A new study reaches a very heartening conclusion. Despite all the brickbats hurled at the Chicago Public Schools over the past 30 years, student achievement in these schools is the best in the state, when compared to similar students.

There has long been a perception that Chicago, like other big-city districts, has dismal academic performance.

But the new study matched students by race and income and discovered that Chicago students outperform kids in the rest of the state.

This is true for African-American students, white students, and Latino students, whether they are low-income or “non-poor.”

“You name the subgroup, and kids in Chicago are doing substantially better than other Illinois kids outside the city,” [Paul] Zavitkovsky said. A similar analysis by the University of Chicago’s Consortium on School Research in 2007 had similar findings but never got much attention.

Zavitkovsky’s key finding: Poverty is an “equal opportunity disruptor.” In suburban and downstate districts where poverty rates have gone up — in many cases by double digits — test scores have faltered or been stagnant. Researchers long ago established that poverty drags down scores.

The author, Paul Zavitkovsky, told NPR:

The household income of a youngster predicts pretty clearly, if you look at averages, how a student is going to do, with remarkable accuracy.

Linda Weber is running for the Democratic nomination for Congress in the Seventh District of New Jersey, a seat presently held by a Republican who supports Trump’s priorities.

She is the spouse of our friend Jersey Jazzman, whose blogs have kept us informed about the privatization movement in New Jersey.

If Linda is elected, she will be the best friend of public education in Congress.

She needs to raise $1,100 by midnight EST tonight to qualify.

Please help.

Give whatever you can.

Linda was endorsed by the Network for Public Education Action Fund, which reviewed her credentials and views about education.

Nancy E. Bailey writes here about current efforts to put children with disabilities on a computer and call it “personalized learning” and “inclusion.” It is neither.

“Personalized learning must not be mistaken for inclusion. The reality is that it’s student isolation!

“Inclusion is generally defined as the action or state of including or of being included within a group or structure. Doing schoolwork on a digital device by yourself is not inclusion. It’s ability grouping for one!

“In special education, inclusion is often described as students working alongside their peers. Alongside? Please tell me that doesn’t mean sitting next to another student on the computer!…

“Differentiation refers to Carol Ann Tomlinson’s push to get children in inclusion classrooms doing academic activities in ways that are common but uniquely different. This takes much thoughtful planning on the part of well-qualified teachers.

“For example, students might read about a topic with everyone placed at their individual reading levels. Next, they could come together as a class to discuss the topic.

“Jennifer Carolan, co-founding partner of Reach Capital, a $53 million venture fund that backs education technology startups, writes in Education Week about such differentiation, trying to liken it to personalized learning. The article is called “Personalized Learning Isn’t About Isolation.” Previously, Carolan was the managing director and co-founder of the Seed Fund at the NewSchools Venture Fund.

“But she’s wrong. Personalized learning is about working alone.

“The reality is, and many of us understand, that tech enthusiasts are pushing teachers out of the profession and creating facilitators who merely monitor students as they work alone…

“It takes experienced teachers in both general and special education, and decent class sizes, to help address the challenges facing students with disabilities. Computers don’t do that. They merely present skills and review (ongoing assessment).

“The human element, the most important part of inclusion for children, involves bringing students together—both academically and socially!

“Children with disabilities need skills, of course. But they also need peer acceptance. They will not get that from a machine. Such acceptance also leads to a greater societal good.”

Linda Weber is a staunch friend of public education. She is running for Congress in New Jersey, seeking a seat now held by a Republican. She needs our help.

Linda has raised $25,000 in the past two weeks. She must raise $8,500 by June 30!

I sent a contribution, I hope you will too.

You may not know Linda, but if you read this blog with regularity, you know her husband Mark Weber. Mark blogs as Jersey Jazzman. He teaches music in a New Jersey public school and is working towards a doctorate at Rutgers University. Mark has repeatedly exposed charter school scams by demonstrating that they do not enroll the same students as public schools.

This is Linda’s statement on why she is running:

“Why I’m Running!

“Like many Americans, and women in particular, on November 8th I was shocked and angry. Since that night these sentiments have only intensified as I’ve watched President Trump aggressively work to turn back the clock for women. He rolled back equal pay protections for women working for federal contractors, he is chipping away at the ability of women to make their own reproductive health choices, and his healthcare bill essentially penalizes women for their gender. Not only does the Trump/House Republican healthcare plan take us back to the days when pregnancy was a preexisting condition, it will also substantially raise the out-of-pocket costs for childbirth and other women’s health services.

“Donald Trump’s behavior, actions, and rhetoric are unacceptable, but what’s worse is the refusal of House Republicans to hold him accountable. In my district, Congressman Leonard Lance, who I am challenging, is actively enabling President Trump. He has voted with him 93% of the time. With regard to women’s health, Representative Lance has 0% score from Planned Parenthood and does not support a woman’s right to make her own healthcare choices.

“In 2017, it is stunning that we are still debating whether women should have the freedom to make their own health choices and be paid the same amount as men for doing the same work. What message are we sending to our girls? This is why I am running. I am running to stand up for pay equity, a woman’s right to choose, and health insurance coverage that does not subject women to a different standard. I am also running to advance policies to protect the air that we breathe and the water that we drink, to create a more equitable and innovative economy, to rebuild our neglected transportation infrastructure, to stand up for marginalized communities, and to ensure that our education system is adequately preparing our children to be successful in our rapidly evolving economy.

“I have spent over 30 years in technology and banking where I’ve often been the only woman at the table so I know what it means to fight for myself and for others. I made sure that while I had a seat at the table, I also created seats for other women, including women of color, to ensure equal access of opportunity. I know how to fight and I know how to win, but more importantly, I know how to serve.”

“This statement was first published on UniteWomen.org on May 16, 2017 as the the first in their new series entitled #WhyImRunning, highlighting the record number of women are running for office since the November election.”

State Commissioner Mitchell Chester died unexpectedly at the age of 65. He was battling cancer.

Although I disagreed with his reliance on corporate reform policies, I regret his untimely passing. R.I.P.

While supporters of public education were appalled by the Supreme Court decision awarding public funding to religious institutions, conservatives were disappointed that the decision did not go far enough to clear away any barriers to vouchers.

Martin West, a professor at Harvard, expressed his chagrin in this article in Education Next. West was mentored at Harvard by choice advocate Paul Peterson. Peterson has trained a generation of younger scholars who reflect his views on school choice, including West, the late John Chubb, Terry Moe, Jay Greene and Patrick Wolf of the University of Arkansas. Peterson is known for his influential protégés, who have formed a powerful cadre favoring school choice.

Now that the Court has a clear majority of five conservative justices, will separation of church and state survive? Not clear. One more Trump appointment to the Supreme Court, and Petersen, West, et al, can throw a party to celebrate their success at undermining public education in America and enabling every religious school–schools that teach creationism, schools that exclude children of other faiths, schools that exclude children with disabilities, schools that discriminate against LGBT children, schools that offer subpar education, schools that have no certified teachers–to get public funding. What a victory. Sad.

Education Next is funded by rightwing foundations and the reliably conservative Hoover Institution.