Archives for category: Disruption
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Robert Hubbell: What Can We Do About Our Rogue Supreme Court? Expand It.

By dianeravitch
July 6, 2023 //
61

Robert Hubbell shares some interesting and informative comments about our Supreme Court, which seems determined to roll back the past century of social progress. The Court is whittling away—in some cases, hacking away—at our rights. Whereas we long believed that the High Court would always defend the rights of citizens, we can no longer count on it. The Court majority seems determined to impose a far-right “Originalist” philosophy on the entire nation. Of course, if they were really Originalists, pretending that it was 1790, Amy Coney Barrett and Clarence Thomas would resign at once. The Founding Fathers never imagined that women and Blacks would vote, become lawyers and judges. Resign, Amy and Clarence.

Robert Hubbell writes:

Last week’s rulings from the Supreme Court continue to lead the news as the nation celebrates the 4th of July holiday. The Washington Post’s headline reads Biden faces renewed pressure to embrace Supreme Court overhaul. The details matter less than the fact that the notion of Supreme Court reform is the top story on a day when the Court issued no opinions. And the Supreme Court is top of mind for many readers, many of whom recommended articles and action items for other readers in yesterday’s Comment section. Chief among those recommendations was Rebecca Solnit’s exhortation in The Guardian, The US supreme court has dismantled our rights but we still believe in them. Now we must fight.

Solnit is a gifted writer who hit the mark in capturing the feelings of millions of Americans. She first addresses the feelings of anger and frustration about a Court that is out of control:

The first thing to remember about the damage done by the US supreme court this June and the June before is that each majority decision overturns a right that we had won. [¶]

Each of those victories was hard-won, often by people who began when the rights and protections they sought seemed inconceivable, then unlikely, then remote, and so goes the road of profound change almost every time. [¶]

To recognize the power of this change requires a historical memory. . . . Memory is a superpower, because memory of how these situations changed is a memory of our victories and our power. Each of these victories happened both through the specifics of campaigns to change legislation but also through changing the public imagination. The supreme court can dismantle the legislation but they cannot touch the beliefs and values.

In words that I wish I had written, Solnit urges us to action:

[H]istory shows us that when we come together with ferocious commitment to a shared goal we can be more powerful than institutions and governments. The right would like us to feel defeated and powerless. We can feel devastated and still feel powerful or find our power. This is not a time to quit. It’s a time to fight.

Other readers shared Jennifer Rubin’s op-ed in The Washington Post, Self-government is worth defending from an illegitimate Supreme Court.

On this Independence Day, we should reaffirm the twin pillars of democracy: Voters (not the mob) pick their leaders, and elected leaders (not unelected judges) make policy decisions for which they are held accountable.

On this Independence Day, we should reaffirm the twin pillars of democracy: Voters (not the mob) pick their leaders, and elected leaders (not unelected judges) make policy decisions for which they are held accountable.

Rubin identifies the many ways in which the Court has strayed from its legitimate role as a judicial body (familiar ground for readers of this newsletter) but highlights the particularly destructive role of the “Major Questions Doctrine.” That judge-made doctrine arrogates to the Court the right to overturn any decision by a federal agency with which the reactionary majority disagrees. The pseudo-rationale for the doctrine is that if Congress intends to delegate discretion to federal agencies on “major questions,” it should use a level of specificity that is to the liking of the Supreme Court.

Says who?

The doctrine was invented from whole cloth to justify judicial activism in service of an anti-government agenda. As Jennifer Rubin writes,

The mumbo-jumbo “major questions doctrine” is not the stuff of judging. No wonder the chief justice got touchy when Kagan pointed out that the court “is supposed to stick to its business — to decide only cases and controversies and to stay away from making this Nation’s policy about subjects like student-loan relief.”

Ian Millhiser explains the Major Questions Doctrine in detail in his article in Vox, entitled, The Supreme Court’s student loan decision in Biden v. Nebraska is lawless and completely partisan. Millhiser does not mince words:

Let’s not beat around the bush. The Supreme Court’s decision in Biden v. Nebraska, the one canceling President Joe Biden’s student loan forgiveness program, is complete and utter nonsense. It rewrites a federal law which explicitly authorizes the loan forgiveness program, and it relies on a fake legal doctrine known as “major questions” which has no basis in any law or any provision of the Constitution.

Roberts’s opinion in Nebraska effectively overrules the decision of both elected branches of government. It overrides Congress’s unambiguous decision to give this power to the secretary of Education. And it overrules the executive branch’s judgment about how to exercise the authority that Congress gave it. As Kagan writes in dissent, “the Secretary did only what Congress had told him he could.”

Like Rebecca Solnit, Jennifer Rubin ends her op-ed on a note of optimism and determination to right the wrongs of the Court:

On this Independence Day, which celebrates rebellion against a monarch lacking consent of the governed, it behooves us to dedicate ourselves to robust and authentic democracy: government of the people, by the people, for the people — not by arrogant right-wing justices….

Without regard to any of the present controversies surrounding the Court, substantially increasing the Court’s size is a reasonable proposition. But considering the Court’s descent into illegitimacy and usurpation of legislative power, increasing its size substantially is an easy call: We must do it to overcome the reactionary majority. We have no other choice.

Enlarging the Court requires only a majority vote in both chambers of Congress, while virtually every other structural reform would require a constitutional amendment—a 2/3rds approval in both chambers of Congress and ratification by 3/4ths of the states. That will never happen. (If you propose imposing 18-year term limits, I urge you to read the plain words of the Constitution: Article III Section 1 | U.S. Constitution.)

Urgency is required. As reader John C. posted in response to my 4th of July newsletter,

I agree that the long term looks promising, but many people cannot wait for the long term. Women who want abortions, victims of gun violence, refugees, same-sex couples who want goods or services, students who are barred from colleges, and so forth are suffering now and lack the luxury of waiting.

We can work our way out of this daunting situation in the short term at the ballot box—by retaking the House and defending the Senate in 2024. And then demand boldness from our leaders. While they have temporized and appointed commissions and fretted about the “legitimacy” of an enlarged Court, tens of millions of Americans have been injured by a rogue Court that abandoned the rule of law and adopted the agenda of religious nationalism. The solution is staring us in the face and is within our grasp. Let’s take it!

In the words of Rebecca Solnit, “This is not a time to quit. It’s a time to fight.”

And if you are looking for guidance on where and how to direct your fighting spirit, there is no better place to look than Jessica Craven’s Chop Wood Carry Water on Substack. Her post on the 4th of July is filled with action steps you can take, including word scripts for calling your elected officials in Washington, D.C., and important organizing / fundraising events, such as:

  • An event on Wednesday, July 5th at 5:30 PM Eastern with Senator Sherrod Brown and Ohio Democratic Party Chairwoman Liz Walters about how you can help get out the “NO” vote in the Ohio special election set for August 8th. Register here.
  • A Force Multiplier event with Senators John Tester and Raphael Warnock on Monday, July 10, 7:00 PM Eastern. The event will help build grass roots support for Senator Tester in what is expected to be a hard-fought campaign. Register and donate here.

While you are at it, sign up for Jessica Craven’s Chop Wood, Carry Water for the latest on daily actions you can take to help defend democracy!

Please open the link to read Robert Hubbell’s concluding thoughts.

Categories Accountability, Civil Rights, Corruption, Democracy, Disruption, Elections, Ethics, Evil, Extremism, Justice

Heather Cox Richardson: The Supreme Court Is Putting Our Democracy at Risk

By dianeravitch
July 1, 2023 //
87

This is one of the best letters that Heather Cox Richardson has written since I started reading her posts. It puts the current Supreme Court’s radical decisions into historical perspective. This Court, hand-picked by Leonard Leo and the Federalist Society, is engaged in a shameless effort to move the clock back to the world as it existed before the New Deal. This Court threatens our democracy and our rights.

She writes:

Today the Supreme Court followed up on yesterday’s decision gutting affirmative action with three decisions that will continue to push the United States back to the era before the New Deal.

In 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis the court said that the First Amendment protects website designer Lorie Smith from having to use words she doesn’t believe in support of gay marriage. To get there, the court focused on the marriage website designer’s contention that while she is willing to work with LGBTQ customers, she doesn’t want to use her own words on a personalized website to celebrate gay marriages. Because of that unwillingness, she said, she wants to post on her website that she will not make websites for same-sex weddings. She says she is afraid that in doing so, she will run afoul of Colorado’s anti-discrimination laws, which prevent public businesses from discriminating against certain groups of people.

This whole scenario of being is prospective, by the way: her online business did not exist and no one had complained about it. Smith claims she wants to start the business because “God is calling her ‘to explain His true story about marriage.’” She alleges that in 2016, a gay man approached her to make a website for his upcoming wedding, but yesterday, Melissa Gira Grant of The New Republic reported that, while the man allegedly behind the email does exist, he is an established designer himself (so why would he hire someone who was not?), is not gay, and married his wife 15 years ago. He says he never wrote to Smith, and the stamp on court filings shows she received it the day after she filed the suit.

Despite this history, by a 6–3 vote, the court said that Smith was being hurt by the state law and thus had standing to sue. It decided that requiring the designer to use her own words to support gay marriage violated the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech.

Taken together with yesterday’s decision ruling that universities cannot consider race as a category in student admissions, the Supreme Court has highlighted a central contradiction in its interpretation of government power: if the Fourteenth Amendment limits the federal government to making sure that there is no discrimination in the United States on the basis of race—the so-called “colorblind” Constitution—as the right-wing justices argued yesterday, it is up to the states to make sure that state laws don’t discriminate against minorities. But that requires either protecting voting rights or accepting minority rule.

This problem has been with us since before the Civil War, when lawmakers in the southern states defended their enslavement of their Black (and Indigenous) neighbors by arguing that true democracy was up to the voters and that those voters had chosen to support enslavement. After the Civil War, most lawmakers didn’t worry too much about states reimposing discriminatory laws because they included Black men as voters first in 1867 with the Military Reconstruction Act and then in 1870 with the Fifteenth Amendment to the Constitution, and they believed such political power would enable Black men to shape the laws under which they lived.

But in 1875 the Supreme Court ruled in Minor v. Happersett that it was legal to cut citizens out of the vote so long as the criteria were not about race. States excluded women, who brought the case, and southern states promptly excluded Black men through literacy clauses, poll taxes, and so on. Northern states mirrored southern laws with their own, designed to keep immigrants from exercising a voice in state governments. At the same time, southern states protected white men from the effects of these exclusionary laws with so-called grandfather clauses, which said a man could vote so long as his grandfather had been eligible.

It turned out that limiting the Fourteenth Amendment to questions of race and letting states choose their voters cemented the power of a minority. The abandonment of federal protection for voting enabled white southerners to abandon democracy and set up a one-party state that kept Black and Brown Americans as well as white women subservient to white men. As in all one-party states, there was little oversight of corruption and no guarantee that laws would be enforced, leaving minorities and women at the mercy of a legal system that often looked the other way when white criminals committed rape and murder.

Many Americans tut-tutted about lynching and the cordons around Black life, but industrialists insisted on keeping the federal government small because they wanted to make sure it could not regulate their businesses or tax them. They liked keeping power at the state level; state governments were far easier to dominate. Southerners understood that overlap: when a group of southern lawmakers in 1890 wrote a defense of the South’s refusal to let Black men vote, they “respectfully dedicated” the book to “the business men of the North.”

In the 1930s the Democrats under President Franklin Delano Roosevelt undermined this coalition by using the federal government to regulate business and provide a social safety net. In the 1940s and 1950s, as racial and gender atrocities began to highlight in popular media just how discriminatory state laws really were, the Supreme Court went further, recognizing that the Fourteenth Amendment’s declaration that states could not deprive any person of the equal protection of the laws meant that the federal government must protect the rights of minorities when states would not. Those rules created modern America.

This is what the radical right seeks to overturn. Yesterday the Supreme Court said that the Fourteenth Amendment could not address racial disparities, but today, like lawmakers in the 1870s, it signaled that it would not protect voting in the states either. It rejected a petition for a review of Mississippi’s strict provision for taking the vote away from felons. That law illustrates just how fully we’re reliving our history: it dates from the 1890 Mississippi constitution that cemented power in white hands. Black Mississippians are currently 2.7 times more likely than white Mississippians to lose the right to vote under the law.

The court went even further today than allowing states to choose their voters. It said that even if state voters do call for minority protections, as Colorado’s anti-discrimination laws do, states cannot protect minorities in the face of someone’s religious beliefs. In her dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that for “the first time in its history,” the court has granted “a business open to the public a constitutional right to refuse to serve members of a protected class.”

It is worth noting that segregation was defended as a deeply held religious belief.

Today, using a case concerning school loans, the Supreme Court also took aim at the power of the federal government to regulate business. In Biden v. Nebraska the court declared by a vote of 6 to 3 that President Biden’s loan forgiveness program, which offered to forgive up to $20,000 of federally held student debt, was unconstitutional. The right-wing majority of the court argued that Congress had not intended to give that much power to the executive branch, although the forgiveness plan was based on law that gave the secretary of education the power to “waive or modify any statutory or regulatory provision applicable to the student financial assistance programs…as the Secretary deems necessary in connection with a…national emergency…to ensure” that “recipients of student financial assistance…are not placed in a worse position financially in relation to that financial assistance because of [the national emergency]”.

The right-wing majority based its decision on the so-called major questions doctrine, invented to claw back regulatory power from the federal government. By saying that Congress cannot delegate significant decisions to federal agencies, which are in the executive branch, the court takes on itself the power to decide what a “significant” decision is. The court established this new doctrine in the West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agencycase, stripping the EPA of its ability to regulate certain kinds of air pollution.

“Let’s not beat around the bush,” constitutional analyst Ian Millhiser wrote today in Vox, today’s decision in Biden v. Nebraska “is complete and utter nonsense. It rewrites a federal law which explicitly authorizes the loan forgiveness program, and it relies on a fake legal doctrine known as ‘major questions’ which has no basis in any law or any provision of the Constitution.”

Today’s Supreme Court, packed as it has been by right-wing money behind the Federalist Society and that society’s leader, Leonard Leo, is taking upon itself power over the federal government and the state governments to recreate the world that existed before the New Deal.

Education Secretary Miguel Cardona called out the lurch toward turning the government over to the wealthy, supported as it is by religious footsoldiers like Lorie Smith: “Today, the court substituted itself for Congress,” Cardona told reporters. “It’s outrageous to me that Republicans in Congress and state offices fought so hard against a program that would have helped millions of their own constituents. They had no problem handing trillion-dollar tax cuts to big corporations and the super wealthy.”

Cardona made his point personal: “And many had no problems accepting millions of dollars in forgiven pandemic loans, like Senator Markwayne Mullin from Oklahoma had more than $1.4 million in pandemic loans forgiven. He represents 489,000 eligible borrowers that were turned down today. Representative Brett Guthrie from Kentucky had more than $4.4 million forgiven. He represents more than 90,000 eligible borrowers who were turned down today. Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene from Georgia had more than $180,000 forgiven. She represents more than 91,800 eligible borrowers who were turned down today.”

In the majority opinion of Biden v. Nebraska, Chief Justice John Roberts lamented that those who dislike the court’s decisions have accused the court of “going beyond the proper role of the judiciary.” He defended the court’s decision and urged those who disagreed with it not to disparage the court because “such misperception would be harmful to this institution and our country.” But what is at stake is not simply these individual decisions, whether or not you agree with them; at stake is the way our democracy operates.

Norman Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute didn’t offer much hope for Roberts’s plea. “It is not just the rulings the Roberts Court is making,” he tweeted. “They created out of [w]hole cloth a bogus, major questions doctrine. They made a mockery of standing. They rewrite laws to fit their radical ideological preferences. They have unilaterally blown up the legitimacy of the Court.”

In a shot across the bow of this radical court, in her dissent to Biden v. Nebraska, Justice Elena Kagan wrote that “the Court, by deciding this case, exercises authority it does not have. It violates the Constitution.”

—

Categories Accountability, Biden, Bigotry, Billionaires, Cardona, Miguel, Civil Rights, Cruelty, Dark Money, Democracy, Disruption, Elections, Ethics, Evil, Extremism, Fraud, Gender, Higher Education, History, Inequity, Injustice, Justice, Race, Racism, Religion, Shame, Student Financial Aid and Student Debt

Gary Rubinstein: TFA Responds to Sharp Decline in Enrollment by…drumroll…Changing Its Logo

By dianeravitch
June 26, 2023 //
21

Gary Rubinstein joined Teach for America in its second cohort, three decades ago. He worked diligently for the organization but became disillusioned by its constant boasting and its in attention to preparing teachers well.

In this post, he notes that TFA has plenty of money j the bank, but it has lost its luster. In its glory days, it attracted 6,000 applicants. Now it gets only 2,000.

He writes:

In the last few years, TFA has shrunk. Their incoming corps size dropped from 6,000 to under 2,000. They recently laid off 25% of their staff. And those alumni education leaders have pretty much all resigned and faded into oblivion. TFA is at its lowest point since the mid 1990s.

So when I read about their big new announcement, I wondered what it might be. It turned out to be a ‘rebranding’ that they are really excited about. Basically, a new logo.

As a companion to the new logo, they released the most bizarre FAQ explaining the rationale of the new logo.

Open the link to understand why TFA is excited about its new logo.

Categories Accountability, Charter Schools, Corporate Reform, Disruption, Education Industry, Ethics, Teach for America, Teachers and Teaching

Houston: Most Schools Targeted for “Reform” Were Performing Well, with Overwhelmingly Poor Kids

By dianeravitch
June 26, 2023 //
5

The Houston Chronicle studied the demographics of the 29 schools that were the targets of the state takeover. Most had grades from the state of B. Even the school that precipitated the takeover—Wheatley High School—went from an F to a C. The takeover superintendent, Mike Miles, is a military man and a Broadie with no classroom experience. He was previously superintendent in Dallas, where he boasted of his lofty goals, but left after three years, having driven out a large number of teachers (he claims the only ones who left were those with low ratings). Once again, he has a plan, but his plan lacks any evidence behind it.

It’s now been two weeks since Superintendent Mike Miles announced his plans to overhaul 29 Houston Independent School District campuses under his “New Education System” plan. Now that HISD has released more details, the Houston Chronicle compiled and analyzed data on each of the campuses to get a clearer picture of the schools impacted by Miles’ plan.

Instead of focusing exclusively on struggling campuses, Miles’ New Education System plan mainly targets elementary and middle schools that “feed” into three struggling high schools in the district. Though the plan will reconstitute 29 total schools as a part of the system, a spokesperson for HISD clarified that only 28 traditional campuses will be impacted. The 29th school will be a temporary alternative education program which will be reformed and evaluated separately.

The schools chosen to participate in Miles’ “New Education System” are three high schools and their feeder schools.

The schools are largely low-income, Black and Latino schools

According to the Houston Chronicle’s analysis, each school included in Miles’ plan is either majority Black or majority Hispanic/Latino. The vast majority of students at each campus are also from low-income families.

At the schools impacted by Miles’ plan, the average percentage of economically disadvantaged students – which is measured by the amount of students who qualify for free and reduced price lunches – is higher than the average across HISD. In the 2021-2022 school year, the average percentage of economically disadvantaged students at the campuses in Miles’ plan was 98%, while the district average was 83%, according to data from the National Center for Education Statistics.

New Education System schools demographics

Every school in Mike Miles’ New Education System plan has either a majority Black or majority Latino student population, and most students at the schools are from low-income families, according to data from the 2021-2022.

Most of the schools are 90-95% Black.

Most schools are already performing well

In terms of accountability ratings, many of the schools targeted in Miles’ overhaul have not underperformed in recent years. In 2022, the majority of schools included in the plan received “A” or “B” ratings, and only five of the schools were given a “Not Rated” label under SB 1365 – which exempted schools from ratings that would have received a “D” or “F” last year.

Though the three high schools at the heart of the Miles’ plan – Kashmere, North Forest and Wheatley – have had three of the five highest failure rates in the district, North Forest and Wheatley both received passing ratings in 2022.

Additionally, Miles’ plan includes four campuses that are unconnected to the three struggling high schools. These campuses include Highland Heights Elementary and Henry Middle, which also have some of the worst failure rates in the district, and Sugar Grove Academy and Marshall Elementary, which both received passing ratings in 2022 but have struggled in prior years.

So, at the point of takeover, the most troubled schools in HISD were on an upswing, making progress under the leadership of an experienced educator (who was quickly hired by Prince George’s County in Maryland). And now they are led by a Broadie who failed to make a difference in Dallas.

It would not be a stretch to believe that Governor Abbott, a mean and vindictive man—is punishing Houston for not voting for him.

Categories Accountability, Broad Foundation, Corporate Reform, Disruption, Education Industry, Houston, Poverty, Race, Texas

Peter Greene: What Vouchers Will Do to West Virginia

By dianeravitch
June 25, 2023 //
4

Peter Greene looks into the Koch-funded voucher lobby in West Virginia and finds a fairly accurate portrayal of the dystopian future that lies ahead.

First, he details the background of the leaders of the voucher lobby. All have long-time connections to rightwing causes. Most were hired to push West Virginia’s expansive voucher plan, which passed in 2021.

If ever there was a state that needs a strong public school system, it’s West Virginia. But with big Koch money, the Koch puppets will make that impossible.

Instead of good public schools, West Virginians will have the “freedom” to find a good education on their own!

After identifying the staff and board, Greene writes:

So we’ve got the picture now– Cardinal Institute for West Virginia Policy (which belongs to the State Policy Network) is a Koch organization.

Cardinal Institute is all for the usual Koch version of liberty. They are pushing a West Virginia Miracle, and the four pillars are “Economic Freedom, Labor Freedom, Education Freedom, and Montani Semper Liberi – a culture of freedom.” They would like to promote “limited government, economic freedom, and personal responsibility.” They’ve got a podcast– “Forgotten America.” And they promise a “new paradigm”–

An “island” of poverty in the wealthiest country the world, West Virginia’s brighter future depends on a new paradigm – a new way of looking at the world with new ideas and a philosophy built on innovation, human flourishing, and a recognition that freedom is the greatest alleviator of poverty the world has ever seen. Ours is a philosophy built on the entrepreneur, the tinkerer in the garage, and the idea that small government means more room for people to create and build their own futures.

It’s a curious pitch in a state that is not exactly known for government overreach. West Virginia is a state with a history of labor struggles and a history of state government that exerts its power mostly to aid guys like Charles Koch. Regular people have always had plenty of room in this state that is renowned for its poverty— worst health, worst education levels, worst employment, and geography that makes it hard for basic infrastructure like roads and water and electricity and internet to reach some citizens. (And at least one community gutted by the departure of its WVU college campus–but hey, they’re free now.) It’s hard to imagine that any of these problems would be solved by less government, but libertarians gotta libertarian.

So what does Ballangee say about Mount Everest?

In his Education Next piece, Ballangee comes close to honesty about the larger goals of his particular arm of the school voucher movement. 

There is a common misconception among education reform advocates that passing universal choice legislation is akin to summiting Mount Everest. Upon universal choice’s enactment into law, it is done. Time to exhale and pop the champagne, for the mountain has been scaled.

In other words, voucher laws are not the end game. Simply making a voucher program available is not enough.

Next, the program has to be pushed and promoted. There will be a urge, then a steady growth “as families become aware of the program and hear from neighbors, fellow church attendees, and other connections about their new options” (just in case you had doubts about voucher ties to religion). Nut awareness must be built and PR must be provided to popularize the program.

Failure for an education choice program does not often come in the form of mistakes, fraud, or incompetence. More frequently, the problems are apathy and ignorance.

I don’t know. There’s an awful lot of fraud and incompetence in the school choice world. Nor am I sure how the lack of interest in a choice program is not the same thing as a lack of market demand. But of course modern marketing means creating a demand for your product. So, Ballangee asserts, somebody will need to work on that.

Someone will also need to build/attract a supply of educational “providers.” “Help private schools sign up,” he says, skipping over the question of why a successful private school would want to sign up. Somebody has to reach out to edupreneurs and get them signed up, too. Basically, be an education broker.

Now that choicers need to spend less time lobbying legislators, “the nexus of a successful program [he means a privatizing program, not an educational program] will shift somewhat from legislative considerations, lobbying, and bill design towards family outreach and relationship cultivation, specific government agency relationships, and broad marketing campaigns.”

Also, you’ll have to prepare for those “legions of entities” looking to “besmirch” the program (public education establishment, unions, union-friendly media). 

And this–

You have to figure out how – not if – to help the families about to embark on this journey for the first time…

You must figure out how to manage each “case” not only for the sake of the family and child but also for the overall health of the program.

There will be grandparents who have never used a computer now asked to upload a birth certificate on their grandchild’s behalf. There will be parents with limited education who know only one thing when it comes to navigating this fresh bureaucratic concoction: “my child needs something different.” Be sympathetic, but, more importantly, develop competence.

Learn the law and accompanying statutes backwards and forwards or find someone who does. You must have a path or contact for families to use. “I don’t know the answer, but I know someone who might” will become one of the most useful phrases in your reform handbook.

In short, Ballengee is outlining all the new business opportunities available on the mountaintop voucher peak. The only one he left out was the booming business in K-12 education loans for all those parents for whom state’s voucher won’t cover the cost of their education provider. Not only will government stop providing public education, but there are many opportunities to make a buck or ten in the newly free and unregulated marketplace of education stuff.

The Koch mountaintop

Because here’s what “freedom” means on Koch mountain– you are free to try to get to the top if you can, and I am free to ignore any of your problems (unless you pay me to help you), because the dream remains a world in which I have no responsibility to my fellow travelers on the earth (and certainly don’t have to pay taxes to provide services for Those People). 

Ballangee isn’t going to have any discussion of how well vouchers work as far as education goes (hint: not very well). But that’s okay, because, as he says, “education choice is good and a moral necessity.” I’m of the opinion that guaranteeing each child a decent education is the moral necessity, and, as always, I question the assumption that “education choice” must somehow involve the free market, one of the great unexamined assumptions of the modern choicer movement. Are choice and freedom important values in life? Damn right they are–which is why we as a society bear a responsibility for getting every child an education that will help them freely access more choices.

In the end, Ballengee’s mountain is one that Ayn Rand would probably approve of.

Though the last few steps up the mountain are the steepest and most difficult, they are also closest to what we are looking for when we embark on our journey: helping children find their own path to their own personal summit.

In other words, I’ve got my summit, Jack. Go find your own. 

“Helping” I suppose could mean choice advocates just helping out of the goodness of their hearts (though their hearts, bless them, don’t know much about actual education). But I suspect that help will be provided, for a price (or a cut of your voucher), to those who can find it and access it while navigating a sprawling unregulated complicated marketplace. It’s funny, because another thing we could do is collect all the experts in delivering education under one roof, where they’d be easy to find. And we could pay them with public tax dollars, and recruit and hire them with the understanding that they are there to help students climb their own personal mountain. But then some of us would have to pay taxes to fund it, and they might not be willing to make it all about christianist ideas. 

So instead, Koch-trained folks imagine a mountain, an Everest. By the way, do you know what Everest looks like these days? It’s a crowded mess of wealthy, resource-rich tourists who are hiring someone else to guide them. Well, that’s Everest.

The peak of the school voucher mountain looks a lot like wealthy, well-resourced folks looking down at the folks struggling on the slopes of other mountains and saying, “Well, don’t they look free. I wonder if they’ll make it.”

Categories Billionaires, Cruelty, Democracy, Disruption, Education Industry, Koch Brothers, Poverty, Privatization, Propaganda, West Virginia

Tom Ultican: “The Right to Read” is Horse Manure

By dianeravitch
June 24, 2023 //
25

Tom Ultican was a computer scientist before he became a high school teacher of advanced mathematics and science in California. Now that he is retired, he is a scholar of the corporate reform movement, whose goal is to privatize public schools.

In this illuminating post, Ultican analyzes a documentary called “The Right to Read,” which he compares to the propaganda film “Waiting for Superman.” Behind the film, he writes, is the whole apparatus of the corporate reform movement, armed with derogatory claims about public schools and a simplistic cure for literacy.

He begins:

The new 80-minute video “The Right to Read”was created in the spirit of “Waiting for Superman.” It uses false data interpretations to make phony claims about a non-existent reading crisis. Oakland’s NAACP 2nd Vice President Kareem Weaver narrates the film. Weaver is a full throated advocate for the Science of Reading (SoR) and has many connections with oligarch financed education agendas. The video which released February 11, 2023 was made by Jenny Mackenzie and produced by LeVar (Kunta Kinte) Burton.

Since 2007, Jenny Mackenzie has been the executive director of Jenny Mackenzie Films in Salt Lake City. Neither Mackenzie nor Burton has experience or training as educators. However, Burton did star on the PBS series “Reading Rainbow.” He worked on the show as an actor not a teacher.

One of the first media interviews about “The Right to Read” appeared on KTVX channel 4 in Salt Lake City. Ben Heuston from the Waterford Institute answered questions about the new film and the supposed “reading crisis” in American public schools. Heuston who has a PhD in psychology from Brigham Young University claimed that two-thirds of primary grade students in America read below grade level. That is a lie. He is conflating proficiency in reading on the National Assessment of Education Performance (NAEP) with grade level and should know better.

Ultican shows the graphs of NAEP scores over the past thirty years: reading scores have been unchanged for 30 years. The rhetoric about “the crisis in reading” is a hoax.

Misinterpreting the data shown above is the basis for the specious crisis in reading claims. It is known that students develop at different rates and in the lower grades the differences can be dramatic. That explains some of the low scoring. All but a very small percentage of these fourth grader will be reading adequately when they get to high school.

America’s leading authorities on teaching reading are frustrated. Their voices are being drowned out by forces who want to monetize reading education and privatize it.

Ultican names names and identifies corporate sponsors. Somebody expects to make a heap of money from this latest manufactured crisis.

Categories Accountability, Billionaires, Corporate Reform, Disruption, Education Industry, Fake, For-Profit, Lies, Literacy, Media, Oakland, Privatization

NYC: Advocates for Justice Files Lawsuit to Block Forced relocation of Two Schools

By dianeravitch
June 22, 2023 //
12

I wrote at the end of April about an effort by the NYC Department of Education to force a high school for overage students in Manhattan to trade places with a billionaire-funded high school on the other side of town. The school for the high-needs students had better facilities, including a gym. I suggested at that time that the Tisch family, which funds the Young Women’s Leadership Academy, could well afford to buy or build a better facility rather than force out the last-chance students in West Side High School. A few days later, the New York City Board of Education, controlled by Mayor Eric Adams, voted to oust the students from the West Side High School and give their home to the Young Women’s Leadership Academy.

It’s not over. A pro bono law firm, Advocates for Justice, has filed a lawsuit to block the swap. The lawsuit includes another school for overage students that opposes the co-location of another school in its building.

For immediate release: Thursday, June 22, 2023

More information: Laura Barbieri, lbarbieri@advocatesny.com, 914-819-3387

Sarah Frank, sarfrank@gmail.com, 617-838-2032

Lawsuit filed to block the re-location of West Side High School and the co-location of Brownsville Academy -both transfer schools with vulnerable overage and undercredited students

Today, Thursday, June 22, 2023, a lawsuit was filed in the New York State Supreme Court on behalf of parents, students, and teachers to prevent the NYC Department of Education from forcing the Edward A. Reynolds West Side High School from moving across town to a smaller building and to block Brownsville Academy from having to share its building with another school,  Aspirations Diploma Plus High School.  

Both of these schools are transfer schools, designed to ensure that vulnerable, over-aged and under-credited students have the support they need to remain in school through graduation. Many of these students have already dropped out of school once or are at increased risk of dropping out in the future, so any negative change in their learning environment jeopardizes their life chances.

The lawsuit, filed by the pro bono law firm Advocates for Justice, focuses on the inadequacy of the Educational Impact Statements [EIS’s] that the NYC Department of Education is required to prepare in advance of the votes by the Panel for Education Policy to approve these changes in school utilization that occurred on April 19, 2023, and May 1, 2023.

Instead, both EIS’s for these proposed changes in school utilization explicitly assumed that current class sizes at both schools would continue indefinitely, even though half of the classes at Brownsville Academy and more than half of the classes at Edwards A. Reynolds West Side High School are larger than the cap of 25 students per class required by the new state class size law, to be phased in over five years.

In addition, students with disabilities in both schools will likely lose their dedicated rooms for mandated services in these new, far more limited spaces. Both schools have very high percentages of such students: 43% at Edward A. Reynolds West Side High school and 26% of the students at Brownsville Academy have disabilities.

 The failure of the EIS’s to analyze the profound educational impacts of these changes is a clear violation of state education law, and in an innovative legal strategy, the lawsuit also argues that the deprivation of critical space from students with disabilities would cause a disparate impact on these vulnerable students, in violation of the New York City Human Rights Law.

Most egregiously, perhaps, is how the students at Edward A. Reynolds West Side High School will be deprived of their on-site GED program, their full-size gym, the Ryan health care center, and the LYFE day-care center, designed to take care of the young children of these overaged students while they are attending school. Yet the DOE fails to assess the likely negative educational impacts of these profound losses, or even acknowledge them in the EIS .

Also highly questionable is the way in which the DOE and certain members of the Panel for Educational Policy ignored their obligations under the Open Meetings Law (OML). Specifically, the law requires that all voting by members of public bodies must be publicly performed. However, many of the Mayor-appointed PEP members failed to turn on their cameras during the meetings that approved these changes in school utilization, which should nullify their votes. In addition, the DOE failed to record the first several hours of the PEP meeting on May 1, which is also an OML violation. Together, these violations call into question whether these PEP proceedings or their votes were legally valid.

State Assemblywoman Latrice Walker said: ““I have long been concerned about the plan to re-site Aspirations Diploma Plus and co-locate it with Brownsville Academy High School. Though well-intentioned, the proposal would harm two communities. Aspirations is the only transfer school in Crown Heights, and I fear they will lose scholars who are not willing to travel to Brownsville. I also share the concerns of the staff at Brownsville Academy, who are worried about the potentially drastic reduction in the number of rooms. The co-location process would deprive the Brownsville Academy of the space currently being used for counseling, an internship program, and their very successful mentoring services. Brownsville Academy has served the community and its students well, consistently ranking in the top 10 in graduation rates, attendance, and career readiness for transfer schools in the city. The potential impact on the student-to-teacher ratio and the reduction of services would have an adverse impact on some of Brooklyn’s most vulnerable students.”

“I strongly support West Side High School staying where it is and appreciate the effort by Advocates for Justice to halt the move,” said Council Member Gale A. Brewer. “It is inequitable to take away from the student population the LYFE Center, the wellness and health center, the large gym and field, and the kitchen. If the TYWLS building is not adequate to meet the needs of its current student population, then it cannot be adequate for the students now at West Side High School.”

“The relocation of West Side High School and the co-location of Brownsville Academy presents a number of challenges to the families, students, and teachers in both schools.” Said New York City Council Deputy Speaker Diana Ayala. “Students within these schools have either dropped out once before or require special accommodations to ensure they receive a quality education. The Department’s relocation plan does not take those factors into consideration and their decision further jeopardizes the educational prospects of the students within these schools. I urge the Department to reconsider this decision and to work with both schools to find a compromise that focuses on the students rather than the ideal location.”

Added Ashley Norman, a plaintiff, a parent of a current student at West Side High School and herself a graduate of the school: “West Side has paved the way for so many students in its time. Myself and everyone I know felt as if dropping out would be the best option, until we went to this school. They do their best to meet you where you are and push you for greatness. This school is so important for young parents. You can receive your education, have your child cared for, and receive not only mental health care but your physical healthcare as well in the Ryan Center -things that being a young parent are hard to juggle. I decided to participate in this lawsuit because I also worry about the potential for gang violence on the East side that our kids might be exposed to. I believe this school NEEDS to stay here for the benefit and more importantly the safety of our community.”

Lucie Gaba, a plaintiff and parent at Brownsville Academy commented: “Before attending Brownsville, my son attended another high school where he struggled with attendance issues and with being on time. Since switching schools, his attendance has improved and the wonderful staff have inspired him to become an active member of the school community. Brownsville Academy has helped my son improve his academics greatly. I am worried that the co-location will make it harder for him and his friends to get the dedicated help they have come to count on. English is his second language and he receives extra services for this reason. I am very concerned that if the co-location happens, the increased crowding will cause him to lose these services.”

Grisslet Rodriguez, plaintiff and parent of a current West Side High School student, said: “I’m participating in this lawsuit because it is the right thing to do for all of the students in West Side High School. I want to be a voice for my son and all the West Side students since their voices are not being heard. My concern is that if our students are moved to another location, the outcome is going to be devastating. It will have a negative impact on a minority group that already struggles. Students might drop out, have emotional damage, and more mental health challenges. My top concern is the lack of safety in the neighborhood that is on the East side and is dangerous. The new location across town will require many students, including my son, to take a bus and a train, which is a longer commute. Health-wise, there is no gym and no clinic, which is so important for the health, well-being, and growth of the students. The daycare center is crucial to keep the young mothers in school. I hope students can remain in West Side High School, where they feel safe. These students have been through a lot, and we are so proud of them and happy that they found a place where they feel they belong.”

Sarah Frank, teacher at West Side High School and a plaintiff, said: “We have been pushing back on this relocation from the moment it was announced because as a transfer school, we know our vulnerable students need access to smaller classes and additional services and support. Our current building was specifically designed for West Side High School in the 1990s to have an on-site daycare and health clinic. Our Public School Athletic League teams play in our beautiful gym and the field adjacent to the school. The building we are being relocated to on the East Side has none of these resources, and traveling to other locations for daycare, healthcare, and athletics is a huge barrier for our students. While we have had enrollment struggles, our enrollment has grown tremendously in the last few months. The new space will not allow us to meaningfully lower class size and will not afford the space for small groups and other social-emotional supports we have always offered our students, particularly the nearly 50% of our special needs population with IEPs. Our students do not gain anything from this move, they only lose.”

Marissa Moore, a plaintiff, and parent at Brownsville Academy HS pointed out: “Brownsville Academy has provided my son with a rigorous academic experience along with rich social emotional support which is so needed coming out of the pandemic. Under the co-location proposal, I am concerned that BAHS will become overcrowded and offer fewer services just like the larger schools which failed to serve him previously.”

Concluded Hon. Carmen Quinones, President of the Frederick Douglass Houses Association where many of the students who attend West Side High School live, “This is not what Justice looks like: putting a target on our children’s back and making them choose to drop out of school or die trying!”

Here are notes:

Memo of Law ; Verified Petition, and affidavits from Lucie Idiamey-Gaba, Sarah Frank, Anneris Fernandez , Chance Santiago, Marissa-Moore, Grisslet Rodriguez, Ashley Norman, and Leonie Haimson.

 

###

Categories Accountability, Cruelty, Disruption, Ethics, Inequity, New York City

Houston: New Superintendent Unleashes Chaos, Fear, Uncertainty

By dianeravitch
June 19, 2023 //
10

Military man Mike Miles has launched his overhaul of Houston’s public schools, and parents and teachers are alarmed. Miles previously failed in Dallas, but that has not dimmed his authoritarian style. Trained for school leadership by the Broad Academy, which admires authoritarian style, Miles was imposed on Houston as part of a state takeover.

The state education department is led by non-educator Mike Morath but controlled by Governor Greg Abbott. Abbott hates Houston, because its a Democratic city. The takeover was triggered by the “failure” of one high school, Wheatley, which enrolls higher proportions of students with disabilities than other high schools. Miles, however, has far exceeded his mandate by firing the staff at 29 schools—not just Wheatley—and telling staff to re-apply for their jobs. Miles now sees himself as an education expert and has declared his grandiose ambition to create a “New Education System” (NES), to show the nation how it’s done.

Parents, teachers, and students at the schools that Miles is disrupting are outraged.

The Houston Chronicle reports:

Elmore Elementary School was never perfect, but Kourtney Revels felt prospects were improving for the northeast Houston campus. A new principal, Tanya Webb, had taken the helm in December, and while Revels didn’t approve of every move she made, she admired the newcomer’s initiative.

Revels and other parents had long been frustrated, for example, that the school bus would often arrive late in the afternoon because kids would act up on board. So the principal took matters into her own hands — she, or another staff member, began riding the bus home with students, to make sure their behavior stayed in line. Now, Revels’ third grader, Judith, arrives home faster from school.

“Going that one extra mile took a burden off of parents who were waiting an hour, two hours, three hours for their kid to come from down the street,” Revels said.

It remains to be seen if Elmore parents can count on the practice to continue. Webb, along with the majority of staff members at 28 other schools in northeast Houston, has to reapply for her job as part of a major shakeupannounced by new Superintendent Mike Miles on his first day in office. 

“I do see a little bit of turnaround since she came in this year but she’s only been here since December,” Revels said. “And now she has to reapply for her job.”

Parents, students and community activists gather near Pugh Elementary School to protest the potential replacement of their children’s teachers by HISD on Thursday, June 15, 2023 in Houston.
Nallely Garza make a sign as she joins parents, students and community activists near Pugh Elementary School to protest the potential replacement of their children’s teachers by HISD on Thursday, June 15, 2023 in Houston.

Radical changes

The 29 schools in the New Education System program that Miles announced on June 1 will likely look radically different when doors open to students on Aug. 28. For starters, kids might be greeted by an entirely new roster of teachers, administrators and support staff; all employees besides custodians, cafeteria workers, bus drivers and nurses have to reapply for their jobs.

Miles has already said that librarians will likely be removed from NES schools, though he promised that they, along with all other teachers, principals, assistant principals and counselors who are already under contract, will be guaranteed similar jobs with the same salary at other schools if they are not brought back. Other staff members have received no such guarantees.

Teachers who do return will make over $90,000 after factoring in various stipends offered for teaching at high-need schools, and be supported by teaching apprentices and learning coaches who will handle much of the supplementary work such as grading and classroom preparation.

The application process is already underway for principals and teachers. NES principals will be selected by June 23, and teachers by July 3.

But staffing changes are just part of the transformation coming to NES schools. Curriculum will be standardized across campuses and lesson plans prepared for teachers in advance. Classes will be recorded via webcam, and students who are pulled from class for disruptive behavior will be sent to another room to watch the streamed class. Magnet offerings such as STEM and dual language programs “will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis” and may be cut.

Emails shared with the Houston Chronicle from principals to their staff suggest school leaders will be observing teachers every day, and that schools will be open from 6:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. each day for free childcare before and after school, with teachers serving four supervisory shifts per month. Miles is also bringing the Dyad program that he had introduced at his charter school network, Third Future Schools, to the NES schools, in which community members will teach students in extra-curriculars, such as sports or arts twice a week, according to emails shared with the Chronicle.

Miles says the changes put students’ most fundamental needs at the forefront by allowing teachers to focus purely on instruction.

“We will be aligning our resources—especially our most effective teachers and principals—to better serve students in underserved communities,” Miles said. “For students who need to catch up and in schools that have failed for years, we will be offering more instructional time.”

Miles has repeatedly stated that he understands the concerns emanating from many in the HISD community, but that he hopes improvements at the schools will eventually win their trust.

“Change brings some anxiety, and there will be some anxiety most of the summer, probably, but we will keep putting information out there so that we can turn that anxiety into hope,” Miles said during his first week in office.

‘Pugh es nuestra familia’

Several parents at Pugh, Martinez and other northeast Houston elementary schools gathered Thursday morning with their children at the Denver Harbor Multi-Service Center to protest the potential removal of teachers from their A-rated schools, before traveling to HISD headquarters to bring their complaints to the district. Children held signs with their teachers’ names — Ms. Rodriguez, Ms. Arguelles, Mr. Infante — and pleas to keep them in place. “Pugh es nuestra familia,” one sign read.

“Every morning, everyone from the principal to the office staff, custodians and cafeteria workers, they greet our children with a smile. I think the kids forget the problems they have at home when they go to school. We don’t want new teachers, we want the same teachers because they’ve been our second family at Pugh,” said Nancy Coronado, a parent volunteer at Pugh for 13 years, in Spanish.

Her son, Ricardo Delgado, graduated from fifth grade at Pugh this year. He discussed his favorite teacher, Ms. Lopez, and how she was a warm, familiar presence to him even before he’d ever taken her class. Now set to start at the Baylor College of Medicine Academy at Ryan Middle School in the fall, Delgado credits Ms. Lopez with teaching him the reading skills he’ll need in middle school.

“If other teachers come, it wouldn’t be the same because she’s been there since I was 6 years old,” Delgado said.

The plan to have teachers reapply for their job has left other Houston parents with mixed feelings. Karmell Johnson, a Fifth Ward mother of three students at NES schools, said there are “pros and cons” to the situation. She welcomes the opportunity to remove under-performing teachers, but worries that some effective teachers, who understand the community they’re serving in and may have formed bonds with students, may be caught up in the mix.

“It’s an emotional roller coaster. Once a bond is established and they rip that out, the kids have to get used to their teachers, the teachers have to get used to the schools, and it’s going to take some time. It’s going to be uncomfortable for everybody,” Johnson said.

Uncertain future for teachers, staff

At many NES schools, however, teacher and principal turnover has already become a fact of life. It was only 10 years ago that North Forest High School was completely reconstituted when the Texas Education Agency ordered North Forest ISD to be absorbed into Houston ISD, and after a brief upswing, it has failed 80 percent of its TEA evaluations since (it passed this year with a C). Wheatley High School replaced a significant portion of their teachers just last year.

Ainhoa Donat, a bilingual fourth grade teacher at Paige Elementary, said she worked with a different fourth-grade colleague in each of her six years at the Eastex/Jensen school.

Donat said she was told by her principal that the school would no longer offer a bilingual program, and that she was welcome to apply for a standard teaching position at the school (the district, in a statement, said that NES schools “will now have a dedicated English Language Arts block for English language development,” which “includes bilingual support for emerging English speakers based on their proficiency level”).

With 16 years of experience at HISD under her belt, the extra money being offered wasn’t enough for Donat to overcome the indignity of being blamed for the school’s low performance. She’s currently in the process of applying for a bilingual job at another HISD campus.

“I have a lot of experience and I work super hard, so when I went to that meeting and the superintendent (basically) said ‘you didn’t do your job,’ I felt really humiliated,” Donat said.

One longtime teacher at Martinez Elementary School, who asked to remain anonymous out of fear of retribution, said she worries that the financial incentives may “entice the wrong people.”

“I would give it back to stay at Martinez,” she said. “There are some teachers who are all about the money… but not at our school.”

The fear is even more acute for support staff, who aren’t guaranteed positions.

One administrative assistant, who has worked for over 20 years at an NES elementary school and also asked to remain anonymous, said she may be forced to retire early if she isn’t rehired. The assistant has spent almost her entire career with HISD and doesn’t know what else she could do.

She wonders who will manage the payroll, procure supplies for teachers, plan field trips and do all the other unseen tasks that keep a school running if support staff are eliminated.

“All I’ve ever known is HISD, getting up and going to work at these schools. We’re not here for the money, we’re here for the children,” she said. “You talk about the children but what are you doing for them? You’re taking their teachers away, and its very upsetting.”Parents, students and community activists gather near Pugh Elementary to protest the potential replacement of their children’s teachers by HISD on Thursday, June 15, 2023 in Houston.Brett Coomer/Houston Chronicle

Photo of Sam González Kelly

Written By 

Sam González Kell

Sam González Kelly is a reporter for the Houston Chronicle.

You can reach Sam at sam.kelly@chron.comVIEW COMMENTS

Categories Administrators, superintendents, Broad Foundation, Disruption, Education Industry, Extremism, Houston, Parents, Students, Teachers, Texas

Houston: New School Board Meets…and Excludes the Public

By dianeravitch
June 19, 2023 //
12

The state takeover of the Houston Independent School Board involved firing the elected school board, replacing them with a state-picked board, and hiring a new superintendent who was never a teacher but is a military man, a Broadie, and a failure as Dallas superintendent.

The new school board held its first meeting and set up only 35 seats for the public. The room holds 310 people. Everyone else was shunted to a room where they could watch the meeting on a screen. One man who registered to speak was handcuffed when he insisted on entering the room where the board was neeting.

The board unanimously agreed that superintendent Mije Miles should be allowed to serve even though his state license had lapsed in 2018.

This meeting exemplified the state’s contempt for public schools, and its complete indifference to the public, which has a stake in public schools. The public schools belong to the public, not to Republican politicians in Austin.

Categories Accountability, Broad Foundation, Corruption, Democracy, Disruption, Education Industry, Elections, Extremism, Fraud, Houston, Injustice, Texas

Texas: Christian Nationalist Charter Applies for Approval

By dianeravitch
June 18, 2023 //
149

Only days ago, the Network for Public Education released a report on the growth of Christian nationalist charter schools. It is titled “A Sharp Turn Right: A New Breed of Charter Schools Delivers the Conservative Agenda.” Many of these charters are affiliated with the far-right Hillsdale College, and call themselves classical academies. Their goal is to indoctrinate their students into extremist political views and to teach a rose-colored version of American history.

In Texas, a charter of this stripe is applying to the State Board of Education for the fourth time, hoping that new conservative members of the board will grant them a charter.

Edward McKinley of the Houston Chronicle reports:

Last summer, the Texas State Board of Education denied for the third time an application from Heritage Classical Academy to start a charter school in Northwest Houston. Heritage will try again next week, and although very little has changed about its application, its chances of success are now much higher.

Classical charter schools, like Heritage, have been on the rise nationwide and in Texas as parents seek an alternative to “woke” lessons and themes in public schools, namely the promotion of diversity and inclusion, viewing America’s history through a more critical lens, and discussion of LGBTQ topics in classrooms. And earlier this year, the Texas Legislature advanced several bills to bring more Christianity into public schools, part of a related national movement.

Heritage Academy is pitched as a return to an old-school type of education, involving training in rhetoric and public speaking, learning Greek or Latin and reading foundational texts.

Texas Education Agency Commissioner Mike Morath has already approved Heritage, as he did the preceding three years. But before the school can open, the State Board of Education is allowed an opportunity to veto it. Next week state board members will interview officials from Heritage on Wednesday before a planned Friday vote.

Heritage is affiliated with Hillsdale College, a conservative Christian university that refuses federal assistance so that it doesn’t have to comply with Title IX or other federal regulations, through its Barney Charter School Initiative.

The program provides curricula and assistance to help launch classical charter schools around the country. Its “1776 Curriculum” teaches that America is morally exceptional to other countries and offers lessons on American history through a conservative bent, including descriptions of the New Deal as bad public policy and of affirmative action as “counter to the lofty ideals of the Founders.”

The school was voted-down initially in 2020 for including books on its curriculum for primary grades that some board members criticized as containing racist themes. Aicha Davis, a Democrat from Dallas who serves on the state board, last year described Heritage as “extreme” and “one of the most controversial applicants that we’ve had because of the curriculum and ideas they wanted to push.”

The academy’s board president and main financial backer is Stuart Saunders, a wealthy Houston lawyer and banker. Saunders has complained of Critical Race Theory and inappropriate sexual content in public schools, including at his son’s school, which he said inspired him to found Heritage. He has pledged $1 million from his foundation to the school, if approved.

After the state board denied the school for the second time, Saunders and his family donated more than $250,000 to a political action committee called Texans for Educational Freedom. That PAC then donated more than $500,000 to local school board races and other candidates who have promoted conservative themes in the schools.

The group donated in four State Board of Education races, including well over $100,000 total in successful bids to unseat state board members Sue Melton Malone and Jay Johnson, Republicans who voted with Democrats in opposition to Heritage. Board members questioned Saunders about this during a public hearing last year.

“Whereas that’s undoubtedly legal, it really appears to be unethical. It appears like you’re trying to remake this board after last summer when you were denied this charter school for the second time,” former board member Matt Robinson, R-Friendswood, said during last year’s board meeting.

Last year, Heritage’s lobbying efforts backfired and became a factor in the board’s decision to reject the charter, although Saunders told state board members he didn’t know Texans for Educational Freedom would donate to state board races.

This year the story could be different.

Robinson is now gone from the state board, as his home was drawn-out of his district by the Legislature. So are Melton Malone and Johnson. All three have been replaced by more Republicans who are thought to be more friendly to charter schools.

Each of the new members campaigned on fighting Critical Race Theory in classrooms, and they are known to be friendlier to “school choice” policies. Their presence on the state board already led to a flip-flop earlier this year on the board’s position on private school vouchers….

Texans for Educational Freedom then reported spending nearly $200,000 to support the campaign of Republican LJ Francis last year, a massive amount for a state board race.

Francis won his race by 1,665 votes, or 0.4 percent of the total, flipping his board seat from blue to red and putting yet another charter-friendly face on the board. Francis joined Gov. Greg Abbott at a speaking event at a San Antonio private school to promote the governor’s school voucher plan. Francis did not respond to a request for comment.

Heritage said in this year’s application to the Texas Education Agency, which was approved by Commissioner Mike Morath, that it expects to serve 1,056 students at capacity, primarily nonwhite students. Its goal is to bring classical education, including “instruction in moral virtues” to “the most disadvantaged students of Northwest Houston.”

A recent analysis from the Network for Public Education found classical schools nationwide are disproportionately wealthy and white, with just 17 percent of students eligible for free or reduced-price school lunch.

Board members have also questioned Heritage’s connection with Hillsdale College, which doesn’t fund or govern schools directly, but provides curriculum and consulting.

Hillsdale has a long history of cozy relationships with the political right. For instance, Ginni Thomas, the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas — who reportedly lobbied to overturn the 2020 presidential election — is a former vice president at the college.

With the four new state board members installed, Heritage’s plan to provide a conservative curriculum that dovetails neatly with an understanding of the United States as a fundamentally Christian nation could be a selling point, rather than a bug.

Texas Republicans have promoted policies introducing more Christianity into public schools, whether it be through more prayer, displaying the Ten Commandments in each classroom or allowing chaplains to serve as school counselors. This is part of a nationwide trend spurred on by a U.S. Supreme Court decision last year weakening the legal case against it.

Texas operates under the theory that if students always have the Ten Commandments in their classrooms, have ample opportunity to pray during the school day, and read the Bible as often as possible, that will cure the social ills of the state: no more murders, no more suicides, no more abortions, no more adultery, no more rapes, no more crime. You get the picture. Meanwhile the state has removed all gun control. Gun buyers don’t need a permit and they can carry their weapon in public. More of that all-time religion will fix things.

If not, the people of Texas should throw these self-aggrandizing frauds out on their ears.

Categories Academic Freedom, Bigotry, Charter Schools, Democracy, Disruption, Education Industry, Extremism, Religion, Separation of church and state, Texas
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »