Archives for category: Corporate Reformers
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Brookings Sullies Its Reputation By Aligning with DeVos Agenda for Privatization

By dianeravitch
March 29, 2017 //
35

The Brookings Institution used to be referred to as a liberal think tank. In reality, it was a nonpartisan think tank that hired former high-level officials from both Democratic and Republican administrations and produced valuable studies and reports. As I was ending my time in the first Bush administration in late 1992, the president of Brookings came to my office at the US Department of Education and invited me to accept the Brown Chair in Education Policy. Since I did not want to live permanently in DC, I declined his offer but agreed to be a Senior Fellow. I was in residence at Brookings until 1995, wrote a book on national standards, then returned to Brooklyn. I continued to be a Non-Resident Senior Fellow until 2012, when I was summarily fired from my unpaid position by Grover Whitehurst, who joined Brookings as chair of the Brown Policy program after serving as director of education research in the George W. Bush administration. Perhaps it was happenstance, but the email from Whitehurst came a few hours after the online release of my blistering critique of Mitt Romney, whom Whitehurst was advising. Whitehurst fired me because, he said, I was “inactive.”

Whitehurst served for a few years as head of the Brown Center but was quietly removed as the Chair. Now, he uses Brookings and its prestige to promote the Republican agenda of privatization.

Here is the latest, in which Whitehurst plugs charters because “We do not know how to create or sustain uniformly great neighborhood schools.” He should have added that “We also don’t know how to create or sustain uniformly great charter schools.” There is no existence proof, even though charters choose their students and exclude students with serious disabilities and ELLs and push out behavior problems. Residents of Clark County, Nevada, may be surprised to see that he raised their grade, since most charters in Nevada are failing schools, concentrated in Clark County, and the funding for the voucher program (which he hails) has been halted by state courts. Columbus, Ohio, got good marks even though the scandal-ridden charters in Ohio have become a bad joke.

To make sure that everyone noticed that Brookings was linking its reputation to the most controversial, least qualified member of the Trump cabinet, DeVos was invited to speak at the press conference on the only subject she knows: the glories of school choice.

The press release reads:

School Choice Increasing Nationally; Secretary DeVos to Speak at Release of Brookings’ Annual School Choice Rankings
Proportion of large school districts allowing choice has nearly doubled since 2000; Denver wins top spot for large districts for second year in a row

Rankings from Brookings’ 2016 Education Choice and Competition Index (ECCI)—an annual ranking of school choice in the nation’s 100 largest school districts—will be unveiled today at a Brookings event featuring keynote remarks by U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos. You can watch a livestream of the Secretary’s remarks at 9:30 AM EDT.

In a summary of the results (PDF), ECCI’s author and Brookings Senior Fellow Grover J. “Russ” Whitehurst highlights the growth of choice across the nation’s school districts according to trends tracked by ECCI, many of which can be observed since 2000. Whitehurst notes that the proportion of large school districts allowing choice has nearly doubled over the past 16 years. That coincides with other measures of the growth of school choice, including that the number of large districts for which charter school enrollment is at least 30 percent of total public enrollment has increased from one to ten.

Whitehurst writes: “There is no question empirically that opportunities for parents to choose among traditional public schools for their children, to choose a charter school, and to receive a financial subsidy to attend a private school have grown leaps and bounds in the last 15-20 years. The traditional school district model is no longer the monopoly it used to be.”

The ECCI is not designed to answer causal questions about what system or education delivery mechanism works best, but to reveal what’s happening on the ground by providing a snapshot of choice and competition in each district and allowing for comparisons of specific policies and practices across districts. The rankings are based on objective scoring of 13 categories of education policy and practice. School choice options considered by the rankings include: the opportunity of choosing any traditional public school in a district (open enrollment), charter schools, magnet schools, virtual schools, and affordable private schools.

Whitehurst notes that critics of school choice often assert that the alternative to choice is to assure that every public school is of high quality, but that “universal access to a great neighborhood school is a pipedream.”

“We do not know how to create or sustain uniformly great neighborhood schools. There is no existing proof that we do, and there is strong empirical evidence that the performance of schools varies substantially everywhere there are large numbers of schools to compare…School choice is one way of addressing the reality of the normal curve of school performance by giving parents the opportunity of moving their children out of schools that are in the lower tail of the distribution.”

Students in the nation’s 100+ largest school districts are overwhelmingly (91 percent) in public schools, with 56 percent of the ECCI districts allowing choice within the traditional public schools. According to Whitehurst, “advocates of school choice should take note of the reality that for the foreseeable future the greatest opportunities for the expansion of choice are in the public school sector through furthering the reach of open enrollment.”

Denver, which received the highest score on this year’s ECCI, and the Recovery District serving New Orleans are the only two districts in the ECCI that receive grades of A on school choice. Both are characterized by: open enrollment and a centralized assignment process requiring a single application from parents for all public schools; a good mix and utilization by parents of alternatives to traditional public schools; rich information to parents to support school choice, including a school assignment website that allows parents to make side-by-side comparisons of schools; funding that follows students to the school in which they enroll; a fair and efficient formula for matching school assignments for students to the expressed preferences of their parents; and provisions for transportation of students to schools of choice outside their neighborhoods.

Notably, Camden City School District in New Jersey and Clark County School District in Nevada saw substantive enough changes to move them from receiving an F in the previous year to a B- and C-, respectively. Clark County’s increase in score was largely due to Nevada’s Educational Choice Scholarship program, which was enacted and launched in 2015. Camden, NJ experienced a dramatic increase in score and grade on the 2016 ECCI by virtue of rolling out a new process for school search, application, and assignment.

New to the top 10 list this year are Columbus, Ohio, and Chicago, while Baltimore and Tucson dropped off. Chicago showed a score increase due to its decision to include data on student growth among the information on school performance provided to parents on its website. The score for Columbus increased, in part, because the district documented a student-based funding formula for schools.

Almost one-quarter, or 26 of the 112 school districts scored on the 2016 ECCI, received a grade of F, meaning that families have very little in the way of school choice other than what they can exercise by choosing to live within the geographical assignment zone of their preferred public school. Or, if they do provide school choice, the process is hidden from parents.

You can learn more about the 2016 ECCI rankings by exploring an interactive breakdown of results or reading a report of topline takeaways (PDF).

CONTACT
Delaney Parrish
Assistant Director of Communications, Economic Studies
202-797-2969 | DRParrish@brookings.edu | @DParrish
BROOKINGS
1775 Massachusetts Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20036

Categories Accountability, Betsy DeVos, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Nevada, Privatization, School Choice, Vouchers

Peter Greene: What Two Decades of Testing Have Produced

By dianeravitch
March 29, 2017 //
10

http://curmudgucation.blogspot.com/2017/03/the-lost-years.html?m=1

Peter Greene asks a crucial question: What have we gained–or lost–because of our society’s obsession with standardized testing for at least the last two decades?

When did it start? Before No Child Left Behind was signed into law in January 2002, but not with the same intensity or the high-stakes that took hold since 2002, when the power of the federal government was used to pummel state’s and districts to comply with federal mandates.

This is one of Peter Greene’s most powerful posts. I urge you to read it.

Greene writes:

“After years of hearing how kindergarten has been turned into the new first grade, you’d think at the other end of the K-12 pipeline we would find highly advanced students. And yet– not so much

“I am not going to report a ton of research on this, because the available research is bogus and part of the actual test-centric problem. What I can tell you is what I, as an actual real live classroom teacher who knows actual real live classroom teachers, see and hear.

“This is the result of accelerated early instruction done primarily in the service of test-centric schooling (“We have to get them started early– otherwise how will they be ready for the Big Standardized Test??”)

“It is lost years.

“By the time these same start-em-early push-em-hard students arrive at high school classrooms, they are behind compared to the students that we saw twenty-five or fifteen or even ten years ago. They know fewer things, have fewer skills, and express lower academic aspirations.

“Why? I can offer a couple of theories.

They have learned to hate reading.

“They have learned that reading is this thing you do with short, disconnected, context-free selections, and when you read, you are not looking for something that sparks interest or enjoyment or curiosity or wonder or the pleasure of feeling your brain expanded and grown. You read so that, in a moment, you’ll be able to answer the questions that someone else wrote– and by “answer” we mean from the potions given the one answer that someone else has decided is “correct.” There will be no expression of your own personal insights, and never the possibility that there’s more than one way to understand the text. It is a stilted, cramped way to approach reading, and it means that students grow up with a stilted, cramped notion of what reading even is, or why human beings actually do it.

“With some luck, some students will still discover the joy and, yes, utility of reading– but they will discover outside of school, and they will not expect that the kind of reading that they love has anything to do with the test-centered “reading”: they are required to do in school. That higher level course has additional “reading”? Then I surely don’t want to sign up for that. And since the real task here, the real point of the whole exercise is not the reading, but the answering of questions about the reading– well, I bet I can find a time-saving way to cut that corner. Because after enough years of this, many students conclude that “reading” is something to actively avoid.

“There’s no pleasure there, no discovery, no ideas to mull and discuss, no characters who help us pick apart the thorny questions of how to be human in the world. Just clues for answering the BS Test questions.

“Their years are shorter.

“The school year is now shorter. It is shorter by the number of days involved in the BS Test. It is shorter by the number of days spent on pre-testing and practice testing. It is shorter by the number of days spent on instruction that is only being implemented because it will help get them ready for the test.

“By the time we’ve subtracted all those days, the school year is a few weeks, a month, maybe even more than a month shorter. It was only 180 days to begin with. The test-centric school has amped up a feature of education that has always frustrated teachers– the 180 day year is a zero sum game, a bathtub full to the absolute rim with water. You cannot add something without removing something else. A really feisty or frustrated teacher might turn to an administrator who just said “Add this to your class” and say, “Fine– what exactly do you want me to stop teaching?” But mostly we’re expected to just make do, to perform some sort of miracle by which we stuff ten more rabbits into the hat.

It doesn’t work. Every year students get less actual instruction than they used to, which means their teacher next year finds them a little bit behind, so the school year that used to start on Day One now starts on Day Thirty after the students are caught up– and then it ends on Day 160 because, you know, testing. So the following year those students are that much more behind. And so on, and so on, and so on.

“In the end, kindergarten may be the new first grade, but for many students, twelfth grade is the new eleventh grade.

“There are certainly students who escape this effect, and there are certainly clever teachers who mitigate it. But mostly the injection of toxic testing into the bloodstream of US education has had the predictable effect– it has weakened and damaged the entire body…We have wasted over fifteen years of education; some students have seen their entire schooling consumed by test-centric baloney.

“Yet we keep plowing on, keep committing to Testing Uber Alles. We are losing students, losing education opportunities, losing the chance to awaken some young humans to what they could be and could become– instead, we are still trying to mash their spirits flat under the heavy testing hand. We are losing years that we cannot get back, cannot give back, and this is not okay.”

Categories Accountability, Common Core, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, NCLB (No Child Left Behind), Race to the Top, Testing

What Opportunities Do Charter Schools Provide That Would Not Exist Without Charter Schools

By dianeravitch
March 28, 2017 //
48

Bill Phillis of the Ohio Coalition for Equity & Adequacy–a retired educator who served as deputy commissioner of education for the state of Ohio- asks the question that is the title of this post.

And he answers:


What educational opportunities do charters provide that would not exist if there were no charters?

Sometimes public school advocates say, “I don’t have a problem with charters, but…” A short quiz is an appropriate way to think about what the charter industry has contributed to the improvement of educational opportunities and results.

ο What innovations and best practices have Ohio charters demonstrated that are worthy of replication in the real public school system?

ο What additional and/or high quality educational opportunities are charters providing for regular, disadvantaged, career/technical students and those with disabilities that are not available in the real public school system?

ο What extracurricular activities do charter schools offer that the real public school system does not?

ο Have charters demonstrated stronger academic performance than the real public school system?

ο Have charters demonstrated a lower cost for school administration than the real public school system?

ο In view of more than 200 charter school closings in Ohio, have charters provided more stability for students than the real public school system?

ο Have the threads of fiscal fraud and corruption, funds wasted in charter closings, nepotism, inordinate profits and towering administrative salaries inherent in charterdom established a new normal in school operation?

Ohio taxpayers have been forced to invest in this $9 billion charter experiment. Truthful answers to the above questions reveal that they have, in large part, been bilked; but state officials in charge of the Statehouse continue to throw more money at this failed venture.

If you want to contact Bill for information or to support his activities, he can be reached at:

Ohio E & A, 100 S. 3rd Street, Columbus, OH 43215
ohioeanda@sbcglobal.net

Categories Academic Freedom, Accountability, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Ohio, Privatization

Memphis: Under-Enrolled Charters Cancel Contracts, Dropping Out

By dianeravitch
March 28, 2017 //
16

Two charter schools in Memphis are breaking their ten-year contracts, leaving Memphis because of under enrollment.

http://www.chalkbeat.org/posts/tn/2017/03/27/heres-why-charter-operators-exiting-tennessees-turnaround-district-can-walk-away/

Some residents don’t understand how a charter school can break a ten-year contract.

Apparently the contracts were written on the assumption that the charters would be flooded with applications. They are not.

“Contracts signed by both Gestalt Community Schools and KIPP contain no penalties for exiting the Achievement School District before agreements run out, according to documents obtained by Chalkbeat.

“And by design, that’s not unusual in the charter sector. For better or worse, operators are given that autonomy, according to Dirk Tillotson, a lawyer and founder of a charter incubation organization in California.

“There hasn’t been much attention paid to closures in the law,” Tillotson said of charter laws nationwide. “The laws are more forward-looking than backward-looking when things might blow up.”

“That lack of clarity has suddenly started to matter a lot in Memphis, where charter schools are struggling to attract enough students to stay viable. Both KIPP and Gestalt blame their impending pullouts on under-enrollment — a challenge faced by more than half of the 31 Memphis schools operated by the ASD.”

No miracles.

The bloom is off the rose.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Failure, Memphis, Privatization, Tennessee

Closed By Choice: The Tragedy of Public Schools in Chicago

By dianeravitch
March 28, 2017 //
11

“Closed by Choice” is an important report about what politicians have done to the children and communities of Chicago for the past 20 years.

They have systematically defunded and closed public schools, offering various lame excuses, while opening well-resourced charter schools.

The report can be found here.

” *Of the 108 new charter schools opened between 2000 and 2015, 62% of new charter schools were opened in areas with high population loss (25% or more).

*Between 2000-2009, 85% of new charter schools were located within 1.5 miles of schools that were later closed.

*The 27% of all CPS charter schools that filed a 2015 audit with the Illinois State Board of Education had a combined outstanding debt of $227 million that will be paid back with tax payer dollars. This off-the-books debt is not included in CPS’ overall $6 billion debt.”

The bottom line is that the overwhelming majority of children, who are children of color, have been systematically neglected for the sake of creating a dual school system.

This is not education reform. This is privatization at the expense of the overwhelming majority of children.

This is Rahm Emanuel’s agenda, this is Arne Duncan’s agenda, this is Betsy DeVos’ agenda.

Categories Budget Cuts, Charter Schools, Chicago, Closing schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Education Reform

God Bless Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe!

By dianeravitch
March 25, 2017 //
30

As reported earlier today, Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe vetoed legislation that would have allowed privately managed charters to be authorized without the approval of the local school board. This legislation would have invited into Virginia all the scandals, frauds, scams, and profiteering that have marred the charter industry in other states.

The state’s major newspaper, the Richmond Times-Dispath, blasted Governor McAuliffe’s veto. It claimed that the Governor was stopping innovation, yet it didn’t name a single innovative practice that charter schools engage in. Is it innovative to treat children like convicts in a chain gang, punishing them for the slightest infraction? Punishing them if their shirt is not tucked in? Punishing them if they speak out of turn? Punishing them if they don’t walk in a straight line?

Is it innovative to expect teachers to work sixty or seventy hours a week, so they leave after a year or two, burned out?

The newspaper says Virginia should have charter schools because Florida and North Carolina have charter schools. Does the editorial demonstrate that charter schools in these states have produced better education? No. Does it admit that charter schools in these states are enriching entrepreneurs who profit by leeching taxpayer money from public schools? Does it acknowledge the hundreds of charter schools in Florida that have closed because of financial or academic deficiencies? Does it acknowledge that charters in some states–like Nevada and Ohio–are among the lowest performing schools in the state? No.

The newspaper falsely claims that charter schools are public schools; they are not. Whenever they are hauled into court for violating the rights of students or teachers, they defend themselves by insisting they are NOT state actors, they are private corporations with state contracts. Let’s take their word for it. They are private contractors, not public schools.

The newspaper doesn’t acknowledge that privately managed charter schools are not obliged to accept children with disabilities or English language learners. Leaving them out falsely boosts the scores of charter schools.

The newspaper editorialist might learn from the example of Michigan, which embraced charters at the behest of Betsy DeVos and saw its national rankings plummet from the middle to the bottom 10% on the National Assessment of Educational Progress.

Governor McAuliffe was absolutely correct to veto this legislation, which would have undermined local control and given free rein to raiders of public funding.

The legislation was probably written by ALEC (the noxious American Legislative Exchange Council, which hates public education and any role for government).

Governor McAuliffe, the Network for Public Education thanks you for standing up for the 90% of children who attend public schools, real public schools under democratic control. Your vote strengthened our democracy and warded off the privatization plans of Betsy DeVos and ALEC.

God Bless Governor McAuliffe!

Categories Accountability, ALEC, Betsy DeVos, Charter Schools, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, For-Profit, Privatization, Scandals Fraud and Hoaxes, Virginia

Allen Weeks: Our Texas Schools Are Broken, It’s Time for a Change

By dianeravitch
March 25, 2017 //
17

Allen Weeks writes in the Austin American-Statesman that Texas schools are broken. They are desperately underfunded by a legislature that cut $5.4 billion from the state school budget in 2011. When the economy improved, instead of restoring the money they took from the schools, they cut business taxes. Now, the leadership thinks they can substitute vouchers and choice for the damage done by budget cuts. The courts in Texas say the legislature is wrong. So does common sense.

“Last year, the Texas Supreme Court called our state’s school funding system awful, inadequate and basically a mess – yet still ruled that it met some minimum standard for Texas students. When I asked one legislator to explain this, he said that only three or four people in Texas understood the school finance system — and he wasn’t one of them. Another legislator told me that it’s not about the funding, because if a teacher is good, he or she could just teach “under an ol’ shade tree.” Neither conversation inspired confidence.

I’ve talked with many Texans about school funding, and here’s what they say:

• We underfund Texas schools.

• The system for sharing it is totally screwed up.

• Property taxes are way too high.

“So let’s sit together under the shade tree and examine these points.

“Not enough funding. You need more than a shade tree to prepare students for today’s economy. But if you get what you pay for, Texas is clearly shortchanging its future.

“In 2011, Texas cut $5.4 billion from public education that was never fully restored. Since 2006, statewide enrollment has increased by 16.8 percent, though funding increases lag at 7.4 percent. In 2015, the state cut business and other taxes by $4 billion, resulting in a self-made budget crisis this session. With possible federal budget cuts looming, the situation for Texas students is dire.

“Texas is 43rd in the country in per-pupil funding, though it invests heavily in incarceration. Massachusetts is similar to Texas in student diversity, immigration and other demographics, but its superior investment in education — seventh from the top — has paid off with the nation’s highest academic ranking and one of the lowest incarceration rates. If we’re to stay competitive, Texas can and must do better.”

Categories Accountability, Budget Cuts, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, Education Reform, Funding, Privatization, Texas

Virginia: Governor McAuliffe Vetoes Legislation to Expand Charters and Gut Local Control

By dianeravitch
March 25, 2017 //
10

Congratulations, Governor McAuliffe of Virginia for protecting the children and public schools of Virginia from predatory privatizers. For standing up to Trump, DeVos, and the corporate reform movement inside the Democratic Party, I add you to the honor roll of this blog.

Governor Terry McAuliffe vetoed legislation intended to remove the authorization of charter schools from local school boards. He also vetoed legislation to permit virtual charter schools.

“Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe Thursday vetoed legislation sponsored in the House of Delegates by Del. Steve Landes that would have allowed the state Board of Education to create regional charter school divisions.

“The Senate version of the charter schools bill was introduced by Sen. Mark Obenshain, R-Harrisonburg.

“Also Thursday, the governor vetoed for the second year in a row legislation sponsored by Del. Dickie Bell that would have created a statewide virtual school program that would have provided Virginia students a full-time online education program.

“The charter school legislation would have allowed eligible school divisions to establish regional charter schools governed by a regional board. Landes said the legislation was narrowly drawn and would have included at least one school in the regional division that failed two of the last three years to reach state accreditation. Landes said logically, two neighboring school divisions could partner on a regional charter school at the elementary, middle or high school level.

“Under current Virginia law, the creation of charter schools is left to each individual school board. Only nine charter schools exist in Virginia.

“In announcing his veto, McAuliffe said: “establishing regional governing school boards that remove authority from local school boards and their members, this legislation proposes a governance model that is in conflict with the Constitution of Virginia.”

“The governor said “public charter school arrangements are already available to divisions at the discretion of the local school board, which makes the ultimate decisions about the establishment, renewal and dissolution of charter schools with its division.”

“Obenshain responded to McAuliffe’s veto saying he [Obenshain] has been “a passionate advocate’’ for charter schools. He said the schools offer “a lifeline for escaping a handful of failing school divisions.”

“The senator said the governor’s veto leaves Virginia behind other states. “With charter schools recognized nationwide as a bipartisan educational solution to improve our children’s futures, Virginia remains far behind.”

“Obenshain noted that Virginia has nine charter schools supporting 2,000 students while Florida has 500 charter schools.”

Be it noted that Governor McAuliffe is a close associate of the Clinton family. His vetoes on these bills give a morsel of hope that there might once again be a mainstream in the Democratic Party that recognizes the power and importance of public education.

Categories Corporate Reformers, Democracy, Education Industry, Honor Roll, Privatization, Virginia

Mercedes Schneider on Hanna Skandera, Felled by the Common Core

By dianeravitch
March 24, 2017 //
7

Mercedes Schneider comments here on the Senate GOP decision not to move forward with Hanna Skandera as Assistant Secretary of Education for Elementary and Secondary Education because of her Common Core love.

Skandera is a protege of Jeb Bush. She was deputy commissioner of education in Florida.

Since she took the job in New Mexico, despite lacking the statutory requirement of real education experience, she tried to impose the “Florida model” of charters, virtual charters, A-F grading, high-stakes testing and VAM. COmmon Core was part of the Florida model.

There is something ironic here.

Categories Accountability, Bush, Jeb, Charter Schools, Common Core, Corporate Reformers, Education Industry, New Mexico, Privatization, Testing

GOP Nixes Hanna Skandera for Top Job Because of Her Fervent Support for Common Core

By dianeravitch
March 24, 2017 //
7

Politico reported this morning that Hanna Skandera, the Commissioner of Education in New Mexico, cannot be confirmed because of her advocacy for Common Core. Skandera is a protege of Jeb Bush. Although she has never been a teacher or a principal, she does have some practical experience in education, unlike DeVos. Skandera is also a proponent of high-stakes testing and VAM. Best not to give her the power to push Arne Duncan’s failed ideas nationally.

SCOOP: SENATE GOP SCUTTLES SKANDERA NOMINATION: Wondering when those Education Department vacancies will be filled? Well, the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education may still be up for grabs after the Trump administration recently reversed plans to nominate New Mexico Education Secretary Hanna Skandera for the assistant secretary job, POLITICO has learned. The administration’s decision to pull back an offer came after Republicans raised concerns about Skandera’s support for the Common Core standards. The offer appears to have been extended before Hill Republicans were consulted.

– “About a dozen Republican offices were skeptical that they could ever vote yes” on Skandera because of her embrace of the standards, said a senior GOP aide. Those English and math standards are reviled by conservatives as a symbol of federal overreach. Republicans also weren’t interested in another fight over an education nominee after Education Secretary Betsy DeVos’ bruising confirmation process. Skandera, who sits on the governing board for the Common Core-aligned PARCC test, declined to comment.

– Skandera has about a year and a half left on the job in New Mexico and many believed that her extensive K-12 and higher education experience made her a good bet for a federal job. Continued lack of top staff at the Education Department could hamper the Trump administration’s priorities and ability to work with states on the Every Student Succeeds Act. “Hanna was as good a candidate as they were ever going to get and they do need someone of that intelligence and stature as part of that team,” said one advocate. Caitlin Emma has the story.

http://www.politico.com/tipsheets/morning-education/2017/03/senate-gop-scuttles-skandera-nomination-219385

Categories Accountability, Alternate Route To Certification, Common Core, Corporate Reformers, Testing
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »