Archives for category: Education Industry
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Heather Cox Richardson: Trump Can’t Escape Project 2025

By dianeravitch
July 31, 2024 //
30

Ever since the general public began hearing Project 2025, the document scared those who listened. Although it was described by its authors as the agenda for Trump’s second term and it was written by veterans of the Trump administration, Trump pretended he knew nothing about it. Who wrote it? What does it say? Never heard of it.

For sure, very few people have read its 900+ pages. I read the section on education. Eliminate the Department of Education. Voucherize programs like Title 1, Headstart, special education funding, with no federal regulations attached to the money. Promote funding for religious and private schools. Ditch separation of church and state.

It also calls for a national ban on abortion and for eliminating the Civil Service and replacing career government employees with people loyal to Trump. It is the document that describes—department by department, agency by agency—how to destroy “the administrative state.”

There’s a saying that comes to mind: “When an authoritarian tells you what he plans to do, believe him.”

Heather Cox Richardson wrote about Trump’s clumsy efforts to distance himself from an agenda written by senior officials in his administration:

On Friday, speaking to Christians at the Turning Point Action Believers’ Summit in West Palm Beach, Florida, Trump begged the members of the audience to “vote. Just this time. You won’t have to do it anymore. Four more years, you know what: it’ll be fixed, it’ll be fine…. In four years, you don’t have to vote again, we’ll have it fixed so good you’re not going to have to vote.”

The comment drew a lot of attention, and on Monday, Fox News Channel personality Laura Ingraham gave him a chance to walk the statement back. Instead, he said: “I said, vote for me, you’re not going to have to do it ever again. It’s true.” “Don’t worry about the future. You have to vote on November 5. After that, you don’t have to worry about voting anymore. I don’t care, because we’re going to fix it. The country will be fixed and we won’t even need your vote anymore, because frankly we will have such love, if you don’t want to vote anymore, that’s OK.”

Trump’s refusal to disavow the idea that putting him back into power will mean the end of a need for elections is chilling and must be viewed against the backdrop of the Supreme Court’s July 1, 2024, decision in Donald J. Trump v. United States. In that decision, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, the court’s right-wing majority said that presidents cannot be prosecuted for crimes committed as part of a president’s “official duties” and that presidents should have a presumption of immunity for other presidential actions. 

John Roberts defends the idea of a strong executive and has fought against the expansion of voting rights made possible by the 1965 Voting Rights Act. The idea that it is dangerous to permit minorities and women to vote suggests that there are certain people who should run the country. That tracks with a recently unearthed video in which Republican vice presidential candidate J.D. Vance calls childless people “psychotic” and “deranged,” and refers unselfconsciously to “America’s leadership class.” 

The idea that democracy must be overturned in order to enable a small group of leaders to restore virtue to a nation is at the center of the “illiberal democracy” or “Christian democracy” championed by Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán. Orbán’s imposition of an authoritarian Christian nationalism on a former democracy, in turn, has inspired the far-right figures that are currently in charge of the Republican Party. As Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts put it: “Modern Hungary is not just a model for conservative statecraft but the model.”

Kevin Roberts has called for “institutionalizing Trumpism” and pulled together dozens of right-wing institutions behind the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 to create a blueprint for a second Trump term. Those who created Project 2025 are closely connected to the Trump team, and Trump praised its creators and its ideas. 

Today, The New Republic published the foreword Vance wrote for Kevin Roberts’s forthcoming book. Vance makes it clear he sees Kevin Roberts and himself as working together to create “a fundamentally Christian view of culture and economics.” Like others on the Christian right, Vance argues that “the Left” has captured the country’s institutions and that those institutions must be uprooted and those in them replaced with right-wing Christians in order to restore what they see—inaccurately—as traditional America.  

That determination to disrupt American institutions fits neatly with the technology entrepreneurs who seem to believe that they are the ones who should control the nation’s future. Vance is backed by Silicon Valley libertarian Peter Thiel, who put more than $10 million behind Vance’s election to the Senate. In 2009, Thiel wrote “I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible.” 

“The 1920s were the last decade in American history during which one could be genuinely optimistic about politics,” he wrote. “Since 1920, the vast increase in welfare beneficiaries and the extension of the franchise to women—two constituencies that are notoriously tough for libertarians—have rendered the notion of ‘capitalist democracy’ into an oxymoron.” 

Thiel set Vance up to invest in companies that made him wealthy and touted Vance for the vice presidential slot, and in turn, the Silicon Valley set are expecting Vance to help get rid of the regulation imposed by the Biden administration and to push cryptocurrency. Trump appears to be getting on board with comments about how the tech donors are “geniuses,” praising investor Elon Musk and saying, “We have to make life good for our smart people.” In a piece that came out Sunday, Washington Post reporters Elizabeth Dwoskin, Cat Zakrzewski, Nitasha Tiku, and Josh Dawsey credited the influence of Thiel and other tech leaders for turning Vance from a Never-Trumper to a MAGA Republican. 

Judd Legum of Popular Information reported today that the cryptocurrency industry is investing heavily in the 2024 election, with its main super PAC raising $202 million in this cycle. Three large cryptocurrency companies are investing about $150 million in pro-crypto congressional candidates. 

On Saturday, Trump said he would make the U.S. “the crypto capital of the planet and the Bitcoin superpower of the world.” He promised to end regulations on cryptocurrency, which, because it is not overseen by governments, is prone to use by criminals and rogue states. That regulation is “a part of a much larger pattern that’s being carried out by the same left-wing fascists to weaponize government against any threat to their power,” Trump said. “They’ve done it to me.”

But the problem that those trying to get rid of the modern administrative state continue to run up against is that voters actually like a government that regulates business, provides a basic social safety net, promotes infrastructure, and protects civil rights. In recent days, Minnesota governor Tim Walz has been articulating how popular that government is as he makes the television rounds.

On Sunday, CNN’s Jake Tapper listed some of Walz’s policies—he passed background checks for guns, expanded LGBTQ protections, instituted free breakfast and lunch for school kids—and asked if they made Walz vulnerable to Trump calling him a “big government liberal.” Walz joked that he was, indeed, a “monster.” 

“Kids are eating and having full bellies so they can go learn, and women are making their own health care decisions, and we’re a top five business state, and we also rank in the top three of happiness…. The fact of the matter is,” where Democratic policies are implemented, “quality of life is higher, the economies are better…educational attainment is better. So yeah, my kids are going to eat here, and you’re going to have a chance to go to college, and you’re going to have an opportunity to live where we’re working on reducing carbon emissions. Oh, and by the way, you’re going to have personal incomes that are higher, and you’re going to have health insurance. So if that’s where they want to label me, I’m more than happy to take the label.” 

The extremes of Project 2025 have made it clear that the Republicans intend to destroy the kind of government Walz is defending and replace it with an authoritarian president imposing Christian nationalism. And when Americans hear what’s in Project 2025, they overwhelmingly oppose it. Trump has tried without success to distance himself from the document. 

He and his team have also hammered on the Heritage Foundation for their public revelations of their plans, and today the director of Project 2025, Paul Dans, stepped down. The Trump campaign issued a statement reiterating—in the face of a mountain of evidence to the contrary—that Trump had nothing to do with Project 2025 and adding: “Reports of Project 2025’s demise would be greatly welcomed and should service as notice to anyone or any group trying to misrepresent their influence with President Trump and his campaign—it will not end well for you.” 

The Harris campaign responded to the news by saying that “Project 2025 is on the ballot because Donald Trump is on the ballot. This is his agenda, written by his allies, for Donald Trump to inflict on our country. Hiding the 920-page blueprint from the American people doesn’t make it less real—in fact, it should make voters more concerned about what else Trump and his allies are hiding.” 

The reasoning behind the idea of a strong executive, or a “leadership class” that does not have to answer to voters, is that an extremist minority needs to take control of the American government away from the American people because the majority doesn’t like the policies the extremists want. 

When Trump begs right-wing Christians to turn out for just one more election, he is promising that if only we will put him into the White House once and for all, we will never again have to worry about having a say in our government. As Trump put it: “The country will be fixed and we won’t even need your vote anymore.”

Categories Budget Cuts, Disruption, Education Industry, Elections, Ethics, Evil, Extremism, Funding, Gender, Trump

ProPublica: How Vouchers Almost Bankrupted Arizona

By dianeravitch
July 31, 2024 //
6

Voters in Arizona voted overwhelmingly against voucher expansion in a state referendum in 2018, but Republican Governor Doug Ducey and the Republican legislature expanded them anyway. The pro-voucher campaign was funded by Charles Koch and Betsy DeVos.

The financial blow to the state has been devastating. As in every other state, most vouchers are used by private and religious school students from affluent families.

ProPublica writes here about the voucher disaster in Arizona:

In 2022, Arizona pioneered the largest school voucher program in the history of education. Under a new law, any parent in the state, no matter how affluent, could get a taxpayer-funded voucher worth up to tens of thousands of dollars to spend on private school tuition, extracurricular programs or homeschooling supplies.

In just the past two years, nearly a dozen states have enacted sweeping voucher programs similar to Arizona’s Empowerment Scholarship Account system, with many using it as a model.

Yet in a lesson for these other states, Arizona’s voucher experiment has since precipitated a budget meltdown. The state this year faced a $1.4 billion budget shortfall, much of which was a result of the new voucher spending, according to the Grand Canyon Institute, a local nonpartisan fiscal and economic policy think tank. Last fiscal year alone, the price tag of universal vouchers in Arizona skyrocketed from an original official estimate of just under $65 million to roughly $332 million, the Grand Canyon analysis found; another $429 million in costs is expected this year.

As a result of all this unexpected spending, alongside some recent revenue losses, Arizona is now having to make deep cuts to a wide swath of critical state programs and projects, the pain of which will be felt by average Arizonans who may or may not have school-aged children.

Among the funding slashed: $333 million for water infrastructure projects, in a state where water scarcity will shape the future, and tens of millions of dollars for highway expansions and repairs in congested areas of one of the nation’s fastest-growing metropolises — Phoenix and its suburbs. Also nixed were improvements to the air conditioning in state prisons, where temperatures can soar above 100 degrees. Arizona’s community colleges, too, are seeing their budgets cut by $54 million.

Still, Arizona-style universal school voucher programs — available to all, including the wealthiest parents — continue to sweep the nation, from Florida to Utah.

In Florida, one lawmaker pointed out last year that Arizona’s program seemed to be having a negative budgetary impact. “This is what Arizona did not anticipate,” said Florida Democratic Rep. Robin Bartleman, during a floor debate. “What is our backup plan to fill that budget hole?”

Her concern was minimized by her Republican colleagues, and Florida’s transformational voucher legislation soon passed.

Advocates for Arizona’s universal voucher initiative had originally said that it wouldn’t cost the public — and might even save taxpayers money. The Goldwater Institute, a conservative think tank that helped craft the state’s 2022 voucher bill, claimed in its promotional materialsat the time that the vouchers would “save taxpayers thousands per student, millions statewide.” Families that received the new cash, the institute said, would be educating their kids “for less than it would cost taxpayers if they were in the public school system.”

But as it turns out, the parents most likely to apply for these vouchers are the ones who were already sending their kids to private school or homeschooling. They use the dollars to subsidize what they were already paying for.

The result is new money coming out of the state budget. After all, the public wasn’t paying for private school kids’ tuition before…

Arizona doesn’t have a comprehensive tally of how many private schoolers and homeschoolers are out there, so it remains an open question how much higher the cost of vouchers could go and therefore how much cash should be kept on hand to fund them. The director of the state’s nonpartisan Joint Legislative Budget Committee told lawmakers that “we’ve never really faced that circumstance before where you’ve got this requirement” — that anyone can get a voucher — “but it isn’t funded.”

Most importantly, said Beth Lewis, executive director of the public-school-advocacy group Save Our Schools Arizona, only a small amount of the new spending on private schools and homeschooling is going toward poor children, which means that already-extreme educational inequality in Arizona is being exacerbated. The state is 49th in the country in per-pupil public school funding, and as a result, year after year, district schools in lower-income areas are plagued by some of the nation’s worst staffing ratios and largest class sizes.

Spending hundreds of millions of dollars on vouchers to help kids who are already going to private school keep going to private school won’t just sink the budget, Lewis said. It’s funding that’s not going to the public schools, keeping them from becoming what they could and should be.

Categories Accountability, Arizona, Billionaires, Budget Cuts, Democracy, Education Industry, Elections, Extremism, Fraud, Funding, School Choice, Vouchers

Project 2025: A Recipe for Disaster!

By dianeravitch
July 28, 2024 //
41

Former President Trump recently discovered that members of his administration had produced a set of plans for his next term. They did this under the guidance of the Heritage Foundation, the Republican Party’s ideological center. If you believed that Trump knew nothing about this 900-page guidebook, I know of a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

Project 2025 is a handbook of extremism. It represents the far-right Republicans’ desire to eliminate many federal programs and, as right winger Grover Norquist one memorably said, “Shrink it so it can be drowned in a bathtub.”

North Carolina public school advocates Patty Williams and David Zonderman are public school graduates and parents. They wrote the following about Project 2025:

In the Spring of 2023, the Heritage Foundation released Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise, aka Project 2025. Now, more than a year later, it is finally getting the serious attention that it demands. In its early pages, the Foundation claims to “have gone back to the future—and then some.” We are warned that, “The federal government is a behemoth, weaponized against American citizens and conservative values, with freedom and liberty under siege as never before.” To fight this supposed incubus sucking the life out of the republic, a growing number of conservative organizations have joined the Heritage Foundation in supporting this project and intend to assemble an army to march on Washington to “deconstruct the Administrative State.”

 

Project 2025 is both breathtaking and scary in its scope. It envisions a far-right rewriting of government missions, policies, and procedures, ranging from the White House, through all Cabinet-level departments, to the Federal Reserve and other independent regulatory agencies.  Tens of thousands of federal employees could be fired or subject to politically-inspired loyalty tests, gutting almost 150 years of civil service reform, and erasing institutional memory, knowledge, and expertise. Whole federal departments—including the Department of Education—and the funding that goes with them could be left on the cutting room floor, with disastrous consequences for the least among us.

 

This far-right “Playbook” is a frontal assault on honest and competent government, and the underpinnings of our 248-year-old democracy. Project 2025 flips the script on our nation’s foundation of liberty, prosperity, and the rule of law by inverting and perverting fact and data about how government actually functions to protect the environment, ensure safe workplaces, and provide some safety net for those in poverty. 

 

Project 2025 may appear to come from the right-wing fever swamp, which conjures up something out of science fiction. Indeed, it does remind us of a legendary Rod Serling Twilight Zone episode, first televised in March of 1962. In “To Serve Man,” earth is visited by the Kanamits. Enormously tall aliens, they appear frightening at first, but are eventually welcomed by humans. The Kanamits help end famine, eliminate war, and provide unlimited energy supplies for the betterment of the planet. 

 

Seemingly altruistic in their efforts, the Kanamits leave a book behind at the United Nations, which a decoding expert, Hero Chambers and his able assistant, Pat, begin to translate. Meanwhile, the Kanamits invite enthusiastic Earthlings to visit their planet, and flight reservations fill up quickly. Only when Pat races up to a space ship about to lift off does she reveal to Chambers that the title of the book—To Serve Man—is a cookbook. A recipe for disaster.

 

Project 2025 also proclaims to serve man, perhaps not literally on a silver platter like the Kanamits; but it may also cannibalize our government, our nation, and our democracy. Unlike the hapless denizens of earth in the Twilight Zone, we don’t need a decoding expert to see through the myths and deceptions that seek to dismantle our enduring republic and its Constitutional rights.

 

Let’s not wait until it’s too late and our collective goose is cooked. It’s time to stir the pot. Encourage your friends and family to vote as though their democracy depends on it—because it does.

 

Categories Accountability, Billionaires, Budget Cuts, Censorship, Civil Rights, Cruelty, Democracy, Deregulation, Disruption, Early Childhood Education, Education Industry, Elections, Evil, Extremism, Failure, For-Profit, Fraud, Funding, Privatization, Propaganda, Republicans, Vouchers

Public Education Advocates Urge Kamala Harris to Select a VP Who Opposes Privatization

By dianeravitch
July 27, 2024 //
26

The following letter was sent to Vice President Kamala Harris by advocates for public schools from across the nation. They pointed out that public schools, attended by 50 million students, are being harmed by privatization programs, which force public schools to cut budgets, lay off teachers, and eliminate courses and activities. Voucher schools are allowed to discriminate against. Students they don’t want: students with disabilities, students with low test scores, LGBT, and students of a different religion. For the past decade, research concurs that vouchers actually harm poor kids, who lose academic ground. Most vouchers are amused by students who already attend private and religious schools.

They urged VP Harris to reject Pennnsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro because of his support for vouchers. They urged her to support someone with a strong record of opposing privatization, like Governor Roy Cooper of North Carolina, Governor Andy Beshear of Kentucky or Governor Tim Walz of Minnesota

Please read.

Real Democrats support real public schools.

Categories Accountability, Budget Cuts, Charter Schools, Democracy, Education Industry, Privatization, Religion, Separation of church and state, Vouchers

Randi Weingarten: The Moment We Are In

By dianeravitch
July 26, 2024 //
3

The American Federation of Teachers held its annual convention in Houston. Its president, Randi Weingarten, delivered this speech about the perils of the present time and the importance of unions.

Read the pdf of the speech here:

RWSpeech 1Download

She began:

These are unprecedented times. First and foremost, I want to thank President Biden. He’s been a great president, a great public servant and an incredible patriot. We owe him a debt of gratitude.


Of course I’m starting with a primary source. I don’t think they’ve banned Charles Dickens—yet. “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness. …” Those words were written more than 165 years ago, but today they feel very Dickensian.


Today, our union has never been stronger, and a revival of labor activism is sweeping the nation. Wages are up, inflation has cooled, the Biden-Harris administration has created more jobs than any other in history, and America’s economy is the strongest in the world—powered by America’s workers.


Yet…


Fear, anxiety and despair have taken hold across our country, driven by disinformation, shifting demographics, loneliness and a pervasive feeling that the American dream is slipping further and further out of reach. Our students and our patients are coming to us with greater and greater needs. Academic freedom and the right to peacefully protest have come under attack. From floods to famines to fires, climate catastrophes are worsening. Hate crimes, particularly anti-Muslim and anti-Jewish hate, are climbing. And gun violence still haunts us.


Let’s be clear: Political violence is never justified; not on Jan. 6 and not against political candidates. And while the calls to condemn political violence were encouraging, billionaires and demagogues are still capitalizing on fear to stoke division, defund public education and public services, decimate healthcare and dismantle our democracy—all to cement their power. And the Supreme Court’s extremist majority is aiding and abetting them, rewriting the Constitution in terrifying ways.

Operatives like Christopher Rufo, who work on behalf of billionaires like Betsy DeVos, openly admit their scheme—to create distrust in public education and in their political enemies so they can enact their extremist agenda.


These aren’t the first unscrupulous operatives we’ve faced. We’ve been outspent, been bet against, and had our union’s obituary written more times than we can count. Michelle Rhee tried to sweep us away. Scott Walker tried to legislate us out of existence. Billionaires backed the Janus case to try to bankrupt us. A red wave was supposed to crest in 2022 and wash us away.
Mike Pompeo tried to vilify us, first claiming that America’s school teachers teach “filth,” and then calling me the most dangerous person in the world—more dangerous than Vladimir Putin.

Why? Because I am your elected leader.


But we’re still here. In fact, we’re thriving. I guess that old saying IS true—what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger. And, in our case, bigger.
The AFT had 1.4 million members when I became president in 2008. Since then, we’ve been through two recessions, a pandemic and all the crap I just described.


Despite everything that has been thrown at us, since our last convention, the AFT has added 185 new units and more than 80,000 new members.
And today, the AFT is 1.8 million members strong!


Who are the newest members of the AFT? Four airport ground crew workers in Bangor, Maine—and 450 teaching assistants at Brown University. Nine licensed practical nurses at PeaceHealth in Oregon, and 910 diagnostic imaging techs in Michigan. Bus drivers in Farmington, Ill., and faculty and staff at universities in Kansas and Hawaii. Healthcare workers at Planned Parenthood in Wisconsin. Librarians in Ohio, doctors in Maryland, charter school educators in Massachusetts, paraprofessionals in Minnesota. And thousands more who just want a better life, including—after a 50-year fight—the 27,000 educators and school staff in Fairfax County, Va.
Why do they join the AFT? Because the AFT believes in improving people’s lives. Because the AFT believes in our communities and our country. And because the AFT believes in you.


This growth is essential. America’s middle class has risen and fallen as union membership has risen and fallen. That’s why we—indeed, the entire AFL-CIO—are working to grow.


Our unions help us win better wages and benefits. Our unions give us real voice at work. It’s how the United Federation of Teachers negotiated groundbreaking paid parental leave and lower class sizes. It’s how Cleveland got their new policy prohibiting students from using cell phones during the school day. United Teachers Los Angeles won sustainable community schools. And the Chicago Teachers Union is negotiating for healthy, safe, green schools.

It’s about the value of belonging.

Please open the PDF and finish reading this terrific speech.

Categories Accountability, Bigotry, Budget Cuts, Democracy, Disruption, Education Industry, Education Reform, Elections, Extremism, Funding, Gender, Harris, Kamala, Teachers, Trump

Memo to Kamala: Don’t Pick Josh Shapiro as VP!

By dianeravitch
July 25, 2024 //
35

Dear Kamala,

You are an exciting candidate, and I am thrilled to help in any way I can to see you become President of the United States. I admired President Biden and his courage in selecting you to be his Vice-President.

Now I see you in the campaign trail, happy and spreading joy. Quite a contrast to Trump, who is always scowling, angry, and promising to wreak vengeance on his enemies.

I have one piece of advice: Please do not choose Josh Shapiro as your Vice President. I know he is popular in Pennsylvania, and you need Pennsylvania.

But Josh Shapiro is a supporter of vouchers. Vouchers are a hoax. Their boosters are right-wing foundations who oppose abortion, gun control, and climate action. Vouchers hurt public schools. Vouchers are the pet project of Betsy DeVos, Charles Koch, the Bradley Foundation, the Olin Foundation, and Texas evangelical billionaires Wilks and Tim Dunn. Another huge voucher supporter is multibillionaire Jeff Yass, the richest man in Pennsylvania, who has spread money to other states to promote vouchers and is rumored to have encouraged Shapiro to push vouchers.

Vouchers are bad not only because of their supporters but because they fail to help poor kids. In fact, the evidence from evaluations in Louisiana, Ohio, Indiana, and D.C. demonstrate that vouchers damage the academic outcomes of poor kids.

Most students who use vouchers are already enrolled in private schools. Why should the state subsidize families who don’t need the money but would be happy to have it as a gift from the state?

I know you don’t have a lot of time for reading these days, but I urge you to read anything that voucher researcher Josh Cowen has written since 2022. In that year, he declared that vouchers had failed and were hurting the kids they were supposed to help. His new book, The Privateers: How Billionaires Created a Culture War and Sold School Vouchers, lucidly describes the origins of vouchers in the fight against desegregation in the 1950s and their utter failure to help “poor kids escape from failing schools.”

You have a great list of potential VPs. Governor Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania should not be on that list.

Thank you,

Diane Ravitch

Categories Accountability, Democracy, Education Industry, Elections, Harris, Kamala, Pennsylvania, Vouchers

Project 2025: What Happens to K-12 in a New Trump Term?

By dianeravitch
July 17, 2024 //
11

Matthew Stone of Education Week described the plans for K-12 education in a second Trump term, as they appear in Project 2025, a document written by hundreds of former Trump officials. The 44-page education section emphasizes eliminating the U.S. Department of Education, distributing its functions to other agencies, converting categorical funds (like Title I for low-income children) into block grants, and rooting out “critical race theory” and any recognition of the existence of LGBT students. The document emphasizes the primacy of parental rights.

Trump has distanced himself from the document, because its recommendations are so radical, but it was prepared under the watchful eye of Kevin Roberts, president of the ultra-rightwing Heritage Foundation. Roberts is a close associate of Trump’s.

Stone wrote:

What would Donald Trump do in the realm of K-12 if voters return the former president to the White House?

He and his campaign haven’t outlined many specifics, but a recently published document that details conservative plans to completely remake the executive branch offers some possibilities. Among them: 

  • Title I, the $18 billion federal fund that supports low-income students, would disappear in a decade. 
  • Federal special education funds would flow to school districts as block grants with no strings attached, or even to savings accounts for parents to use on private school or other education expenses.
  • The U.S. Department of Education would be eliminated.
  • The federal government’s ability to enforce civil rights laws in schools would be scaled back.

The proposals are contained in a comprehensive policy agenda that’s part of a Heritage Foundation-led initiative called Project 2025: Presidential Transition Project, which includes nearly 900 pages of detailed plans for virtually every corner of the federal government and a database of potential staffers for a conservative administration. It will also feature a playbook for the first 180 days of a new term.

The agenda is designed to be ready for a conservative president to implement at the start of a new administration next year, depending on the outcome of November’s election.

Project 2025 involves former Trump administration officials and other allies of the former president, as well as dozens of aligned advocacy organizations. One of those is Moms for Liberty, the Florida-based group that rose to national prominence fighting school boards over COVID-19 safety protocols and has endorsed conservative school board candidates across the country in recent years.

On the campaign trail, Trump has said that parents should elect school principals, called for merit pay for teachers and the abolition of teacher tenure, promised to cut federal funding to schools pushing progressive social ideas, and pledged to establish universal school choice.

But because he’s released little in the way of detailed plans, Project 2025’s 44-page agenda for the U.S. Department of Education offers the clearest picture yet of the education priorities Trump could pursue in a second term, and how a second Trump administration could use the federal government to advance conservative policies like private school choice and parents’ rights that have taken root in many Republican-led states.

Trump is trying to distance himself from Project 2025 because it is so radical. But no one takes his protestations seriously.

Categories Betsy DeVos, Budget Cuts, Democracy, Disruption, Education Industry, Elections, Extremism, Funding, Republicans, Trump, U.S. Department of Education, Vouchers

North Carolina: Voucher Schools Should Be Held Accountable

By dianeravitch
July 16, 2024 //
9

The editorial board of the Capitol Broadcasting Company wonders why voucher schools in North Carolina are exempt from the same accountability as public schools. The answer is simple: They don’t want the public to know. They don’t want them to know that most kids who use vouchers never attended public schools. They don’t want them to know that the few public school kids who sought vouchers are falling behind their peers in public schools.

The editorial boldly chastises the North Carolina General Assembly:

It is not an unrealistic expectation that North Carolinians hold elected officials – whether executive, legislative or judicial – accountable for how tax dollars are spent.

When legislators dole out — say more than half-a-billion dollars – to private schools it should go without mention there would be clear provisions for taxpayers to know how much money goes where, whether the money is being spent for the purpose intended and whether that purpose is being achieved.

Accountability isn’t simply to the parents of students. Achievement isn’t merely a matter of the parents’ happiness.

All North Carolinians – particularly every taxpayer who is paying the tab – have a right to know how their money is being spent and whether it is in the hands of competent and qualified people to deliver the services intended – educating school children.

When it comes to private school vouchers, the leaders of the General Assembly want to pump as much as $632 million into them so that even wealthy families can gain taxpayer subsidies for their kids’ tuition. Nearly 20% of the likely beneficiaries are families with annual household incomes exceeding $259,000 (representing the top 7% of families in the state).

Accountability is overlooked. More than overlooked, it seems legislative leaders are actually blocking the kinds of routine accountability that other recipients of taxpayer money must adhere to.

A recent examination of 200 private schools that receive the greatest share of taxpayer-funded vouchers by the Public School Forum of North Carolina revealed little oversight and few of the basic requirements that are in place for public schools, so taxpayers can see if their schools are properly staffed and kids are learning.

It is the law that students in public schools be taught by state-certified teachers. Voucher-supported private schools have no teacher-certification requirements. Only 2% of private schools require teachers have state certification.

Public schools must operate at least 185 days for classroom instruction. There’s no requirement of any minimum on instruction for voucher-supported private schools.

Public schools – including charter schools – must administer state end of grade tests. Voucher private schools can administer a nationally-normed standardized test of their choice to students.  They must pay if they choose to  use the state’s end of grade tests (see clarification below).

Current funding schemes for private school vouchers – even if funding for students from low- and modest-income families – needs to be accountable.

And there’s certainly no urgency to act on the unwise expansion of private school vouchers. The reality is that none of the families who might be awaiting word on the availability of the subsidies, is dependent upon them to send their kids to ANY school of their choice – public or private.

There are certainly some circumstances when the education needs of students cannot be met in public schools. Having a taxpayer-financed option for those students who need it – and need financial assistance – is appropriate.

But every taxpayer should be able to know – by transparency and accountability set out in state law – that their dollars are being spent as intended by competent teachers and there’s a demonstrable way to determine the effectiveness of the instruction.

Schools that discriminate in admissions or hiring, schools that don’t require basic teacher certification, classroom attendance, schools that don’t show student achievement through the same end-of-grade testing used in public schools and schools that don’t make that information available as public schools do, should not be subsidized with taxpayer dollars.

That’s just basic accountability our legislators should demand and schools willingly provide.

CLARIFICATION: An earlier version of this editorial stated that North Carolina private schools receiving taxpayer-financed vouchers were prohibited from using state end of grade tests. Private schools, including those receiving vouchers, are not prohibited from participating in the state’s end of grade and/or end of course tests, according to the state Department of Public Instruction.  If the private schools pay they can participate and some do, according to the department.

Categories Accountability, Education Industry, Failure, North Carolina, Vouchers

Wacky Heritage Foundation Report Warns that Charter Schools Are “Woke”

By dianeravitch
July 14, 2024 //
16

A recent Heritage report warns that parents can’t trust charter schools because so many of them are just as “woke” as public schools. Some are even more woke than public schools.

The report, written by Jay Greene, Ian Kingsbury, and Jason Bedrick, asserts that the major philanthropic foundations supporting charter schools—the Walton Family Foundation and the Gates Foundation—are also woke. This is where it gets crazy. Walton is woke? The anti-union, rightwing Waltons?

The solution the authors prefer is a fully funded voucher system, where schools are not regulated by the state and do not need money from woke philanthropies like Walton or Gates. That way, parents who are racist, homophobic, and sexist can find a school that teaches their values.

They begin:

There is a loose set of political and social values that can succinctly be labeled as “woke.” These woke values tend to be characterized by a departure from traditional American and classical-liberal values of individual responsibility and equal treatment in favor of emphasizing differentiated treatment by group identity and social rather than individual justice. Of course, there is a constituency of parents who favor an education infused with these woke values—but they tend to be a distinct minority. As past research suggests, when parents have more control over the education of their own children, that education tends to be less woke.

Given that parental empowerment is associated with less woke education, one might expect that charter schools—which are chosen by parents rather than strictly assigned based on the location of a family’s home—are less woke than nearby public schools operated by school districts. But school choice could produce more woke options if those choices are highly regulated and controlled by distant regulators and philanthropists. School districts still retain a fair amount of responsiveness to the preferences of the communities they serve given their democratic governance.

Charter schools, on the other hand, might become less responsive to the preferences of local parents if they have to please state authorizers to be established and remain open and if they are overly dependent on national philanthropies to subsidize their operations. Those charter schools may have to adopt woke values to gain permission to open from the public authorities that grant them their charter and to receive funding, especially for capital expenses, from large donors with progressive values.

Parents may nevertheless choose woke charter schools, either because they are among the minority that hold those values or because safety and quality of instruction may induce parents to select a school that is otherwise at odds with their values. By contrast, policies that permit private school choice with vouchers or K–12 education savings accounts do not require permission from an authorizer for schools to open their doors and therefore are less likely to require capital funds from donors since they often already have school buildings. That means that private schools are typically more directly accountable to parents than charter schools and so are more likely to reflect the values of the families they serve.

It is an open question whether highly constrained and regulated types of school choice, like charter schools, are actually less responsive to parental preferences regarding values than are public district schools, which are also regulated and insulated from parental control by unions and the imperfections of democratic governance.

The purpose of this Backgrounder is to examine whether, on average, charter schools embrace a woke education more strongly than do nearby public schools operated by school districts. By analyzing key words in student handbooks as a proxy for wokeness, the authors find that charter schools actually tend to be more woke than traditional district schools. The authors consider how regulatory and donor capture of charter schools could be reduced so that this type of school choice could be more responsive to parental preferences regarding the values emphasized in the education of their own children.

They conclude:

School choice should empower parents to obtain an education for their own children that is consistent with their values. That is still occurring with private school choice, but with charter school choice it is falling short. Regulatory and financial constraints need to be removed from charter schools so they can better align with the values preferences of parents. In states and localities where charter schools have not been able to be more responsive to parents, private school choice is the better path for avoiding the woke capture of school choice.

Categories Charter Schools, Disruption, Education Industry, Extremism, Privatization, School Choice, Walton Foundation

North Carolina: Five Words for Voters: “And You’re OK with That?”

By dianeravitch
July 13, 2024 //
7

Leaders of the pro-public school organization called Public Schools First in North Carolina discovered that many public school parents and advocates are unaware that the state’s General Assembly has passed a budget that gives vouchers to the rich. They are distributing the following opinion piece from the Greensboro News to inform the public:

Our Opinion: Five words for GOP candidates: ‘And you’re OK with That?’

“And you’re OK with that?”

As Republican candidates for the state legislature begin to the make the rounds this fall, they should be hearing those five words over and over from constituents of all political stripes.

At every stop, on every stump, they should be pressed to give straight answers to that simple question on three issues:

Private-school vouchers

Even as they’ve increased taxpayer funding for private school tuition, adding wealthy families to the dole, many local public districts, including our own in Guilford and Forsyth counties, complain that they are seriously underfunded.

To be more specific, your party plans to plow hundreds of additional millions in taxpayer money into private school tuition assistance. Although 40% of that money ($96 million) would go to middle-class and working-class families earning between $57,721 to $115,440 a year (for a family of four), 44% (or $107 million) would go families earning $115,441 to $259,740.

And 16% (or $39 million) would go to those who need it the very least: wealthy families earning more than $259,741 annually.

One Democratic lawmaker likened it to asking low- and moderate-income taxpayers to help pay for a wealthy kid’s Porsche.

How do you square that with your rhetoric against “the welfare state” and profligate spending of other people’s money?

How do you square it with public school funding gaps throughout the state?

And how do you tell public schools no, that’s all we have to spend and then turn around and tell rich families y’all come. Who do we make the check out to?

Keeping secrets

Your party also slipped a provision into the state budget bill last fall that allows state lawmakers to decide for themselves whether they will make any of their documents accessible to the public. 

By law, they also get to choose whether to destroy or sell documents. They’re the decider. Which means they’re creating their own deep state right here and now on Tobacco Road.

What are they trying to hide and why?

And what gives them the right to membership in this exclusive club, but not others (the governor, the lieutenant governor, the attorney general and other North Carolina officials who are elected statewide need not apply)?

Easy money

Then there’s the provision the Republican-controlled legislature embedded within an (unnecessary) anti-masking bill that allows more “dark money” donations to political candidates in North Carolina.

As the current law stands, candidates must disclose the names of donors to their campaigns. They also are prohibited from taking donations from corporations, and contributions from individuals and political groups may not exceed $6,400.

This bill would change all that by making it legal for political parties in the state to take money from “Super PACs,” which are allowed to keep their donors secret and may receive unlimited amounts of money.

Those Super PACs would be able to collect the money and pass it on to the political parties, which could then funnel it to candidates, no questions asked.

At least your party has made no secret of the fact that it designed this new rule specifically with the GOP gubernatorial candidate in mind. Mark Robinson substantially trails his Democratic opponent, Josh Stein, in fundraising.

To recap, are you OK with:

Channeling taxpayer money to rich people as public schools go wanting?

Keeping documents and correspondence a secret from the public … unless you decide to share it?

And allowing anonymous cash to flow unfettered to candidates of both parties?

If the answer is yes, please explain how any of this benefits most North Carolinians and why we should vote for you anyway.

And how this in any way resembles government for, by and of the people.

Categories Accountability, Budget Cuts, Corporate Reform, Disruption, Education Industry, Elections, Ethics, North Carolina, Privatization, School Choice, Segregation, Vouchers
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »