Archives for category: Education Industry

A highly experienced, very successful high school English teacher clung to her favorite literature textbooks.she preferred them to the digital textbooks adopted by the district. One day recently, she arrived in her class to discover that all her textbooks were gone. Her defiance was unacceptable to the state, the district and the principal. The state wants all children using digital material. It is de-emphasizing fiction and literature, replacing them with “informational text.” In short, the Common Core strikes again.

Audrey Silverman arrived at Dr. Michael M. Krop Senior High last week ready to finish “The Necklace,” the English class staple short story about the deceptiveness of appearances and the dangers of martyrdom with her gifted, honors ninth-grade students.

But when the literature teacher entered her classroom Thursday morning, 50 textbooks, including the teacher’s edition with years of annotations Silverman said she personally purchased, were missing from the baskets beneath the students’ desks. A student told Silverman she saw the books carted away the prior evening.

“They’re gone,” said Silverman. “Nobody knows where they are.

What happened next has culminated into a tussle between teacher autonomy and embracing new, digital curriculum. Silverman filed a pre-grievance with the teachers’ union against her principal, Allison Harley, for breached academic freedom. Harley, Silverman says, launched an internal investigation with Miami-Dade County Public Schools against her for improper use of email.

Silverman, a 30-year veteran teacher whose scores deem her one of the best teachers in the state, has been using a textbook called “McDougal-Littell Literature” for a decade, although students were using an edition from four years ago. It’s got poems, essays, short stories, Edgar Allan Poe and Shakespeare — a curriculum she says challenges and rivets her students.

But the Florida Department of Education phased out that textbook five years ago and introduced new titles that districts could use. A committee of teachers picked “Collections“ by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, a digital textbook that aligns with new Florida standardized tests that heavily emphasize nonfiction and informational texts.

That digital book was adopted by the district in 2015 while rolling out a tablet-based program for high school freshmen, who could bring their own device or check one out from the school.

“It makes the learning a lot more interactive,” than using just a static book, said Lisette Alves, the assistant superintendent over academics.

Silverman had been quietly hanging on to her hardcover books until last week, when a group of district officials stopped by her classroom. District spokeswoman Jackie Calzadilla said an instructional review of all subjects took place at Krop on Sept. 26 and determined that the material Silverman was using “was not aligned with the Florida Standard” and was outdated.

The next morning, the books were gone. Not in the closed cabinets where she kept the spares, not under desks, not in her own desk.

“I felt that this may happen one day,” Silverman said.

Alves and Sylvia Diaz, assistant superintendent over innovation and school choice, say the district does not make the call to remove books. That decision was made by the principal.

“We do occasionally hear about a teacher using older materials,” Diaz said. “We advise the principal.”

“If we see it as we’re doing reviews, then we advise the principal to make sure they’re using [the adopted books],” Alves said.

Harley, the principal at Krop, would not comment and referred a reporter’s questions to the district. The district said Harley repeatedly asked Silverman to use the approved material and she refused.

Spokeswoman Daisy Gonzalez-Diego said books were removed from Silverman’s class two summers ago, “but the teacher retrieved them and brought them back into the classroom.”

“So, they had to be removed again,” Gonzalez-Diego wrote in an email.

Silverman said this incident has been the first and only time books have been removed from her classroom. She said she’s kept these books in her cabinet for three years.

“That is an outright lie,” she said.

The district also said all other language arts teachers at Krop were using the approved material.

Ceresta Smith, a 10th-grade intensive reading teacher who returned to Krop after a decade at John A. Ferguson Senior High, said she doesn’t use any of the approved material. She uses a collection of materials she’s put together over her 30-year teaching career.

“I said to the principal when I … came back to Krop, I said, ‘Don’t expect me to follow the pacing guide. I’m a veteran and I’m a professional and I know what I’m doing.’ ”

Read more here: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/education/article219197755.html#storylink=cpy

The story goes on with more horrifying detail.

Celesta Smith, be it noted, is a National Board Certified Teacher, a founder of United Opt Out, and a BAT. Nobody dares to tell her what to teach.

No one should tell Audrey Silverman what to teach. She is a professional.

LEAVE HER ALONE.

Ms. Silverman, google the literary selections and forget about the textbook.

Jan Resseger reviews a major report by the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of the Inspector General, which condemns the Department’s repeated failure to oversee the spending of federal. charter school funding.

The blame here falls not on Betsy DeVos, but on her predecessor, Arne Duncan, who was so eager to stimulate the creation of new charter schools that he failed to monitor those already opened with federal funds.

She writes:

“The report condemns a trend of poor oversight: This is the third major report in which the Department of Education’s OIG has documented poor management of federal dollars flowing to charter schools. Reports from the Department of Education’s OIG in 2012 and 2016 also disparaged Duncan’s charter school oversight. It is not likely, however, that Betsy DeVos, a libertarian, will improve the Department’s regulatory role.

“The new 2018, OIG report examines whether the U.S. Department of Education has a process for adequately monitoring the management of federal dollars and the management of student records and data when charter schools are closed. OIG examined charter school closures in three states between 2011 and 2015. Defining privately operated charter schools as public schools for the purpose of this report, the OIG notes that in the 2015-2016 school year, there were 98,277 public schools across the United States, among which 6,855 were charter schools. Between 2011 and 2015, 977 of the charter schools closed. OIG studied charter school closures in three states: Arizona, which had the highest number of closed charter schools authorized by the same authorizer; California, which had more charter schools than any other state and more students enrolled in charter schools; and Louisiana, which had the highest ratio of charter school closures relative to the number of charter schools in the state. In its 2018 report, OIG examines the procedures used in 89 of the closed charter schools—45 in Arizona, 31 in California, and 13 in Louisiana. OIG explains: “The purpose of the audit (is) to determine whether the U.S. Department of Education has effective oversight of the programs provided to charter schools….”

“The OIG begins its report by reassuring us—in oxymoronic language— that, “Charter schools are nonsectarian, publicly funded schools of choice that are intended to be held accountable for their academic and financial performance in return for reduced governmental regulation.” Maybe the myth that charters can be held accountable without accountability explains why the Department of Education hasn’t done so well with with preventing the kind of problems the report describes.

“The 2018, OIG report charges that the Department of Education has not provided adequate guidance to enable states and local school districts to comply with the federal laws and regulations they must follow to protect Title I, IDEA and Charter Schools Program dollars when charter schools are shut down. Neither Arizona, California, nor Louisiana had developed required procedures for tracking how the assets of charter schools were disposed after the schools were closed. The report notes that in September of 2015, the Department of Education sent a letter to state departments of education to remind them “of their role in helping to ensure that Federal funds received by charter schools are used for intended and appropriate purposes.” OIG explains, however, that, “The Dear Colleague Letter did not specifically discuss charter school closures.” Neither has the Department adequately monitored states’ charter school closure processes. “The Title I, IDEA, and CSP program offices did not incorporate a review of charter school closure procedures into their State Education Agency monitoring tools.”

“The 2018, OIG report continues: “During our audit period, the Department did not consider charter school closures to be a risk to Federal funds; therefore, the Title I, IDEA, and CSP program offices did not prioritize providing guidance to State Education Agencies on how to manage the charter school closure process….” “Without adequate Department guidance provided to the State Education Agencies and sufficient State Education Agency and authorizer oversight and monitoring of charter school closure processes, the risk of significant fraud, waste, and abuse of Federal programs’ funds is high. The growing number of charter schools, from 1,993 in School Year 2000-2001 to 6,855 in School Year 2015-2016, and the number of charter schools that closed, ranging from 72 in School Year 2000-2001 to 308 in School Year 2014-2015, require the Department’s program offices to develop and implement a modified approach to overseeing the State Education Agencies.””

Finally: “We found there was no assurance that for the sampled closed charter schools (1) Federal funds were properly closed within the required period, (2) assets aquired with Federal funds were properly disposed of, and (3) the students’ personally identifiable information was properly protected and maintained.”

Unfortunately, Kathleen S. Tighe, the Inspector General of the Department of Education, is retiring next month, and her replacement will be named by the president, subject to Senate confirmation. The current deputy IG Sandra Bruce will take over until a permanent IG is nominated and confirmed.

Given the track record of the Trump administration in politicizing every facet of the federal government, this change may be the end of honest inquiry about charter school oversight.

Bill Phillis, retired deputy superintendent of the state department of education, is a zealous advocate for accountability and transparency. He has made a public records request about the Gulen charter schools in Ohio. He has written a multi-part series based on what he learned. This is Part 4.


Public Records and Charter Schools – Part Four: Buckeye Community Hope Foundation (BCHF)

According to its website, the Buckeye Community Hope Foundation “was founded in 1991 as a non-profit corporation with the mission of developing affordable housing for low-income families and individuals.” In 2005, the organization decided to expand its core purpose by becoming a charter school sponsor. According to an analysis completed by the Education Commission of the States, 44 states provide for charters by statute. However, only Minnesota and Ohio clearly allow non-profit organizations without a singular, core educational purpose like BCHF to serve as sponsors legally responsible for the oversight of these publicly-funded but privately-operated schools.

Since entering the charter school business, BCHF has become the sponsor for 47 schools, nearly as many as the ESC of Lake Erie West (ESCLEW), one of the original charter school sponsors in Ohio. Nine of these are Concept Schools operating under the Horizon Science Academy and Noble Academy brands. These schools are located in Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton, Lorain, and Youngstown.

Consistent with the public records requests sent to the Ohio Department of Education (ODE) and the ESC of Lake Erie West, the Ohio Coalition for Equity & Adequacy of School Funding (Ohio E & A) sent a letter on May 2 to the Buckeye Community Hope Foundation requesting comparable records for the schools it sponsors. But the reply on June 4 from the BCHF attorney was not unexpected:

“… The Buckeye Community Hope Foundation is not a public entity subject to public records requests. Other places you may get the records you desire are the Ohio Department of Education and the public schools themselves.”

In trying to inform the public about state policy and practices, along with reporting on the condition and needs of schools, it was regrettable, but also predictable, to receive this reply from counsel. Instead of dealing with one agency (ODE and ESCLEW), it was suggested that Ohio E & A deal with nine, along with the state agency, to get the information desired. Irrespective of the statute which allows BCHF to collect significant public revenue but use its non-profit status to be immune from responding to public records requests, legislators need to reexamine the statute and require more transparency and accountability from private organizations that benefit from public funds. We will examine this more in Part Five, the final segment in this series.

A final observation on BCHF and its stance on public records reveal that in fact, the public has to rely on ODE to provide the information about the Concept Schools that are sponsored by the non-profit. For example, we had to find out through records sent by ODE, not BCHF that the non-profit had to deal with the same type of issues in its Concept Schools as the public agency sponsor ESCLEW. When you have to find out information from another source when the first party says no, we are not required to do so, that is not reassuring.

The records available to us from ODE, and not BCHF, clearly demonstrate that it is up to the state education agency and, again, not BCHF, to inform the public regarding the operational condition of nine schools. The ODE records revealed a string of parent concerns regarding student expulsion, Individualized Education Program (IEP) issues, and a teacher complaining about one of the schools cherry-picking students in violation of standard public school admission practices. Again, it is not reassuring to find out about such issues through a third party – ODE.

In our final look in Part Five at the topic of public records requests and charter schools, we will make some recommendations about what we learned and what needs to be done regarding the charter school industry that will better serve the public.

William L. Phillis | Ohio Coalition for Equity & Adequacy of School Funding | 614.228.6540 | ohioeanda@sbcglobal.net| http://www.ohiocoalition.org

Thanks to G.F. Brandenburg for alerting me to this important post by Valerie Jablow, public school advocate in D.C.

D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser picked a bona fide corporate reformer as her deputy mayor for education. Even the pro-charter Washington Post Thought the choice was “odd.” Jablow thinks the correct word was not odd but conflicted.

The new deputy mayor Paul Kihn is a private school parent. He has close ties to the power structure. He previously worked in Philadelphia where Jablow notes some of his less than admirable feats, which make his appointment to oversee the D.C. public schools very odd:

Also odd is how the Post article did not mention a few things about Kihn that are, well, downright strange–if you believe in public schools BY, FOR, and OF the public:

–Kihn apparently made changes in a teacher contract in Philadelphia to eliminate guarantees about water fountains–because teachers wanted to ensure every school would have functional water fountains. (Not to mention what we know this means for kids’ developing brains.)

–Kihn also was apparently behind an idea to increase public engagement in Philadelphia’s public schools by allowing parents at a few underfunded district schools to vote to turn their schools into charters–or accept no additional funding. Now that’s school choice–with teeth!

[Confidential to Paul Kihn: As a DCPS parent, I really don’t wake up at night thinking about how I need to have even less engagement in my kids’ schools by turning them into charter schools that are not subject to FOIA; that can use annual facilities allocations for anything without any public accountability; and whose plans are not a matter of public knowledge until after the fact. But I do think about stranded costs and empty seats and civil rights violations created by the uncontrolled growth of charter schools in our city. Do you?]

–The wife of Scott Pearson (head of the charter board) is the boss of Kihn’s wife–at a think tank started by Pearson’s wife, called JPMorgan Chase Institute (associated with the financial institution of the same name).

Even more odd is that Paul Kihn, his wife, and Scott Pearson are all former employees of McKinsey, which applies business thinking to every activity.

If all of this sounds incestuous, well, it is.

The mayor has controlled D.C public schools since 2007. We are still “waiting for Superman” to land in D.C. So far, the biggest change has been to hand over half the kids to charter schools, most funded by the rightwing Walton Family Foundation and to introduce a failing voucher program. This looks more like floundering than strategy. Abandoning public responsibility for public schools is retreat, not success. Soon, Betsy DeVos is likely to name D.C. as one of her demonstration districts.

Rick Hess and Michael McShane of the AMERICAN Enterprise Institute bring a fresh perspective from their perch on the right. Writing in the conservative journal Education Next, they speculate on the reasons for the disappointing results of No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top, the twin policies of Bush and Obama.

Policy makers in Washington loved the ideas of testing, accountability, choice, and national standards. Yet, we now know that these policies were controversial and ultimately ineffective. NAEP scores flatlined, and there is little or no evidence that these policies succeeded.

They write:

“Within a few years, though, those Obama administration efforts—especially its support for teacher evaluation and the Common Core state standards—would themselves turn controversial, breeding backlash that rivaled the dissatisfaction with NCLB. Obama’s reforms would get mired in bitter debates about their emphasis on test scores and whether they constituted federal overreach.

“The results of all this activity were decidedly mixed. There’s some evidence that NCLB’s accountability push led to modest test score gains, at least early on (though one can reasonably ask how much of those gains was evidence of schools “getting better” and how much might have been due to teachers shifting time and energy from other subjects to reading and math instruction). Over the past decade, however, the National Assessment of Educational Progress has shown an unprecedented flat-lining of achievement growth. Research suggests that ambitious efforts to remake teacher evaluation did not lead to meaningful changes in how candidly teachers are actually evaluated, and that the $7 billion in the federal School Improvement Grant program did not, on average, improve achievement in participating schools. The Common Core and many of these other efforts may yield benefits down the road, but the results have certainly not been revolutionary and are widely perceived to be disappointing.

“This brief recap prompts a simple query: What happened? Why did each of these initially promising, seemingly popular efforts at federal leadership ultimately lose its luster? Were the high-profile initiatives of the Bush-Obama years a much-needed kick-start that forced America to get serious about school improvement, or a recipe for slipshod policymaking and rushed implementation that ultimately undermined reform? Did these reforms reflect a gutsy commitment to putting students first or political gamesmanship that yielded a counterproductive series of distracting mandates?”

There is no reason to believe that the latest version of these policies—the Every Students Succeeds Act—Will fare any differently.

Hedge fund manager Austin Beutner, superintendent of schools for the Los Angeles Unified School District, has lots of time to meet with Eli Broad, Peter Cunningham, the head of the California Charter Schools Association, and a long list of charter leaders and privatization advocates.

The teachers’ union, which has already authorized a strike, fought to get Beutner to release his calendar. He resisted, and now we know why.

Here is the story.

Of course, he has also met with union leaders, which is inevitable. But he has an unusual availability to charter school leaders and their lobbyists.

Perhaps Beutner could arrange a visit by Betsy DeVos. He could show her the progress he has made in undermining the public schools that he is supposed to lead.

This was LAUSD’s comment on Beutner’s calendar.

The Network for Public Education Action Fund endorses Tony Thurmond for Superintendent of Public Institution in California!

California is a mess because of the intrusion of billionaires into education, billionaires who do not send their own children to public schools but want to control and privatize them. They pour millions into school board races, and they are now pouring millions into the state superintendent race, in hopes of capturing that important position.

Tony Thurmond’s opponent, Marshall Tuck, has a long history in the charter industry. Although he claims to be a Democrat (as in DFER), Tuck was endorsed by the California Republican party. Thurmond won the support of 95% of the delegates to the California Democratic party convention. Tuck was also endorsed by Arne Duncan, and Duncan’s endorsement means support of charter schools, high-stakes testing, and misuse of test scores to evaluate teachers.

California desperately needs accountability and transparency for its unregulated charter sector, not a fox in charge of the henhouse.

Please help Tony Thurmond. He is wildly outspent by the candidate of the billionaires, including Eli Broad, Reed Hastings, Arthur Rock, and the Walton family.

This is the NPE Action statement:

The Network for Public Education Action proudly endorsed East Bay Assemblyman, Tony Thurmond, for California State Superintendent of Public Instruction.

We are writing today to remind you just how important your support for Tony Thurmond is.

Marshall Tuck, a corporate reformer, is gaining ground thanks to millions supplied to his campaign by the California Charter School Association and its allies.

Here is what one of the state’s leading public school advocates Professor Julian Vasquez Heilig had to say about this race:

“Marshall Tuck would clearly be an important ally for the Donald Trump and Betsy DeVos education agenda in California. In contrast, Tony Thurmond has vowed to lead the resistance against their education agenda. Marshall Tuck has millions of campaign dollars given to him by his billionaire allies and others lobbying to privately control and privatize public education in California. While Tuck has millions, Thurmond has people power. As Superintendent of Public Instruction he would be our champion for community-based solutions and better funding for education across our state.”

It is no wonder that Tuck is the darling of the charter-school backing billionaires.

Tuck is a former charter school executive and CEO. In 2014, Tuck ran an unsuccessful campaign for State Superintendent, losing to incumbent Tom Torlakson. Tuck was heavily funded by outside money from national charter advocates, including Michael Bloomberg, Eli Broad, the Waltons, Laurene Powell Jobs, Arthur Rock and John Arnold. Thurmond stated that, “California’s voters don’t want this election to be bought by the Walton family, Eli Broad, and other billionaires who want to privatize public education.”

Thurmond is passionate about improving public schools. His public school education prepared him for a 20-year career in social work, where he ran after-school programs and taught life skills and career training. Those years of experience provided him with a unique perspective into the lives of California’s youth.

Thurmond has vowed to “lead the resistance against Donald Trump and Betsy DeVos and their agenda to undermine and defund our public education system,” promising that he will not support policies that seek to divert taxpayer dollars from public education to private schools.

Thurmond has already received numerous endorsements, including the endorsement of Superintendent of Public Instruction, Tom Torlakson. Thurmond will be on the general election ballot on November 6th. NPE Action urges our over 21,000 supporters in California to educate and inform your friends, family, neighbors and colleagues about Thurmond’s campaign and the importance of this election for the future of public education in California.

Governor Doug Ducey of Arizona has been a stalwart champion of unregulated charters and vouchers. He has looked the other way when members of the legislature pass laws to enrich themselves while running charter chains and voucher programs. He has ignored conflicts of interest, nepotism, and self-dealing because, hey, that’s how unbridled capitalism works!

But the state is now knee-deep in scandals committed by privatizers, and guess what? Governor Ducey says it is time to reign in the corruption!

In a debate with his Democratic opponent, David Garcia, Ducey claims he wants to reform charter law. Is it because of the latest scandal, where a legislator (Eddie Farnsworth) sold his for-profit charter chain to a nonprofit and cleared at least $11.8 million in profit plus a contract to manage the nonprofit chain?

Laurie Roberts of the Arizona Republic is outraged that the government is indifferent to charter fraud.

She writes:

Farnsworth says he’s just a businessman who took a risk, followed the law and is now reaping the reward.

“Charter schools have been lucrative to me because I’ve done what every other business has done to make money: I had an idea,” he told Harris. “I put the business plan into place. I followed every law and every contract. I provided a product that is a good product that people wanted.”

“It doesn’t hurt that for most of the last two decades, Farnsworth, along with other legislators who own charter schools, has helped write some of those laws. In his 16 years as a legislator, for example, Farnsworth has voted 12 times to boost “additional assistance” to charter schools (read: himself).

“But there is no conflict, we are told.“

Garcia is an education professor. He has pledged to eliminate the profiteering from the charter se tor. His own children have attended an arts-focused charter school, so he is not opposed to charters on principle, just to the rampant fraud that makes Arizona a national laughing stock.

Despite his support for charters, the Network for Public Education Action Fund Endorses Garcia because Ducey is an ALEC stooge and a voucher proponent. Garcia opposes vouchers and has pledged new dedicated funding for public schools.

At 10 am I posted a story from the San Francisco Chronicle about Marshall Tuck, who is running for State Superintendent of Public Instruction. The original headline said that Tuck lowered standards to get a higher graduation rate.

This was the original:

Marshall Tuck, candidate for California schools chief, lowered the bar for graduation to make struggling schools look better

I just learned that the Tuck campaign complained about that headline, and the newspaper agreed to change it.

Now it reads: “TEACHERS AT 8 OF 10 SCHOOLS TUCK OVERSAW REJECTED HIS LEADERSHIP.“

Same story, new headline. He might as well have stuck with the original.

Charles Foster Johnson, founder of Pastors for Texas Children, barnstormed across Tennessee, Meeting with like-minded ministers who believe in separation of church and state.

Rev. Johnson organized 2,000 ministers in Texas, and PTC played a significant role in forging an alliance between rural Republicans and urban Democrats to stop vouchers.

“Johnson’s mission is starkly different from church leaders who want public funding available for religious and private schools. He is a fierce advocate of separation of church and state, as well as local control of schools and education funding.

“We want full funding of our public schools, and we are against privatization that diverts God’s common good money to underwrite private schools,” he said. “The public should stay public, and the private should stay private.”

“His advocacy model is being replicated in Oklahoma, Kentucky, Mississippi, and now Tennessee, where Johnson is rallying local pastors this week during stops in Knoxville, Nashville, and Pleasant Hill. He’ll close out his tour on Friday at First Baptist Church of Memphis, the city where some Tennessee lawmakers sought last year to create a pilot voucher program. That effort failed, but groups on both sides expect some type of voucher legislation will be introduced next January, when a newly elected General Assembly convenes under a new administration replacing outgoing Republican Gov. Bill Haslam.”

Pastors for Tennessee Children will be ready to fight against vouchers.

The support for vouchers comes from the American Federation for Children, an organization funded and founded by Betsy DeVos to promote vouchers. AFC spends hundreds of thousands of dollars in Tennessee at every election, to support voucher-friendly candidates.