Archives for category: Democracy

 

The rightwing Manhattan Institute recently honored a Betsy DeVos with its Alexander Hamilton Award.

Mercedes Schneider brilliantly explains that Betsy DeVos knows nothing about Alexander Hamilton or his convictions. Indeed, her anti-government views are the opposite of Hamilton’s, but she doesn’t know that.

Schneider writes:

According to MI, its Alexander Hamilton Award is named such “because, like the Manhattan Institute, he was a fervent proponent of commerce and civic life. ” However, Hamilton was clearly pro-centralized government, which makes the award an MI misnomer since MI uses it to honor the likes of DeVos, whose ideology is much more in line with the Antifederalists of Hamilton’s day.

The contradiction did not go unnoticed; on May 03, 2019, Think Progress published an article entitled, “Betsy DeVos Appears to Have No Idea Who Alexander Hamilton Was” From the article:

…The entire purpose of the agency Education Secretary DeVos leads is to use the resources of the federal government to foster better public education. Let’s also set aside the fact that the overwhelming majority of American primary and secondary school students — 90 percent — are educated by government-run schools. If DeVos plans to fight for “freedom from government,” she is in the worst possible job.

Yet DeVos doesn’t just appear to be rejecting the core mission of her agency and the foundational premise of the American education system. She also seems to have no idea who Alexander Hamilton is or what he sought to accomplish as the architect of much of America’s economic system. The early history of the United States was, to a large extent, a battle between a Jeffersonian model built on agriculture, small government, and slavery; and a Hamiltonian model built on capitalism, economic expansion, and a robust centralized government.

Hamilton’s core insight was that healthy markets and a robust manufacturing sector do not emerge from the ether so long as centralized authorities do not interfere. Rather, the vibrant economy that Hamilton helped build depends on a strong central government authority.

Below are excerpts from DeVos’ speech for the MI event, which she characteristically uses as a slant for her own pro-choice, anti-union agenda:

The Federalist Papers, to which Hamilton contributed a great deal, cautioned against a tyranny of factions. These groups of agitators jealously protect and advance their own self-interests to the detriment of just about everyone else.

Sound familiar? Education unions, the association of this, the organization of that… those are today’s factions. One of their own, the late Al Shanker, said this: “I don’t see a voice for students in the bargaining process. I think it’s one of the facts of life… the consumer, basically, is left out.”

That union boss admitted then what’s still true today: factions keep student voices out. But it’s way past time to let them in!

Note that the Federalist Papers were meant to assuage public fears about a centralized, federal government, but DeVos tries to shape a reference to them in order to discredit teachers’ unions.

DeVos is single-minded. She believes that her mission in life is to destroy public schools, weaken the federal government, and crush teachers’ unions. Why is this woman in charge of the U.S. Department of Education, which she despises?

This is one of Mercedes Schneider’s best pieces.

She concludes, with irony:

At the opening of her MI speech, DeVos comments, “I must admit I’m not sure what I’ve done to deserve such an honor.”

Indeed.

So many layers to that sandwich.

 

Larry Lee, Alabama journalist and blogger, tells what happened in Washington County, Alabama, when people got fed up with being pushed around and decided to protect their public schools. 

People are chartering buses to attend the state education board on Thursday to express their opposition to the charter.

Alabama has a Republican supermajority in the Legislature, and that supermajority does whatever it wants. Whichever party has a supermajority, it’s not good for democracy, because people feel helpless.

What has happened to public education since 2010?

A-F school report cards that are basically worthless–except to those who want to bash public schools.  The Alabama Accountability Act which continues to divert millions from the Education Trust Fund.  The charter school law that, as we see in Washington County, makes a mockery of transparency and truthfulness.

None of these have been in the best interest of public schools.  Yet, try to get someone to take a stand and push back and nine times out of ten all you get is a shrug.  Are another superintendent saying, “Well, you know my board wants me to keep a low profile.”

This was until Washington County and a small group of dedicated educators and parents agreed that they were going to stand firm for what they believe is right for their school system and its students.

Thank God they have.

Because in so doing, they have shown us all that David can go into battle with Goliath.  They have set an example.  One that says only a handful of tenacious folks can get the attention of a great big bunch of folks.  Even The Washington Post.

You do it by keeping on keeping on.  By not giving up.  By doing your due diligence and hours and hours of homework.  They refused to knuckle under when the state charter school commission refused to be forthright and share info that belongs to the public.  They have had the backbone and courage to challenge people they know are being disingenuous and trying to pull the wool over their eyes.

They have shown us that you can fight city hall.  That just because someone is housed at the state department of education and have fancy titles doesn’t mean they can run over local school systems.

Yes, a handful of good people in Washington County have shown all of Alabama what is possible when you are convicted.

And all of Alabama owes them a standing ovation for doing so.

Now let’s see whether the state school board listens.

 

The privatizers got badly beaten in 2016, when they tried to lift the cap on charter schools in Massachusetts. Funded by the Waltons and the usual coven of billionaires, they asked the public to endorse a proposal to launch 12 charter schools every year, wherever they wanted to open. The referendum was overwhelmingly defeated, much to the surprise of its sponsors.

Governor Charlie Baker is a Republican who has appointed a choice-friendly State Board, so the privatizers have not given up hope for undermining democracy.

Now they are back with a proposal for “innovation zones.” 

Jonathan Rodrigues writes:

In a world where we’re more and more accustomed to jargon inherited from corporate start up world like “disruption” and “big data”, “innovation” stands out as one of the most empty vessels in which we project meaning without much thought of it.

In the education world in particular, almost anything can be “innovative”. Even bringing back purposeful segregation and differential treatment under the guise of educational opportunity. Governor Baker’s latest “Innovation Partnership Zones” may be clever, but it’s certainly not very innovative.

If only segregationist Alabama Governor George Wallace had known it would be this easy to fool people, he’d had changed his 1963 speech to “innovation today, innovation tomorrow, innovation forever!”.


So what are “Innovation Partnership Zones” (IPZs), and what would the governor’s bill do? It’s important to note here this idea has prominent Democratic support as well, it was only last year that Education Committee co-chair Alice Peisch (D-Wellesley) and Senator Eric Lesser (D-Longmeadow) sponsored very similar legislation.

The bill allows groups of 2 schools or more (or one school with more than 1,000 students) to create an IPZ which would allow an outside organization to manage these schools and give the “zone” autonomy over things like budget, hiring, curriculum, etc. Essentially third-partying away the public good, but doesn’t “partnership” sounds so much better than “takeover”?

The IPZ can be triggered in two main ways.

  1. Through local initiative of school committee members, a superintendent, a mayor, a teachers group or union, and parents. .
  2. Through the state’s Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) Commissioner’s choice from schools determined to be “underperforming” by high stakes testing metrics.

The process would then call for proposals jointly with an outside entity that may include nonprofit charter operators and higher ed institutions….

If past is prologue, the results should look familiar. Brown University Annenberg Institute’s 2016 report “Whose Schools?” analyzed the board composition of charter schools in Massachusetts. 60% of charter schools in the Commonwealth had no parent representation at all. 31% of charter board members were from the corporate sector, heavily from finance.

We should all look forward to our IPZs filled with executives from places like TD Bank, who certainly might live in the “region,”, but have no respect for Boston’s biggest neighborhood.

It is especially worrisome that IPZs will be inevitably pushed on communities of color, continuing a nationwide trend of stripping away voice from families of color from Philadelphia to Chicago, Detroit to New Orleans.

A 2015 Alliance to Reclaim Our Schools “Out Of Control” report examined the disenfranchisement of black and brown families through mechanisms such as appointed school boards, and state and district turnovers. In their 2014–15 analysis, there were 113 state takeover districts nationwide. 96 were handed to charter operators. 98% of affected students were Black and/or Latinx. In New Orleans, parents had to navigate 44 different governing authorities; in Detroit, 45.

The most important innovation of all would be the full funding of schools in poor communities.

He concludes:

In no place where black and brown families are the majority in the school district is the innovation of a fully funded quality public school with adequate staffing, special education services, mental health supports, art and music, full-time librarians, and school nurses ever even attempted.

 

Jennifer McCormick, Indiana’s last elected state superintendent, has 20 months left in her term. She is a Republican, but she is different from the state leadership: She actually cares about students and democratic control of public education.

The Governor and the Legislature have decided that in the future, all power over education will be concentrated in one office: the Governor’s.

The state’s last elected superintendent of public instruction is not leaving office quietly. With just more than 20 months left in her four-year term, Jennifer McCormick is on a mission to warn Indiana voters of the immense power over education legislators just handed off to the governor’s office.

In a presentation to more than 100 parents and educators at Ivy Tech Community College’s Coliseum campus Thursday, the schools chief described the state’s current system of school governance, what it will become in 2021 and why Hoosiers should begin paying closer attention. 

“What we’re going to have is not the norm,” McCormick said, describing oversight of preschool education through higher education. “In most states, somewhere in here, beyond the governor’s office – is your voice. In most states, it’s either the state board (of education) is elected, or the state superintendent goes through confirmation by those who are elected, maybe in the state senate. Indiana will be very, very, very top-heavy in one office, with a lot of control.”

McCormick, a Republican, spent more than an hour highlighting policy differences between the Department of Education she now oversees and the governor’s office and like-minded education leaders in the General Assembly, beginning with views on school finance.

“I know it’s not all about the money, but it’s hard to operate school systems without adequate and equitable resources,” she said, citing numerous examples of funding proposals that shortchange public schools and a growing system of “haves and have-nots.”

She has a singular focus: What is in the best interest of the student.

She pointed out the disconnect between different leaders’ objectives. Gov. Mitch Daniel pushed to get every Indiana student prepared for a four-year college track, she said. Now, under the Holcomb administration, the push is for workforce certifications and two-year college programs… 

“We need to start saying our customer is not the workforce,” McCormick said to loud applause. “Our customer in K-12 is the child. You have to consider their ability, their passion.”

This is a very unusual point of view in Indiana, where the business leaders make the decision and the Governor expresses them. Educators are supposed to remain silent and do what they are told. Communities are supposed to relinquish local control and take orders from the Governor.

This is not democracy. This is not the way public schools are supposed to operate. The Hoosier state is turning into an autocracy where children are useful only as lon as they meet the needs of the workforce.

 

In this comment, posted not long ago, reader Laura H. Chapman describes the Ohio view of education as workforce preparation. The pioneers of education had nobler goals. Above all, they considered the purpose of education to be preparation for citizenship in our emerging democracy. That meant literacy and numeracy but also character development with the hope of cultivating a commitment to democratic values and a readiness to participate in improving society on behalf of the community, not just oneself.

A resident of Ohio, Chapman describes the state’s narrow, utilitarian view of the goals of education. She notes that this goal was announced without any public discussion.

Several days ago, she wrote:

 

Today March 30, 2019, several Ohio newspapers had variations on the same announcement of a new non-profit headed by Lisa Gray, a long standing point person for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Gray is now the “founder” of Ohio Excels, a corporate-led non-profit intent of making evidence of job preparation the priority for all high school graduates . The mission statement also includes educational choice, a policy perfectly consistent with the view that early apprenticeships and career prep from preschool are the singularly important missions of Ohio’s public schools.

This set of policy and practice priorities, comes to us hard on after the State Board of Education published Each Child, Our Future. Ohio’s Strategic Plan for Education: 2019-2024 in June 2018. That plan also included a strong emphasis on workplace skills and early career education, notably with Lisa Gray participating in a “workgroup” on “ High School Success and Postsecondary Connections ” led by LEAH MOSCHELLA from JOBS FOR THE FUTURE (JFF) where Moschella is a senior program manager for the Pathways to Prosperity Network, a collaboration between the Harvard Graduate School of Education.

I judge that plan 2018 Ohio plan (a conceptual mishmash) left too many CEOs unhappy, so Ohio Excels will be putting a new plan is in place–one that is an offshoot of Jobs for the Future (JFF) and the Pathways to Prosperity Network.

I looked at the board of Ohio Excels and see lots of CEOs, many from activist positions in metro area business committees and civic and cultural groups. One is also on the board of Hillsdale College–a radical right school. I recognize another as a major supporter of the arts. Another was leading an initiative instigated by the MindTrust in Indianapolis, seeking more charter schools in Cincinnati with the usual patter about needing more “high quality seats.”

I am still unravelling the connections among all of these outfits, but so far I have discovered that JFF has received 35 grants for a total of about $122.5 million from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation dating from 2002. Early grants pushed the Common Core with “college and career” readiness, beginning in earnest in grade 9.

The Pathways to Prosperity Network has been funded within each member state (e.g., annual participation fee for California, $500,000) in addition to funds from the Carnegie Corporation of New York $450,000, the James Irvine Foundation (about $12 million, most in California), the Noyce Foundation (before it closed in 2015), and SAP an international Software company.

Jobs for the Future,appears to be inseparable from the Pathways to Prosperity Network. JFF has 18 projects in Ohio. All of these are designed to make Ohio education serve corporate interests. I have not yet done research on each of these projects.

Pathways to Prosperity Network (a project and all host to other efforts);
Center for Apprenticeship & Work-Based Learning;
Student-Centered Learning Research Collaborative;
Postsecondary State Network;
Student Success Center Network;
Nudging to STEM Success;
Early College;
Improved Reentry Education;
Jobs to Careers;
Counseling to Careers;
Middle-Skill STEM Pathways Initiative;
New Skills at Work;
Digital Career Accelerator;
Great Lakes College and Career Pathways Partnership;
Lumina Foundation Talent Hubs;
Google IT Support Professional Certificate;
Policy Leadership Trust, and the big surprise:
“Pay for Success in K–12 Education” wherein venture capitalists overtly hope to make money from turning K-12 education into a financial product with little or no public voice and oversight.

Jobs for the Future has “partners.” These are

GOOGLE,
California Endowment,
Salesforce.org (cloud computing, artificial Intelligence),
Educational Credit Management Corporation (ECMC) Foundation,
The James Irvine Foundation,
William and Flora Hewlett Foundation,
Social Finance (Pay for Success contracts), and yes–
US Department of LABOR and US Department of EDUCATION.

This national network of interlocking programs, foundations, and corporate groups has an agenda far removed from vocational eduction.

Ohio Excels, the new Ohio non-profit to be led by Lisa Gray has three staff and a policy agenda for public education that has not been shaped by public discussion. Our students are to part of the “talent pipeline” that CEOs say they want. Never mind what the life of our students may offer or require beyond getting a job and getting ready for a job beginning in Kindergarten. I hope to offer more detail about “Ohio Excels,” Jobs for the Future, and Pathways to Prosperity in another post.

 

I have said it before and I will say it again. Betsy DeVos is the most effective weapon against corporate reform, because she activates resistance and personifies noblesse oblige.

Former New Orleans charter leader Andre Perry has become a thoughtful critic of charters, and he points out that DeVos has become a major cause of a widespread charter backlash. 

As Perry puts it, Betsy Devos’s support of charter schools “spells disaster for their Democrat backers.” How can charters be, as their billionaire supporters say, “the civil rights issue of our time” when DeVos and every Red State governor supports them?

The fact that she wanted to cut the Special Olympics by $18 million at the same time she proposed to increase charter school funding by $60 million sent a loud message about what matters to her. Choice above all else.

The teacher strikes in many states specifically protested the introduction or expansion of charters because they drain money from public schools. In Los Angeles, striking teachers demanded a moratorium on new charters, and the state is now considering legislation to rein in the voracious industry.

In Milwaukee, a slate backed by the Working Families Party and the teachers’ union swept to victory in a recent election.

The drumbeat of scandal and failure haunts the charter industry, and DeVos’s warm embrace is a flashing danger sign.

Perry notes that charter teachers tend to be less diverse than those in public schools.

The price of “reform,” he writes, is steep:

As a former charter leader in New Orleans myself, I’ve seen black and brown communities have to make trade-offs like losing political control, teaching positions, and funding in the name of educational reform. If people of color don’t realize direct economic, political, and educational benefits, then it’s not real reform. Consequently, we need reforms that empower people, districts, and students on the way to educational progress—and hiring and retaining people of color should be an explicit focus of reform.

Should communities of color be required to lose political control and teaching positions in exchange for charters, which may or may not survive, and may or may not get higher scores than the public schools they replaced?

 

The Brookings Institution posted a review of the Mueller report’s findings about Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election. 

The Mueller report “is the most comprehensive account thus far of Russian efforts to interfere in the 2016 U.S. election. Alina Polyakova outlines what the report tells us about the tactics and intent of the information operations in particular and what we don’t know due to redactions.”

Polyakova describes the Russians’ adept use of social media, especially Facebook, to send fake and divisive messages. Their efforts were intended, above all, to damage the Hillary Clinton campaign. The Russian attack on our election and our democracy was remarkably successful.

 

Reed Hastings, the billionaire founder of Netflix, will speak at a tech conference in San Antonio on May 5, where he will be celebrated as a pioneer and innovator.

To those who believe in public schools, Hastings is a nemesis and villain, who has advocated the complete elimination of local school boards and their replacement by corporate management of public schools.

He has donated at least $100 million to creating charter schools.

And as we learned in a recent issue of Capital & Main, a California investigative website, Hastings was responsible for making the state’s charter law a welcome mat for graft and corruption and encouraging districts to poach dollars from other districts.

If you go to the conference, tell him to leave public schools alone and pay more taxes to support public schools. Also, ask him why he has a problem with democracy.

 

St. Louis once again has an elected board after 12 years of state control. It’s hard to know what factors led to the district’s improvement but one factor stands out: the same superintendent Dr.Kelvin Adams has been in charge since 2008. The implicit message appears to be about the value of continuity and stability, which are anathema to Disrupters.

The following commentary was posted by St. Louis Schools Watch, a civic advocacy group:

 St. Louis Schools Watch

Susan Turk,
Editor and Reporter

Congratulations Are In Order!

April 16, 2019—St. Louis–This morning the Missouri State Board of Education voted unanimously to approve termination of the transitional school district superimposed on the St. Louis Public School District at the end of its current term, June 30, 2019.  As a result, on July 1, 2019, the elected St. Louis Board of Education will return to governance of the St. Louis Public Schools after twelve long years.

Commissioner of Education Margie Vandeven recommended the termination of the transitional district because the Special Administrative Board which has governed the SLPS for the duration has accomplished the purposes for which it was established.  Vandeven spoke about four concerns which motivated the State Board to revoke accreditation and institute the transitional district in 2007.  The four concerns were financial status, accreditation history, student performance and leadership instability.

Vandeven reported that while the SLPS had a $24.5 million deficit representing a negative fund balance of 5.79% in 2007, SLPS now has reserves of $78.6 million or a positive fund balance of 22.24%.  Having less than 3% reserves puts a district in financial stress and allows the State Board to dissolve a school district. Their Annual Performance Reports and accreditation status has improved and stabilized and leadership has been stable.  Improvement was noted in the dropout rate, 13.9% in 2007-8 to 8.2% in 2017-18 and the graduation rate, 55.9% in 2007-8 versus 78.2% in 2017-18, among other factors.

Prior to 2007 there had been no less than 6 superintendents in the preceding 5 years as compared to Dr.Kelvin Adams serving as superintendent since November 2008.

The elected board was credited with having undergone 50 hours of extensive training in preparation for regaining governance. State Board Vice President Victor Lenz declared them ready to resume governance. Commissioner Vandeven reminded the State Board that they had two statutory options, either continuing the transitional district and the SAB or returning the elected board to governance, There is no statutory allowance for a hybrid board of both elected and appointed members. At least one state board member, Peter Herschend, had spoken of a preference for a hybrid board option previously.

State Board President Charlie Shields asked State Board VP Victor Lenz to make the motion to terminate the transitional district and return governance to the elected board effective July 1, 2019. Shields then  asked Board Member Mike Jones to second the motion.   After they did so, Shields asked, Jones, Lenz and Board Member Peter Herschend to offer remarks, which they did.

Mike Jones, who never lacks for eloquence, heaped praise on the SAB. He spoke about how hard it is to govern. He said there should be special recognition for their success. That theirs was a story about how to do things the right way, which should be documented.  Jones also addressed the elected board members present, Dorothy Rohde Collins, Susan Jones, Donna Jones, Dr. Joyce Roberts and Natalie Vowell, telling them that they did not represent the community but the 22,000 children in the school district who can’t represent themselves. He implored them to listen to the advice and concerns of the adults in the community but not to take orders from them, to make up their own minds about what is best for the children and trust their own judgment. He said that the hardest part of leadership was making the least worst choice sometimes. He also told them to figure out how to do what the SAB did. He ended with a riff on becoming a team and trusting one another.

Dr. Lenz also praised the SAB, and spoke about the need to trust each other and the superintendent. He acknowledged that the 12 year length of the SAB’s governance was unusual and advised them to learn the difference from people who were giving good advice versus giving them orders.

Herschend revived the old meme of the 5 superintendents who served during a 2 year period. He criticized that Board as a board that was trying to operate as opposed to make policy. He claimed that was the difference between failure and success, told them their most important job was the selection, maintenance and evaluation of the district’s leadership. “If you do that well, the district will succeed,” he said.  “If you fail, it will revert to where it was.” He implored them to care about the kids and ended by saying they were being handed an opportunity to create a flagship district that others in the country would look up to as an example.

Shields added that in Missouri we believe in local control which is why we have state standards but not a state curriculum. So there is a commitment to elected governance. He said governance by an appointed board was always meant to be temporary. He told them he had never seen a process where people were better prepared for the challenge and said he expected them to do a fabulous job. A voice vote on the motion was then taken and all said, “Aye”.

It was anticlimactic. It was surreal.  I should have been happy.  But the bovine excrement being served up spoiled the moment.

First, the data they were using to explain their reasons for taking over the district came from the 2007-2008 school year. That was the end of the first year the SAB governed the district. It is difficult to cull data from 12 years ago on dese,mo.gov.  Software incompatibility prevented this reporter from accessing the data but memory reminds that achievement data was lower after the SAB’s first year than it had been under the last year of the elected board’s governance. Perhaps that is why it was tempting to use as an illustration. Then again, superintendent at the time, Dr. Diana Bourisaw was insistent that SLPS data supported the district keeping its accreditation.  Perhaps using the 2006-2007 data as compared to the lower 2007-2008 data would have been embarrassing.

Second, although Commissioner Vandeven expressed concern that student achievement did not show improvement, that was barely touched upon.  In truth, the ELA proficient and advanced score of 22.8% and math proficient and advanced score of 18.4% from 2017-18 can be brushed aside as inconsequential because of the annually changing tests over the past 4 years. But, during the tenure of the elected board and even some years during the SAB’s governance, achievement on the MAP has been as high as 35% on ELA and 28% in math. Academic achievement has suffered under the SAB. But this may be a blessing in disguise for the elected board. Achievement scores can only rise from where they currently are.

And third, it was difficult to sit through praise of the SAB’s success and criticism of the elected board when Darnetta Clinkscale sits on the SAB. She was president of the elected board during the period of time that the district ran through those 5 superintendents. How could one board be excoriated and the other upheld as the epitome of boards when she participated in both? Cognitive dissonance ran rampant.  But it has been this way through this entire 12 year period. The SAB has been the good board and the elected board has been the bad board and damn any evidence to the contrary.

It is good that the elected board is returning to governance.  But 12 years have been lost. That’s an entire generation of students.  Back in 2003, when a multiracial group of parents from the Parent Assembly coalesced around the idea that electing parents to the Board Of Education could have a positive impact on student achievement, they could not conceive that our civic leaders would react to their electoral success by advocating that the governor implement a state takeover of the SLPS. Twelve years later, with achievement scores dismal, we will finally get to see whether a board informed by parents can make a difference.
_________________________________________________________________________

The editor encourages readers to forward The Watch to anyone you think would be interested. Our city and our schools need as much public awareness and public engagement as we can muster at this time.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Questions for The Watch? Letters to the Editor? Stories to contribute? News tips? Send them to SLS_Watch@yahoo.com
………………………………………………………………………………………………

Calendar

April 18 2019, Thursday, monthly meeting of the Special Administrative Board, 6:00 p.m., 801 N. 11th Street, room 108

April 23, 2019 Tuesday, 6:30 p.m., meeting of the Board of Education, 801. North 11th St. room 108, St. Louis, MO 63103.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Please Subscribe to the SLS Watch.

If you have never subscribed because friends have forwarded The Watch to you, please consider subscribing now. Internet newsletter mailing and management services are not free. The Watch has always concentrated its efforts on getting you the news and analysis of the SLPS that you value rather than on keeping itself in the black. But in order to pay our bills, we do need your subscription. For a dollar a month, you will get news, opinion, and analysis that you won’t see elsewhere in the media. Please write a check today.
Subscribe to the St. Louis Schools Watch.

Name:____________________________________________
Street No.:________________________________________
City:_____________________________________________
State/Zip:________________________________________
Telephone:_______________________________________
Email:___________________________________________
I am enclosing:_____$12 for a 1-year subscription (make checks payable to Commonsense Publishing, and mail to P.O. Box 1983, St. Louis, MO 63118.)

……………………………………………………………………………………………
The St. Louis Schools Watch was founded on the premises that parental and community involvement is needed for good schools to flourish, and that public participation is a cornerstone of democracy. St. Louis Schools Watch offers information and analysis that we hope contributes to a public debate over what changes are necessary to improve St. Louis public schools and what works.

Our mailing address is:
Common Sense Publishing
P.O. Box 1983
St L

Copyright © 2019 Common Sense Publishing, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you are a subscriber/reader of the St. Louis Schools Watch

Our mailing address is:

Common Sense Publishing

 

Bill Phillis of Ohio urges the repeal of the state takeover law, HB 70:

 

It appears that the HB 70 CEO in the Lorain City School District is at odds with the Board of Education, school personnel, the Police Department and the Mayor. The CEO and the Police Department are in a tiff over a School Resource Officer matter.
The Board of Education’s Vice President says it is time for the CEO to go.
HB 70 of the 131st General Assembly was pushed through the legislature with no public discussion in a 24-hour period. It was cobbled together in secret by a former state superintendent and a half-dozen non-elected residents of the Mahoning Valley at the behest of a former governor. The premise of the bill is that a poverty-stricken school district will demonstrate significantly improved test scores and educational opportunities by removing control of the district from the elected board of education. In other words, it assumes that replacing democratic control with autocratic control of the district will solve the issue of low test scores and inadequate educational opportunities. Then if that doesn’t work, the district will be turned over to a charter operation.
The perpetrators of HB 70 presumed that when a school district registers low test scores democratic control of the district is the problem. Essentially their presumption is that, in some communities, the citizens are incapable of self-government; hence, a dictator to run the school is warranted.
The 131st General Assembly made a huge mistake in enacting HB 70 and the 133rd General Assembly must eliminate this horrific wart.
William L. Phillis | Ohio Coalition for Equity & Adequacy of School Funding | 614.228.6540ohioeanda@sbcglobal.net| www.ohiocoalition.org