Archives for category: Education Reform

The New York Times is called (and calls itself) “the newspaper of record.” Talk show hosts, editorial writers, and influentials read the Times. That’s why I get so frustrated by its consistently awful editorials about education, which as a rule favor the data-driven, test-and-punish approach to schooling. But its news writing about education just keeps getting better all the time.

 

Here is its take on DeVos’ appearance before the HELP committee: a Bronx cheer, a raspberry. The theme of the story: DeVos is in over her head. After a long run as an advocate for school choice, she has no idea about the lingo of federal education policy or about federal law. She is being asked to take charge of a department that administers aid to college students, but knows nothing about the department’s role or programs.

 

“Her confirmation hearing that night opened her up to new criticism: that her long battle for school choice, controversial as it has been, is the sum total of her experience and understanding of education policy. In questioning by senators, she seemed either unaware or unsupportive of the longstanding policies and functions of the department she is in line to lead, from special education rules to the policing of for-profit universities.

 

“Ms. DeVos admitted that she might have been “confused” when she appeared not to know that the broad statute that has governed special education for more than four decades is federal law.
“A billionaire investor, education philanthropist and Michigan Republican activist, Ms. DeVos acknowledged that she has no personal experience with student loans — the federal government is the largest provider — and said she would have to “review” the department’s policies aimed at preventing fraud by for-profit colleges.
She appeared blank on basic education terms. Asked how school performance should be assessed, she did not know the difference between growth, which measures how much students have learned over a given period, and proficiency, which measures how many students reach a targeted score.
“Ms. DeVos even became something of an internet punch line when she suggested that some school officials should be allowed to carry guns on the premises to defend against grizzly bears.
“But if she was sometimes rattled on the specifics, Ms. DeVos was unshakable in her belief that education authority should devolve away from the federal government and toward state and local authorities. Whether the issue was allowing guns in schools, how to investigate sexual assault on college campuses, or how to measure learning, her answer was always that states and what she called “locales” knew best.”

 

 

Meanwhile, a story on Huffington Post reported that former Senator Joe Lieberman, who introduced DeVos, giving this rightwing extremist a bipartisan gloss, is associated with a law firm that represents Donald Trump.

 

“Former Senator Joe Lieberman (D-CT) tonight introduced Donald Trump’s controversial nominee for Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos, to the Senate HELP Committee. Lieberman lavishly praised DeVos, but failed to inform the American people that his law firm, Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman LLP, “have represented Trump in all manner of matters since at least 2001. Such matters have included, but are certainly not limited to, the restructuring of $1.3 billion in bondholder debt connected to his Atlantic City casinos; a defamation case filed against the author of TrumpNation: The Art of Being the Donald, for stating that the businessman was worth between $150 million and $250 million, not billions (a suit that Trump later lost); and the fight to keep filings from his 1990 divorce from ex-wife Ivana Trump sealed.”

 

“Most recently, Lieberman’s law firm represented Trump by threatening the New York Times for publishing pieces of Trump’s tax return.

 

“In 2012, asked about his future work upon his retirement from the Senate, Lieberman promised, “I’m not going to lobby. For sure.” In 2013, as a member of Kasowitz Benson, Lieberman registered to be a lobbyist, representing a Libyan politician.

 

 

 

“As soon as the election was over, Trump abandoned his promise to drain the swamp of corruption in Washington and stand up for working people. His appointment of entitled billionaire Betsy DeVos, who has financial investments in education companies, has favored privatization over public education, has failed to finalize the necessary paperwork with the Office of Government Ethics prior to her hearing, has contributed millions to the Republican Party, and is now opposed by leading civil rights and education groups and 68 members of the congressional black, Hispanic, and Asia Pacific American caucuses, is part of this betrayal.

 

“Joe Lieberman’s invocation of his Democratic Party credentials to endorse DeVos, without mentioning out loud to the American people that his law firm has long worked for Trump, is yet another piece of the deep corruption Trump is bringing to Washington.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

During the hearings on Betsy DeVos, the Republican Senator Richard Burr (North Carolina) asked why people get all hung up on process, when they should be talking about “results.” DeVos agreed. I was hoping the committee might then discuss the results of DeVos reforms in Michigan and Detroit. Or anywhere else. How awesome is Detroit, which is overrun with charters? On the National Assessment of Educational Progress, it is the lowest performing urban district in the nation. How awesome are Milwaukee and Cleveland, which have had vouchers and charters for more than 20 years? They barely top Detroit among the lowest performing urban districts in the nation.

 

Here is what the New York Times said about charters in Detroit:

 

Michigan leapt at the promise of charter schools 23 years ago, betting big that choice and competition would improve public schools. It got competition, and chaos.

 

Detroit schools have long been in decline academically and financially. But over the past five years, divisive politics and educational ideology and a scramble for money have combined to produced a public education fiasco that is perhaps unparalleled in the United States.

 

While the idea was to foster academic competition, the unchecked growth of charters has created a glut of schools competing for some of the nation’s poorest students, enticing them to enroll with cash bonuses, laptops, raffle tickets for iPads and bicycles. Leaders of charter and traditional schools alike say they are being cannibalized, fighting so hard over students and the limited public dollars that follow them that no one thrives.

 

Detroit now has a bigger share of students in charters than any American city except New Orleans, which turned almost all its schools into charters after Hurricane Katrina. But half the charters perform only as well, or worse than, Detroit’s traditional public schools.

 

“The point was to raise all schools,” said Scott Romney, a lawyer and board member of New Detroit, a civic group formed after the 1967 race riots here. “Instead, we’ve had a total and complete collapse of education in this city.”

 

This morning I was on the NPR radio show from D.C. that used to be the Diane Rehm show but is now called 1A, with Rick Hess of the DeVos-funded American Enterprise Institute, and he said that Detroit charters were outperforming Detroit public schools. As Stephen Henderson, the editor of the Detroit Free Press wrote not long ago, the charters in Detroit vary in quality but many of them are failing and they are no better than the public schools.)

 

Henderson deconstructed the CREDO studies that Rick Hess cited, and concluded:

 

In a city like Detroit, for instance, where, on average, students perform well below statewide norms, kids in charter schools should more quickly close their gaps than kids in traditional public schools.

 

Hypothetically.

 

The problem is they really haven’t. Not for 20 years, dating to the beginning of Michigan’s charter experiment.

 

CREDO also found that, for instance, 63% of charters statewide perform no better than traditional public schools in math. And in Detroit, nearly half all charters do no better than traditional public schools in reading.

 

Overall, about 84% of charter students perform below state averages in math; the number is 80% for reading. That tracks closely with the outcomes for traditional public schools.

 

The gains for charter students are also clustered, in many instances, in high-performing outliers. But because Michigan does not require charter operators to have proven track records before they open schools or do much to hold them accountable after their schools open, the number of underperforming charter schools far outweighs the high achievers.

 

In addition, the CREDO results need to be considered in the context of other data about charter schools.

 

The Free Press investigation of charter schools, for instance, revealed that even taking poverty into account, charter schools essentially perform the same as traditional public schools, and in some cases, a little worse.

 

If Detroit, which is still the lowest-performing urban district in the nation, is the DeVos model of “success,” then our nation’s education system is doomed.

 

Similarly, Michigan’s standing on the National Assessment of Educational Progress has dropped, in some cases dramatically since 2003, about the time Betsy took control of education in the state. EdTrust wrote a report warning that the state was on its way to the bottom:

 

Among the 2015 NAEP results highlighted in the report:

 

• Michigan ranked 41st in fourth-grade reading, down from 28th in 2003.

 

• The state ranked 42nd in fourth-grade math, down from 27 in 2003.

 

• It ranked 31st in eighth-grade reading, down from 27th in 2003.

 

• It ranked 38th in eight-grade math, down from 34th.

 

Given these dismal results, why would anyone listen to Betsy DeVos on the subject of education? It must be the funding she has showered on Republicans, including 10 of the 12 Republicans on the committee that will judge her fitness to serve. It can’t be results.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Betsy DeVos was questioned about whether she would maintain gun-free zones around schools. She said that should be left to states. She was questioned by Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut, where the Sandy Hook massacre occurred in Newtown. DeVos said that some schools might need guns to protect against grizzly bears. She also said she would do whatever Trump wanted on the issue. She expressed sympathy for anyone killed by guns.

 

A group called States United tweeted:

 

“U.S. school shootings since 2013: 210. Grizzly bear attacks at American schools since 2013: 0. #DeVosHearing…”

 

Crooks and Liars said she “waffled,” as she did with most questions. 

 

 

Graham Vyse writes in The New Republic that Betsy DeVos was stumped time and again by straightforward questions from Democrats. Meanwhile, Republicans fell all over themselves praising her for being willing to serve in a job for which she is manifestly unfit.

 

“Betsy DeVos, President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for secretary of education, just failed her first test. At her Senate confirmation hearing Tuesday night, the billionaire conservative philanthropist and “school choice” advocate appeared unprepared to answer straightforward questions about school reform, and she aired extreme views that could cause headaches for the incoming administration.

The worst of it began when Senator Al Franken, a Minnesota Democrat, asked DeVos about a longtime debate in education policy over whether students should be evaluated on their academic growth or “proficiency.” The nominee seemed stumped:
“I think, if I’m understanding your question correctly around proficiency, I would also correlate it to competency and mastery, so that each student is measured according to the advancement they’re making in each subject area,” she said.

 

“Well, that’s growth. That’s not proficiency,” Franken replied. “I’m talking about the debate between proficiency and growth and what your thoughts are on that.”
“DeVos said she was “just asking to clarify,” and then Franken really pounced.

 

“It surprises me that you don’t know this issue,” he said, “and Mr. Chairman, I think this a good reason for us to have more questions.”

 

“To the average American tuning in on C-SPAN, this moment might have seemed like know-it-all nitpicking from Franken. DeVos’s answer suggests she’s not well-versed on policy, and begs the question why she wasn’t better prepared.”

 

Possibly, DeVos knew that her generous contributions to Republicans made her confirmation a mere formality, so there was no need to prepare. Most of her answers were evasive or noncommittal.

 

 

 

 

Now that Vladimir Putin is slated to become a good friend of the new president, it is important to know more about Putin. Start by learning about Aleksandr Dugin, who is known as “Putin’s Brain.” Dugin is a Russian nationalist. He proudly calls himself a fascist. He despises secularism and modernity. He strongly opposes the U.S. and our allies. He foresees a new Russian-Arab alliance and longs for the restoration of the Soviet empire.

 

The Economist wrote about parallels between Dugin and Trump’s Advisor Steve Bannon.

 

“ALEXANDER DUGIN, the Russian philosopher of religion and geopolitics who has been described as “[Vladimir] Putin’s brain” is absolutely delighted by the American election result. On the website of this apostle of anti-Americanism, there is an article rejoicing in the fact that the United States need no longer be treated as an enemy, because the good guys are winning there: the next step, it hints strongly, will be to ensure further victories for anti-liberal forces in Europe, beginning with the French presidential candidate Marine Le Pen.

 

[Dugin wrote:]

 

“Anti-Americanism is over. Not because it was wrong, but exactly the opposite: because the American people themselves have started the revolution against precisely the aspect of the US which we hated….So let us [now] drain the European Swamp…What is the structure of the Swamp? First of all, the Swamp is an ideology, Liberalism. We need a Nuremburg Trial for Liberalism, the last totalitarian political ideology”
“Who is Mr Dugin? An exponent of “Eurasian” geopolitical thought which dreams of a great Slavic-Turkic land empire under Moscow’s command, he saw his influence soar during the early months of the conflict in eastern Ukraine in 2014. Along with some figures on the nationalist fringe of Russian Orthodox church, he gave moral support to the leaders of the Russian-backed rebellion against the government of Ukraine. Mr Dugin sometimes describes his credo as Orthodox Eurasianiam, but he is not much interested in Christian theology as such: more in Orthodoxy as a mark of distinction from the West. Among the thinkers whose guiding hand he acknowledges is Julius Evola, an Italian guru of the far right; he also draws on a “traditionalist” school of religious philosophy which sees wisdom in many ancient and elaborate faiths and loathes secular modernity.”

 

This is a quote from one of his books:

 

“In principle, Eurasia and our space, the heartland Russia, remain the staging area of a new anti-bourgeois, anti-American revolution. … The new Eurasian empire will be constructed on the fundamental principle of the common enemy: the rejection of Atlanticism, strategic control of the USA, and the refusal to allow liberal values to dominate us. This common civilizational impulse will be the basis of a political and strategic union.”

 

Dugin and Bannon, says The Economist, have major differences, but they have common enemies: They “secularism, multi-culturalism, egalitarianism and modernity.”

 

More on Dugin.  See here.

 

This is my favorite quote in his Wikipedia entry, written in 2007. Dugin wrote:

 

“There are no more opponents of Putin’s course and, if there are, they are mentally ill and need to be sent off for clinical examination. Putin is everywhere, Putin is everything, Putin is absolute, and Putin is indispensable” – was voted number two in flattery by readers of Kommersant.”

 

I wonder which quote was voted number one in flattery by readers of Kommersant?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I was invited to appear on Chris Hayes’ “All In” last night. Here is the link. It starts with Senator Sanders asking Betsy DeVos how much money she gave to Republicans.

 

When asked about whether there should be gun-free zones around schools, Betsy DeVos dodged and said some schools might need a gun. She gave the example of a Wyoming school that needs protection from grizzly bears.

 

School officials in Wyoming at the district in question said the school has strong fences but no guns are allowed. The school has 10 students and was quite surprised to be the center of national attention.

 

“(CNN)The superintendent for a rural Wyoming school cited by education secretary nominee Betsy DeVos in Tuesday’s Senate confirmation hearing says they have no guns for grizzly bear at Wapiti School.

 

“Ray Schulte, superintendent for Park County School District No. 6, told CNN Wednesday he was at the school board meeting Tuesday night when he got word one of their local school had been mentioned by DeVos.

 

“I noticed the gal mentioned Wapiti School,” he said.

 

Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy, who represents Sandy Hook, the site of the 2012 school shooting, had asked DeVos if she believed guns have “any place in and around schools.”
Citing grizzlies, Betsy DeVos says states should determine school gun policies

 

“I think that is best left to locales and states to decide,” she said.

 

After Murphy pushed DeVos, she brought up a story Wyoming Sen. Mike Enzi told about a school with has fences around it to protect against grizzly bears.

 

“I will refer back to Sen. Enzi and the school he is talking about in Wyoming. I think probably there, I would imagine there is probably a gun in a school to protect from potential grizzlies,” she said.
Schulte said it’s against state law to have guns at school.
“We do not allow weapons on school property,” he said.

 

 

 

Wyoming school district cited by DeVos: Grizzlies, yes; guns, no
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/18/politics/betsy-devos/index.html

The prepared remarks of Betsy DeVos were released, and Daniel Katz analyzes them here.

 

DeVos knows very little, maybe nothing, about the public schools of America. She thinks that parents long to send their children to religious schools, for-profit charter schools, cybercharters, anyplace but a local public school.

 

She never mentions the failure of the school choice policies she has inflicted on Michigan. Michigan has seen its NAEP performance drop steadily–sometimes sharply–since the spread of DeVos ideas. Since 2003, Michigan scores on NAEP have declined from the middle of the pack among states to the bottom third. Detroit is awash in charters, and it is still in desperate trouble as public dollars shift to private management. The Detroit charters are no better than the public schools.

 

But she doesn’t mention any of that. She just talks about the wonders of choice. It worked for her and her family. Why shouldn’t all children have the same choices as the DeVos family?

 

When you figure that out, I have a bridge a few blocks from where I live that I want to sell you.

 

 

A group of researchers, parents, and other activists released a report on the inequitable provision of education in the nearly all-charter district of New Orleans. Their focus was the highest-risk neighborhoods, where the city’s poorest children live. The group is called Equity for All Places. Its report highlights the poor choices available to the neediest students in New Orleans.

I was taped this morning for NPR’s “The Takeaway.” It comes on at different times on AM and FM. 
The show interviewed a charter school advocate from Michigan, then me. The conversation was about Betsy DeVos and her crusade for charters and vouchers. 
When I get a link to the show, I will post it.