s major effort in education was an extension of the GW Bush program of test and punish. Teachers, always an important part of the Democratic base, were repeated assailed as incompetent by Arne Duncan and alienated by his insistence on high stakes testing. Duncan and RTTT promoted privatization, worked closely with reformers like Jeb Bush noted for their hostility to public schools, sent millions to TFA to undermine the profession, and turned the Department of Education into a marketing arm of the education industry.

 

 

 

 

Steven Singer writes that at the heart of the school choice is selfishness: me first, and to heck with everybody else.

 

The public schools were created for everyone in the community. They are subject to democratic control. They are free. If you don’t want to go to the public school, you can go to a private or religious school, but your family must pay tuition.

 

The school choice movement wants everyone to choose among public schools, charter schools, and voucher schools. Whenever children leave the public school, the public money follows them. But the public school must still operate its facilities, and it must adapt to the loss of enrollment by laying off teachers, cutting programs, eliminating electives, and reducing the quality of education available to most children. School choice harms the majority of students, so that a few may leave for charters or voucher schools. As school choice grows, the public schools wither.

 

There is nothing so compelling in the research to show that this is a good tradeoff. Vouchers have a shoddy record. Charters are the luck of the draw; some get high scores by demanding strict discipline, some are no better than the local public schools, some are far worse. Why destroy the quality of the community’s public schools to open charters of dubious quality and to send children to religious schools at public expense?

 

Yet this is what Betsy DeVos and Donald Trump plan to do.

 

This is a risky scheme, that puts an essential democratic institution at risk.

 

Singer writes:

 

Though the media would have you believe otherwise, traditional public schools do a much better job of educating children than charter or voucher schools. Some choice schools have better outcomes, but the majority do no better and often much worse than traditional public schools. Moreover, children who continually move from school-to-school regardless of its type almost always suffer academically.

 

So when parents engage in these choice schemes, they often end up hurting their own children. The chances of children benefiting from charter or voucher schools is minimal.

 

It is worth noting that the world’s highest performing nations have strong and equitable public schools, not charters or vouchers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The elected board of the Patchogue-Medford School District on Long Island in New York adopted the following resolution at its December meeting:

 

 

 

Whereas, the Board of Education of the Patchogue-Medford School District has been elected by the residents of the Patchogue-Medford Union Free School District to determine policy and approve programming for the students of the district, within the confines of both federal and state statutes governing education, and

 

Whereas, this Board of Education, on many occasions, has expressed its displeasure with the requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act and the Every Student Succeeds Act, as well as the implementation of the Common Core and Annual Professional Performance Review and the high stakes testing which accompany these mandates, and

 

 

Whereas, the Board of Education wants all of our students, regardless of ability, background, race, or gender, to feel secure, focusing on the physical, social, emotional, cognitive, and relational growth of our students, and

 

Whereas, President-Elect Trump has called for the nomination of Betsy DeVos as Secretary of Education of the United States, a candidate apparently lacking any credentials as an educator, experience in the administration and management of public schools, demonstrating a pre-disposition towards and long-history of support for charter schools and school voucher programs, which by their very nature eviscerate free and appropriate public education for specific economic, social and racial groups, and

 

Whereas, Ms. DeVos has been at the forefront of the establishment of the Detroit charter school initiative, by all accounts an abject failure which hurt students and enriched the coffers of private companies, therefore be it

 
Resolved, that the Patchogue-Medford Board of Education hereby, based on this record, opposes the confirmation of Betsy DeVos as Secretary of Education, and until such time as the incoming Trump administration presents a formal vision for the future of public education in the United States of America

 

and will continue to oppose such a nomination, and calls upon the incoming United States Senate to stand firm by opposing this nominee and affirming this serious need, and be it further

 
Resolved, that the Board of Education invites the president-elect, the nominee for secretary of education or representatives of the incoming education team to meet with them to conduct a forthright and meaningful discussion about the future of public education and their strategies to affect the necessary changes.

Politico reports that the proof of Betsy DeVos’s school choice policies can be found in Michigan. She claims that choice would “fundamentally improve education.”

 

But it hasn’t.

 

Despite two decades of charter-school growth, the state’s overall academic progress has failed to keep pace with other states: Michigan ranks near the bottom for fourth- and eighth-grade math and fourth-grade reading on a nationally representative test, nicknamed the “Nation’s Report Card.” Notably, the state’s charter schools scored worse on that test than their traditional public-school counterparts, according to an analysis of federal data.

 

Critics say Michigan’s laissez-faire attitude about charter-school regulation has led to marginal and, in some cases, terrible schools in the state’s poorest communities as part of a system dominated by for-profit operators. Charter-school growth has also weakened the finances and enrollment of traditional public-school districts like Detroit’s, at a time when many communities are still recovering from the economic downturn that hit Michigan’s auto industry particularly hard.

 

The results in Michigan are so disappointing that even some supporters of school choice are critical of the state’s policies.

 

So, let’s see, follow Betsy’s policies and the state opens bad charter schools and undercuts public schools. A disaster for everyone.

 

Carol Burris wrote an article that was published on Valerie Strauss’s blog, in which she explains that charters are the leading edge of the privatization movement. Corporate education reformers are scrambling to make a distinction between charters and vouchers, but the reality is that charters clear a path for vouchers. Once you sell the public on the idea of school choice, it is increasingly difficult to say that parents may choose a corporate charter chain but can’t choose a religious school. Once you erode the principle of public education as a public good, open to all, responsible for all who enroll, you turn citizens into consumers. Whether they choose a charter or a voucher, their choice diverts public money away from public schools. Jeb Bush argued in his 2012 speech at the Republican National Convention that parents should be able to choose their child’s school the same way they choose a carton of milk at the supermarket: whole milk? 2%? 1? Fat-free? Chocolate? Buttermilk? That is actually a ridiculous argument, because a parent doesn’t reach into a case and select a school. Choices are constrained by geography and transportation. A parent may choose the best private school in town, but the school is unlikely to accept voucher students, and the state voucher won’t cover the tuition. A voucher will in fact cover the tuition only for a religious school that is unlikely to have certified teachers or any of the educational riches of the school that costs $50,000 a year.

 

Charters are no better than vouchers. They are part of the same universe of “school choice” that Trump and DeVos are selling. In DeVos’s Michigan, 80% of the charters operate for profit. Detroit is awash in charters, yet Detroit is the lowest-performing urban district on the National Assessment of Educational Progress. State legislation may call them “public,” but there is nothing “public” about charter schools except their funding. They have private boards; many are allowed to hire substantial numbers of uncertified teachers. If their goal is high test scores, they select their students carefully to reach their goal.

 

Burris writes:

 

During the past 60 years, public education has been the frog in the pot of water, as school privatizers and “education reformers” have slowly turned up the heat. Over 1 million students receive a taxpayer-funded voucher to attend a private school, and close to 3 million attend charters schools. Whether the adjective “public” is in front of the word “charter” or not, charters are at the forefront of school privatization.

 

Opening a charter is akin to opening your own business — but the cost and risk are fully funded by the taxpayers. In most states, taxpayer dollars provide the initial “investment.” This is an odd business model in which the corporation gets income for every customer who walks through the door, regardless of the individual ability to pay. And if the business fails, “owners” are not out a dime, but the customers, who are in this case children, are stranded.

 

It is remarkable that the American public has allowed such risk-free, taxpayer-funded entrepreneurship to occur.

 

If you think that publicly funded, largely unregulated businesses would be ripe for shady deals, oversized compensation and outright fraud, you would be right.

 

In September of 2016, the Inspector General’s Office of the U.S. Education Department issued its final audit report titled a “Nationwide Assessment of Charter and Education Management Organizations.” The report assessed “the current and emerging risk” that is posed by charter management organizations for fraud, waste and abuse.

 

The audited period was less than two years — between late 2011 and the early months of 2013. Thirty-three charters in six states were selected for review. Of the 33, the department found that 22 lacked the necessary internal controls, resulting in a significant risk to Education Department funds. The report also made it clear that the Education Department itself is not doing enough to protect taxpayers from charter management fraud. (The present secretary, John King, led one of the top five charter chains, Uncommon Schools.)

 

Burris cites a small sample of the many charter school frauds and scandals that have emerged in recent years. Misappropriation of funds is not surprising in a sector that receives public funding with little or no supervision or oversight.

 

She writes:

 

What will the future hold under DeVos, who believes that “the more of a ‘marketplace’ we have for education, the more, I think, the better”?
Will we have more charter schools with entanglements with foreign governments? Will we have taxpayer-funded charter schools run by white supremacists? Will vouchers go to schools run by jihadists? Will fraud and abuse escalate? These are serious questions to ponder when the marketplace is the only regulator of school choice.

 

Donald Trump claims our public schools run by locally elected boards of education are “government schools” that fit better with the old Soviet Union. I wonder whether he has thought through his alternative. Freewheeling, government-funded schools, unaccountable to the taxpayers, sound awfully more dangerous to me.

 

 

Peter Greene listened to Betsy DeVos speak about how terrible public schools are, and he goes through each of her inconvenient truths.

 

Two observations:

 

1. She should have described her talk as “inconvenient opinions” since none of what she says is true.

 

2. With all her carping about the public schools, she sounds eerily like Arne a Duncan. He is taller than her.

 

She pines Ned for the days when American students were #1 on international tests but as I explained many times, here and in a chapter in “Reign of Error.” We were never number 1 on the international tests. When they started in 1964, we were last. But in the more than half century since then, we have surpassed all the nations with higher scores by every dimension.

 

On the other hand, there is no evidence whatever for privatizing our schools.

The Republican chair of the North Carolina State Board of Education said that the legislature’s act to hand its powers over to the newly elected state superintendent was probably unconstitutional. The state board is deciding whether to sue. Apparently some conservatives were angry because the state board turned down some charter applications. But the state board chair Bill Corey said they were just doing their job and protecting public money.

 

The decision to strip the state board of  most of its powers was a quickie proposal, enacted without deliberations or hearings, as part of the Republicans’ strategy of taking away the powers of the newly elected Democratic governor.

 

“I don’t want to pass judgment on the governor,” said Cobey, a Republican appointee of McCrory. “But it’s still unconstitutional in my opinion.”

 

Cobey is one of at least two Republican appointees on the state’s leading public school board to take issue with the GOP-led House Bill 17, which not only impacts Cooper but wrests powers from the State Board of Education and hands them over to incoming N.C. Superintendent of Public Instruction Mark Johnson.

 

The sweeping legislation was filed and speedily approved with little public vetting in a surprise special session of the legislature last week, called shortly after lawmakers wrapped work on a hurricane relief bill.
– See more at: http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/2016/12/19/governor-signs-controversial-bill-state-board-education-chair-condemns-new-law-unconstitutional/#sthash.lJPP1vlx.q3uT8oyu.dpuf

 

Meanwhile, the new superintendent of the state’s schools, a 33-year-old lawyer who had two years in the classroom as a TFA recruit, said he supported the controversial bill that gave him many of the powers of the state board, including the power to approve new charters and control of the new “achievement school district,” modeled on the one that failed in Tennessee.

 

The state board plans to meet again to review its options.

Peter Greene here debates a libertarian proponent of school choice–on his blog, not in person.

 

The debate typically begins with the undocumented assertion that public schools are failing. This is a standby of the  school choice crowd. I demolished that particular claim in my last book, “Reign of Error.” The public schools are actually performing (if you mean test scores and graduation rates) better than ever, and in affluent districts, they are doing a great job.

 

Greene uses the shaky claims for choice as an opportunity to knock them down, one by one. No, educators don’t need to be “incentivized” by competition. No, choice does not “empower” parents. It enables schools to choose the students they want and reject the ones they don’t. It’s most certain result is hypersegregation. By Race, religion, and social class. That’s why “school choice” was the rallying cry of southern segregationists in the 1950s and early 1960s.

 

He doesn’t mention the fact that none of the highest performing nations in the world have adopted school choice.

 

 

An earlier post today was about the “charter school bubble,” but the link didn’t work. That happens sometimes with links.

 

Fortunately, reader Jack Covey supplied a story that appeared in the Village Voice that contains a picture of students making mouth bubbles and details about the charter school that teaches proper mouth bubble action. When a STUDENTS makes a mouth bubble, he or she can’t talk. That’s the point. Silence.

 

Open the the link and you will never again wonder what a charter school mouth bubble is.

You may have come across the term “mouth bubble” when reading about charter schools. Or maybe you have not.

 

But they are real. Here is a picture of charter school children blowing “mouth bubbles.”

 

A reader suggested googling the term, and there was the picture.

 

Children in “no excuses” charter schools are not allowed to speak in the hallways. They are told that if they feel an urge to speak, they should blow a “mouth bubble” instead.

 

And that is what you see in the photo.