Archives for category: Funding

This is funny. The Republicans control both houses of Congress. Trump asked them to slash the federal education budget by billions and to create a multi-billion fund to support school choice. The new budget for education ignores both requests.

According to Education Week, there will be increases for Title I and special education. There will be no new spending on school choice.

The only federal program that takes a budget hit is Title II, which helps keep down class sizes.

Lawmakers appear to be sending early signals of independence from the Trump administration on education budget issues. For example, in the fiscal 2018 budget proposal Turmp released several weeks ago, the president also sought to eliminate just over $1 billion in support for 21st Century Community Learning Centers in fiscal 2018. However, this budget deal for fiscal 2017 would give the program a relatively small boost of $25 million up to nearly $1.2 billion. Trump had also wanted to cut Title II funding in half in fiscal 2017, far more than this agreement, before eliminating it entirely in fiscal 2018.

And programs designed to serve needy students like TRIO and GEAR UP would also get small increases in this fiscal 2017 deal. Several of Trump’s proposed fiscal 2017 cuts were to programs that had already been consolidated under ESSA.

The budget deal doesn’t appear to include a new federal school choice program, a top K-12 priority for the Trump administration, although Trump’s request for such a program appears in his fiscal 2018 proposal and not his fiscal 2017 blueprint.

The budget deal also includes an increase (instead of elimination) for the National Endowments for the Arts and Humanities.

Barbara Byrd-Bennett, once Rahm Emanuel’s choice to lead the Chicago Public Schools, was sentenced to 4 1/2 years in prison for her role in a kickback scheme intended to gain her hundreds of thousands of dollars. She has lost her job, her career, her reputation, and now, her freedom.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-barbara-byrd-bennett-sentence-met-20170428-story.html

One of her co-conspirators received a sentence of seven years, another got 18 months.

MORE BREAKING NEWS: Cook County judge rejects CPS lawsuit seeking more money from the state. The district may close schools June 1 because of lack of funding.

Judge rejects CPS’ state funding lawsuit, gives district option to refile
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/politics/ct-chicago-schools-funding-lawsuit-ruling-met-20170428-story.html

Jennifer Berkshire, once known as EduShyster, raised the money to follow Betsy and Randi to Van Wert, Ohio.

This is a powerful article and a first-hand report. I hope you will read it in full.

Here is her perceptive report on the trip, what she saw, what she learned.

Clearly, Randi and the local educators wanted her to see wonderful public schools where students were happily engaged in learning. Perhaps she might think twice about the budget cuts that the Trump administration is set to inflict, even on those who voted for him, like the good people of Van Wert. Maybe she would hesitate to harm them. Maybe she might advocate for them.

When the two leaders visited the elementary schools, the fifth grade students were learning about the Great Depression, and how awful it was for people who lost their jobs and their futures because of decisions made by bankers far away. The parallels with the present are unavoidable.

Jennifer couldn’t help noting that Betsy DeVos and Trump want to roll back all the laws and regulations that were created to prevent another Depression and to protect ordinary people from the predatory malefactors of great wealth.

The tour’s next stop was the fifth grade classroom of Nate Hoverman, a Van Wert grad, whose students have spent weeks working on a project-based learning unit about how kids experienced the Great Depression. On this day, the students were reading an excerpt from Russell Freedman’s Children of the Great Depression about how the economic crisis crippled schools across the country.

Out of work and out of money, people couldn’t pay the taxes that paid for their schools. Schools closed down or shortened their school years and teachers everywhere were laid off, which meant huge classes for the students who still had schools to go to. In Chicago, teachers, who hadn’t been paid for months, joined with parents and students and marched on the city’s banks, demanding that the bankers loan the city enough money to pay their salaries. When some of the teachers occupied the banks, the cops moved in. Freedman cites a newspaper report: “In a moment, unpaid policemen were cracking their clubs against the heads of unpaid school teachers.”

The timing of the reading was a coincidence, Hoverman told me. The students had started the unit reading the acclaimed novel Bud, Not Buddy, about an orphan making his way in Flint, MI in 1936, but they wanted to know more about the “why” behind the story. Still, it would be hard to conjure up a more fitting frame for our present precipice. For DeVos and her peeps, this was the period of American history when the nation went pear-shaped, the government using its might on behalf of working people like it never had before. The regulatory state was born, the unions were newly powerful, and those students who marched through the streets of Chicago with their teachers grew up to become Democrats with a deep distrust of the free market.

Both DeVos’ own family and the one she married into were part of the business-led crusade to roll back the New Deal’s accomplishments that began practically as soon as the New Deal did. Seven decades later, the fever dream of low taxes, little regulation and shriveled public services may finally be at hand.

Jennifer goes on to describe the heavy hand of ALEC behind the choice movement, not only to demolish public schools, but to lower the wages of construction workers. And the heavy and successful lobbying for cyber charters, which have terrible results but are very adept at getting more and more taxpayer money with no accountability for students or performance or finances.

Jennifer met a local education activist, Brianne Kramer, who had taught at one of the online schools and knew how dreadful they are. She asked her the question: where is this leading?

She answered without missing a beat.

“They don’t believe in the idea of common schools because they don’t believe in the common good,” said Kramer.

Kramer and I were meeting for the first time. A friend of hers from the Bad Ass Teachers Association had alerted her that I was heading to this corner of Ohio, and here we were 36 hours later, discussing the future of public education in the Buckeye State over biscuits and broasted chicken (a thing!) at a Bob Evans. Kramer has become something of an expert on the influence of ALEC in Ohio. Last year, she testified before the Senate Finance Committee in favor of a bill that would have subjected the state’s notoriously awful virtual schools to more oversight. Her testimony is well worth watching, but make sure you stick around for the Q and A portion, when Senator Bill Coley, ALEC’s Ohio state chairman and a veritable ambassador for ECOT, interrogates Kramer and makes the case for why virtual schooling is the best kind of schooling. The bill never made it out of committee.

I needed Kramer to help me understand the endgame for public education in a state like Ohio. Her vision was bleak enough to make me wish that Bob Evans served alcohol. She thinks that the controversial plan to blow up the Youngstown schools, hatched with charter school lobbyists and Catholic school groups, and passed under cover of darkness in 2015, is likely a model for how the GOP plans to break up and sell off other school districts throughout the state. It sounds conspiratorial until you consider that the chair of the House Education Committee has called for doing just that: “sell[ing] off the existing buildings, equipment and real estate to those in the private sector.”

Kramer says that she can envision a not-so-distant future in which online schools will be the only option for Ohio’s low-income students; anyone with the means will attend private and religious schools. “The people pushing this agenda don’t want a common good where everyone has a fair chance. A common good requires that you give citizens the tools they need to operate within the framework of democracy,” Kramer told me. “Everything that’s happening in Ohio is aimed at undermining that notion.”

The only good news is that Trump supporters seem as unhappy about that as do public education advocates.

Dennis Kucinich, a former eight-term member of Congress, is touring the state of Ohio, possibly exploring a bid for the governorship. John Kasich is nearing the end of his two terms. Kucinich is an outspoken critic of charter schools and vouchers, saying that they drain resources from public schools.

Dennis Kucinich, a potential candidate for governor and former Ohio congressman, spoke Monday night in Washington Township, where he criticized charter schools as a drain on public funding and public schools.

Kucinich called charter schools a “multi-billion dollar boondoogle” that forces Ohioans to subsidize private school education with money that is supposed to go to public schools.

Charter schools are publicly funded, privately operated schools.

“If you want to send your kid to a private school, pay for it,” Kucinich said. “But don’t send your kid to private school and tell the public they have to pay for it.”

The local representative of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute criticized Kucinich for “grandstanding.”

It is wonderful to see the issue of privatization become part of the political landscape after having advanced stealthily for the past 15 years.

An urgent appeal from parent leaders at Public Schools First North Carolina. The General Assembly is about to pass a budget that includes no funding for teachers of art, music, and physical education. The unfunded mandate for reduced class size in the early grades will cause massive layoffs and program cuts. ACT NOW!

ACTION ALERT……..ACTION ALERT ACTION ALERT……..ACTION ALERT ACTION ALERT……..ACTION ALERT

PUBLIC SCHOOL ADVOCATES MUST CONTACT LEGISLATORS NOW!

Senators are planning to vote on the HB13 Amended Bill THIS AFTERNOON, Tuesday April 25th at their 4pm session.

PLEASE STOP what you are doing right now and CALL, E-MAIL, or TWEET North Carolina Senators FIRST and then call every HOUSE Member and ask them to add an amendment to put money for SPECIALS in the new two-year budget! The current bill has NO funds to pay for specials teachers next year! PLEASE DO IT NOW!

This may be our only chance to get this bill FIXED to avoid headaches with funding for our specials teachers next year. Let’s avoid having our teachers worry for another year about having their jobs. Let’s avoid potential layoffs next year by getting the money appropriated this year. Ask Senators to AMEND HB13 on the SENATE floor today! If this is their intention, then putting it into the bill this year should be no problem, right?

Ask Senators to amend the bill to add a guarantee of funding for specials teachers for next year in the two-year budget they are working on right now. ASK THEM TO PUT A GUARANTEE OF MONEY IN THE BUDGET to give school districts the planning time they need to keep their teachers in the classroom!

If HB13 is not amended to add money, this will NOT be addressed until the NEXT legislative session, the short session that starts in May 2018 — this is later in districts’ budgeting process than right now! May 2018 will be TOO LATE for many school districts whose teachers will have moved on to find other jobs or will have been dismissed due to lack of funding.

IF THE SENATORS DO NOT ADD THE FUNDING GUARANTEE NOW before the bill returns to the HOUSE for a final vote, OUR TEACHERS AND PARENTS will be left to worry and fret for another 12 months. This is not the way to run our public schools – ACT TODAY!! ASK NOW!!! This is the critical moment in this fight for funding.

Senators have the DATA needed! All of the information needed for the reports that Senator Barefoot wants to so he and other Senators can ALLOCATE money for K-3 teachers and for SPECIALS is in PowerSchool (NCDPI database) right now. This means that all of the Senators have this data NOW and can use it to make all assumptions needed NOW to figure out exactly what appropriations are needed to FUND Specials in 2018-19.

Senators promised to add this language in the Amendment last night and at the last moment they excluded the language leaving the HB13 fix ONLY half done.

BOTTOM LINE: The data needed to make the appropriation in the NEW two-year budget is in PowerSchool database and in the hands of our legislators at this time. The request is simple: put money in the budget now by amending HB13 now to include appropriation for Specials in 2018-19 school year.

To be clear, legislators are to be praised for advocating for smaller class sizes! All public education advocates are for smaller class sizes but not supportive of unfunded mandates or unrealistic implementation plans. The unintended consequences must be dealt with if our goal is to have great public schools that offer the best learning experiences for our youngest children.

Here is a WIN-WIN proposal: Encourage legislators to provide the money for teachers and SPECIALS NOW! And give local school districts time – 3 to 5 years – to find local funds for new classroom space; time to build and create additional space! Give school districts time to find new teachers or reassign/retrain some of their current staff. The alternative is crowded schools, classes in supply closets or lunchrooms, higher local taxes, lack of teaches or teachers with little or no experiences, and extreme over crowding in the upper grades to accommodate space and teachers for K-3. Right now, class sizes in the grades 4 to 12 are too large in many school districts — we have 35 or more kids in many classes!

Jennifer Berkshire and historian Jack Schneider discuss a new phenomenon: schools that advertise for students. They identify one charter that spends $1,000 per student to recruit new ones. This is the new world of school choice and the free market, where schools compete for customers and your tax dollars are spent for advertising and marketing, not for teacher pay or supplies.

http://haveyouheardblog.com/truth-in-edvertising/

The public schools of Albuquerque, New Mexico, plan to save money by eliminating middle school sports teams.

Be it noted that Republican Governor Susanna Martinez has refused to raise taxes and has threatened to defund state universities.

The one potential cut that gets parents’ attention is sports teams.

New Mexico doesn’t want to pay for educating its children.

“Parents reacted with dismay to 3,400 students in Albuquerque Public Schools losing a traditional training ground for high school athletics. Basketball, volleyball and track and field teams in the district’s 28 middle schools are set to be disbanded next school year, leaving families to find private leagues for children in grades 6, 7 and 8.

“Some worry that low-income families in particular may be hard-pressed to find teams and facilities outside public school, while others say the opportunity to play sports is critical for students at such a formative age.

“Vanessa Petty, president of the parents association at Lyndon B. Johnson Middle School in Albuquerque, said her daughter was looking forward to playing volleyball next year.

“Their first introduction to sports for a majority of children is middle school,” Petty said. “It’s huge not just for their personal health but more for social aspects. They learn teamwork, they learn respect for others.”

“Under the athletic cuts, teachers would lose coaching stipends and short-term coaching contracts would go away. The changes will save $580,000 and help avoid classroom cuts, district spokeswoman Monica Armenta said.”

That is a small fraction of the $26 million in reductions that the district says may be needed as New Mexico wrestles with a downturn in tax income linked to oil prices, a sluggish economy and the highest U.S. unemployment rate. Public schools in New Mexico rely on the state for nearly all their operating budgets.

Republican Gov. Susana Martinez and the Democratic-led Legislature are in a standoff over how to fill a $156 million budget shortfall and protect the state’s credit rating. Martinez vetoed tax increases that she called reckless and plans to call lawmakers back to the Capitol to renegotiate.

Lawmakers are preparing to sue the governor to block vetoes that would defund all state universities, the Legislature and other core government services.

Michael Messer is a parent activist in Texas. He wrote this comment in response to Sara Stevenson’s post about the true cost of testing in Texas.


I am glad to see people writing about my bill. I am the original author of HB 1336 (aka, “Transparency in Testing”), and the person who Mrs. Stevenson saw speak at the Save Texas Schools rally. Representative Leach is the legislative sponsor. I am not a CPA, but I have been an accountant for the last seven years. During that time I have served as the Dallas-Fort Worth Regional Organizer for Save Texas Schools.

It was through my public education advocacy work that I found out that nobody has any idea how much we are really spending on standardized testing. The commonly reported number is $90 million per year, but that accounts for little more than the state’s contract with ETS & Pearson to print the test, score the test, and send out a few roaming consultants. It fails to include the bulk of direct costs associated with testing (most notably the salaries of certified educators who are forced to proctor the tests) which are paid for by the districts.

Recent estimates have indicated a price tag closer to $13 BILLION per year. That is over 1/5th our entire public education budget every year, or in terms Texans can appreciate, up to 10 times what we spend on our athletic programs or even administrative salaries.

I wrote HB 1336 in December to address what I believe is a material lack of transparency in the yearly financial reports submitted by our school districts to the Texas Education Agency. It was written in consultation with education experts from both sides of the political spectrum, and it has gained public support from county parties, elected officials, and candidates from across the state. Representative Jeff Leach, a noted conservative Republican, sponsored the bill, and it was co-authored by Representative Lina Ortega, a Democrat out of El Paso.

In short, HB 1336 adds just a couple of lines to the Texas Education Code which would require the districts to include a total of testing-related expenses on the financial reports they already submit to the TEA every year. In my opinion, we cannot expect to engage in any substantive conversation regarding the finance of our public schools without a full picture of how the funds are being spent.

Here is a link to the text of the bill:

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/85R/billtext/pdf/HB01336I.pdf#navpanes=0

The draconian $5.4 billion cut imposed by the Texas Legislature in 2011 was devastating to our schools, and that was over a two year period. Every other year, the public has to fight over the scraps we are given for gifted, AP, disability, athletic, music, art, career & tech, and numerous other programs. Giving the public a view of exactly how much we are spending on standardized testing is the first step toward freeing up the $13 billion (and 45+ class days) per year we spend on the tests.

HB 1336 doesn’t eliminate standardized testing, but it sure as heck would change the dialogue about public education in Texas. For instance, I had one man ask me, “How much are you wasting on educating illegal immigrants?” Here is my response:

“While I’m not partial to calling anyone ‘illegal,’ nor do I consider education for anyone to be a ‘waste,’ I think I might actually be able to formulate a decent answer your question. First, let’s assume that you are asking about the total of all education-related expenditures on children of unauthorized immigrants who are also unauthorized themselves. Anyone born in the United States is a citizen of the United States.

According to a January 2016 report from the Migration Policy Institute, 834,000 children of unauthorized immigrants lived in Texas in 2013. Of those, 667,000 were U.S. citizens. That means that 167,000 were children who were at the time considered unauthorized immigrants.

Of the 834,000 children of unauthorized immigrants, 566,000 were of an age where they might have attended public school. Assuming the same ratio of roughly 80% U.S. citizens, the total number of unauthorized immigrant students in Texas in 2013 would have been approximately 113,200.

According to PEIMS statewide financial data which is publicly accessible on the Texas Education Agency’s website, we spent an average of $9,902.64 per student in 2013.

$9,902.64 x 113,200 = $1.1 billion

The acting assumption of most questions like yours tends to be that the parents of these children pay none of the associated taxes. While I could easily debate that with you, let’s assume that were true, and the entire $1.1 billion in funding associated with educating those children came out of the taxes paid by the rest of the children’s parents. That would mean that of the $9,902.64 schools get per student, $226.70 would be attributable to educating unauthorized immigrants.

If we were to presume instead that parents of unauthorized immigrant students pay sales and property taxes, then the only portion of the public education budget that this issue would apply to is federal funding. Of the $50 billion in total funding Texas public schools received in 2013, $5.6 billion came from the federal government. That’s approximately $1,101.27 per student.

$1,101.27 x 113,200 = $125 million (note the “m”)

Dividing that over the remaining student population would mean that $25.21 out of $9,902.64 would be attributable to educating unauthorized immigrants. So now we have a range we can agree is somewhere between $25.21 – $226.70.
By comparison, recent estimates indicate that we spend up to $13.4 billion per year on standardized testing. That’s around $2,700 per student. In light of all of this, wouldn’t it be more prudent to focus on how much we spend on standardized testing instead of blaming immigrant students for the scarce education resources our schools receive to teach our kids?”

It’s amazing how easy it is to put into perspective the scapegoats that have traditionally been used to justify minimal resources for public education when you’ve taken the time to research the numbers. Think about how conversations will change when the public has access to a full account of all expenses related to standardized testing. That is what HB 1336 (aka, “Transparency in Testing”) was written to accomplish. When we know better, we make better decisions.

If you would like to see a dramatic shift in the public discourse regarding public education in Texas, please visit my page, http://www.facebook.com/TransparencyinTesting, share the information, and ask your legislators to support HB 1336. Thank you!

Dear Senator Graham,

I hope someone on your staff sees this. If not, I hope that readers in South Carolina send it to you. This is an important message from one of your constituents.

She writes:

I had an opportunity to listen to Senator Lindsey Graham talk about how he lifted himself up and became the Senator from SC he is today. He said both his parents died before he began college.

But he failed to say his social security benefits (based on the death of his parents), at that time, continued through age 21 and that full-time tuition at a flagship state college in SC was roughly $287.00 per semester and $596.00 per semester, if you lived in a dorm (no food plan). This included University provide healthcare.

Back then it was easy to self-fund college on social security benefits and summer and part-time jobs. I know I did it, too. I earned $20.00- 30.00 per day waiting tables during the breakfast shift at Howard Johnson. My University even held my check for several weeks at that time. (My father was killed in Vietnam so I also had $330.00 per month VA but they paid really late during the semester). My husband also self-funded working a work study job and obtaining student loans. He left college as a chemical engineer with a $55.00 per month student loan.

He could not have done it today. Nor could I. Nor could my husband. It amazes me the disconnect of our politicians with the plight of our young people today. Comparing his experience of “lifting himself up by his bootstraps” with what our kids face today is ludicrous.

This article was written by An Garagiola-Bernier and published in the Washington Post.

She had a difficult life, growing up in a low-income home, dropping out of high school to help pay expenses, then suffering a debilitating disease that made it impossible to work and required multiple surgeries. She relied on charity to get by, but eventually enrolled in a community college. She made it to Hamline University, where she has a scholarship awarded by the John Kent Cooke Foundation. But she could not have made it to where she is today without the help of multiple federal assistance programs for low-income students like her. Those programs are now jeopardized by the proposed budget cuts.

She writes:

President Trump and Education Secretary Betsy DeVos never had to worry about the cost of a college education for themselves or their children. They never had to skip meals because they couldn’t afford to buy food. They never feared becoming homeless because they couldn’t afford a place to live.

Unfortunately, I — like millions of other low-income people — have had these worries. Not because we are lazy, ignored our school work or are not very bright. We simply didn’t have the good fortune of Trump and DeVos to be born into wealthy families. Many of us have had other bad breaks as well.

In my own case, I dropped out of high school to work at a low-wage job to help my mother pay mounting bills. Later, I was stricken with a disease called Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome that made it impossible for me to work for seven years and required me to undergo 12 surgeries, leaving me and my husband struggling to get by with our three children. I turned to a charity to pay my enormous medical bills. Disabled, with little education, my employment opportunities were dismal.

Fortunately, I found my way to community college and then transferred to Hamline University in St. Paul, Minn., where I am now a student. My life was transformed when I received a Jack Kent Cooke Foundation Undergraduate Transfer Scholarship that provides me with up to $40,000 a year for my education at Hamline. But most low-income students aren’t as lucky.

I resumed my education after many years out of school because, like the vast majority of low-income students, I want to make something of myself, get a good job and leave poverty behind. I am told the best way to do this is to get an education beyond high school.

But instead of helping us to further our educations, President Trump recently proposed his “America First” budget that calls for a 13 percent cut in the Education Department budget, amounting to $9 billion.

In higher education, Trump has proposed taking $3.9 billion in surplus funds from Pell Grants for low-income students to use for other parts of government; $200 million in cuts to other programs that help low-income students pay for and succeed in college; cuts to the Federal Work-Study program that pays students to hold part-time jobs; and elimination of the Supplemental Education Opportunity Grants for low-income students.

Two particularly effective programs that prepare low-income students for college and help them graduate would be hit hard — one called GEAR-UP (the acronym stands for Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs) would be eliminated, and a group of programs called TRIO would be cut. TRIO got its name from three initiatives that date to the 1960s.

How can Trump “make America great again” by denying access to higher education to those students who are low-income?

How is he “putting America first” if he closes the doors of opportunity to those who were not born rich like him?