Archives for category: Funding

Angie Sullivan is a veteran teacher of children in the early grades in Clark County (Las Vegas), Nevada. She writes to a long list of legislators and journalists from time to time to let them know what is happening at the classroom level. Their discussions need to be informed by teacher knowledge, and Angie has plenty of it to share. She does this without fear of being fired. Angie Sullivan joins the honor roll of this blog for always putting the needs of her students first.

She writes:

My concerns are similar to the Trustees of Clark County School District, but they come from the practicality of the classroom.

Student Achievement:

I have concerns about student achievement as the CCSD Trustees currently implements mandates. Since testing has replaced instruction in many schools, there has been little or no achievement. There has also been little authentic achievement as teachers have been forced to teach to the test instead of teaching at each student’s instructional level to scaffold instruction. This has been particularly detrimental to limited English students and students in poverty. Forcing students with zero background, limited vocabulary, and no access to perform on a rigorous grade-level assessment – invalidates the assessment. The tests are simply too hard to show anything useful to teachers or students. That does not mean my students are not bright and capable; they are a protected class who has not yet had enough developmentally appropriate access
and participation validity is questionable. Simply: testing in English when your primary languages is not English is unfair. Trustees have created an environment where students, parents, and teachers have realized they cannot rely on these test to inform decisions – everyone failing all the time every time does what? Adequate support must be given prior to testing. Adequate instruction with background building and vocabulary building must occur. Protected groups cannot be repeatedly tested over and over and over then the data used as a weapon against children and teachers unless there has been an initial investment in learning time, supplies, and care. This is under the Trustees authority and it has not happened. Instead, labor and children are punished for things beyond our control. And unfortunately any “success” cannot be replicated in authentic situations because teaching to the test does not generalize to a different kind of test on a different day.

Equity and Civil Rights Issues:

We live in a district which has 100,000 students who are undocumented or live in families which are undocumented. We have few services for families to learn English, participate in Citizenship courses, negotiate the labyrinth of scams which take advantage of the unwary. Our students are in jeopardy of being removed from their families everyday. Family members disappear and are never seen again often. Frankly, it is a holocaust with individuals living in fear, under the radar, hiding. This is not conducive to learning and one third of our students live with this daily. My attempts at educating CCSD leadership on this issue has fallen on deaf ears – yet one-third of our students are affected by these issues. What would your life be like if your parents were taken in the night? Would your priority be graduation or something else? Students drop out to survive. I have asked over and over for some care by the Trustees to be taken.

I participated in sex education meetings. The Trustees allowed gay bashing and hate speech for 7 hours at a time. I watched Trustees brag about bringing their churches to the meetings to do this. The LGBTQ community is a protected class. Trustees openly allowed abuse of children who identity as queer. A community that is likely to consider suicide should not be exposed to long meetings where trusted authorities allow speeches about Bibles and hell. This is a human rights violation and unfortunate that Trustees participated in this.

Look at the data and you will see. It is people of color who CCSD fails. We do very very well serving the white outer ring of Las Vegas. CCSD knows how to teach students because we have some of the top schools in the nation. We are extremely successful in some areas of town – directly correlated to socio-economic status (which is the best predictor of educational success). CCSD fails to address the inner ring of the city which is soaked in social problems, poverty, and lack of care. Looking at census data for Las Vegas and you will see we have generations of adults who dropped out before the ninth grade – millions. 30 years of under-funding, crazy mandates, and hiring people who are NOT real teachers has built this. This is the extreme civil rights issue that has been built by the current Trustee leadership. The money has not gotten to the children who needed it most. This was in Trustee control and they failed.

The Department of Justice will become involved because of the severe racial inequity in the CCSD charters. These charters are successful at preventing collective bargaining, causing racial segregation, and siphoning money for questionable ventures. I have watched the Trustees admit that charters are failing and instead of closing them down – renewed their contracts. No regulation, no data, no transparency – another wasteful money pit.

It would be difficult for a new power structure to do worse than the current system which is ranked last in a state which is ranked last. The extreme inequity is difficult to measure currently since the Trustees have not been able to deliver how much money each school receives, though it has been asked repeatedly.

Employment Issues:

150 CCSD schools protested with picket signs to receive a teacher contract after the legislature sent CCSD $1 Billion which it refused to share with labor. Over 15,000 teachers in the streets each payday and marching finally lead to new language.

We fought to keep our non-profit healthcare which still struggles from being forced to spend down. Surely it is not teachers that Trustees are concerned about.

Perhaps it is support staff . . .

Who did not give support staff a raise in 8 years? Who forced support staff into a for-profit insurance that is prepared to gouge them again? Which bodies included out-sourcing in the support staff contracts? This is the current language not put there by legislators. Hint: CCSD and ESEA put outsourcing in the contract not the Nevada legislature. It is not support staff Trustees are concerned about.

Perhaps it is administration (principals) . . .

They haven’t settled a contract either.

Trustees are concerned about interviewing? I’m the one sitting in schools filled with long term subs, TFA, and ARLs. The door revolves in my community and each year the people coming through are less prepared than the year before. We filled our at-risk schools with folks who who had to have 60 college credits (no degree necessary) last year. Special Education students do not have a professional – sometimes for their whole school career? How about being concerned about stuffing warm bodies into vacancies. Those warm bodies are not ready to teach at-risk kids. I digress since that is a civil rights issue – is it not? Frankly, the white outer ring is not staffed with TFAs, ARLs and subs is it?

Equipment:

Have you ever been with 42 five year olds in a room when it is 104 degrees outside? They get sweaty and limp. Everyone gets sick and starts to throw-up. Have you ever done that as a routine for five years or more because the air conditioning routinely goes out because CCSD bought the air conditioner in Wisconsin to save money? Air conditioning and lack of it is not funny or a joke to be ignored. Trustees have failed.

Would I be sad if my principal had the right to call the AC guy who lives across the street to flip the switch so babies do not get heat-stroke? I would not be sad.

And again – I’m sure if I taught students on a different side of town we would not have to endure significant and life-threatening equipment failures. I digress- again a civil rights issues.

Student Funding:

I have taught at my current school for about five years. This week my at-risk Title I school finally received a reading series and a math series.

Yes. We have books.

I find it hard to believe that the Trustees who I have been watching spend money on lasers, trips, gadgets, and yee-haws for all sorts of schools not on my side of town – is now concerned about books, paper, and basic supplies? Because that has been my consistent concern since arriving here.

Frankly, no one has listened to teachers nor have they given us anything we really needed. But they have whipped us for not being successful with invalid data that tells no one anything.

In summary, I find Trustee concerns ironic.

They have had the power to do major change.

They could have shown an interest in civil or human rights long ago.

They could have been bold and really addressed the concerns they listed.

Instead they have mismanaged and abused their power.

Frankly it would be hard to do worse than they have done. So for my kids – I want to move forward.

The Education Law Center reminds us that the California Supreme Court made the right decision on teacher tenure (Vergara) but passed up a chance to make funding equitable across the state. One would think that there should be a right to go to a public school that is adequately and equitably funded. But not yet.

CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT GOES 1 FOR 2: ENDS TENURE CASE, BUT TURNS AWAY CHALLENGE TO INADEQUATE SCHOOL FUNDING

On August 23, the California Supreme Court denied petitions for review in two cases asking the courts to declare state education laws unconstitutional. Campaign for Quality Education (CQE) and Robles-Wong v. State claimed the state’s school funding system violated the state constitution, and Vergara v. State challenged laws on teacher tenure, dismissal, and seniority.

Education Law Center, joined by civil rights organizations, filed amicus (friend of the court) briefs in both cases, arguing that the Supreme Court deny review — and effectively end — the Vergara tenure case and accept review in CQE Robles-Wong to allow the school funding case to proceed to trial.

In a 4-3 decision in CQE Robles-Wong, the Court denied review of lower court rulings and, instead, affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of the complaints for “fail[ure] to state a claim for which judicial relief may be accorded,” thereby denying plaintiffs a trial on the merits of their claims.

The Court majority denied review without comment. But, three Justices would have accepted the case for review, two of whom wrote strong dissents. In his dissent, Justice Liu wrote,

It is regrettable that this court, having recognized education as a fundamental right in a landmark decision 45 years ago (Serrano v. Priest), should now decline to address the substantive meaning of that right. The schoolchildren of California deserve to know whether their fundamental right to education is a paper promise or a real guarantee.

In Vergara, the Court denied review of the Court of Appeal decision, which found plaintiffs had failed to show a causal connection between the challenged statutes and an alleged inferior educational opportunity. The civil rights brief opposed the Vergara plaintiffs’ claims and explained to the courts that fair and sufficient funding is essential to providing a high quality teacher workforce in California’s school districts. The brief also recounted the expansive research showing that adequate educational resources yield better results for students.

“The California Supreme Court got it right in denying review in Vergara,” said David Sciarra, ELC Executive Director and a leading education rights litigator. “The media attention on Vergara, however, overshadowed Robles Wong, a ruling with far more impact on the educational opportunities afforded California’s public school children.”

Mr. Sciarra added that, “in Robles Wong, the Supreme Court allowed an Appellate Court ruling to stand which effectively holds that public school children cannot vindicate their fundamental right to an education under the California constitution in the California courts. The ruling also prevents courts from hearing evidence and deciding on the constitutionality of California’s school finance system — among the most inadequate in the nation.”

California has the largest public education system in the nation, serving over 6 million K-12 students—one in eight U.S. students. Nearly half of those students qualify for federal free and reduced priced lunch, the benchmark for student poverty.

Education Law Center Press Contact:
Molly A. Hunter
Education Justice, Director
mhunter@edlawcenter.org
973-624-1815, x 19

The Pennsylvania School Boards Association conducted a study of costs, comparing charter schools and public schools, and concluded that the charter schools have higher salaries for those at the top and spend twice as much on administration as public schools.

Furthermore, the bulk of their revenue–as much as 84%–is taken away from public schools, leaving them in worse condition.

Charter-school administrative expenditures are nearly double those of conventional public schools, and their highest-ranking officials are paid far more.

They spend less on instruction than school districts, but more on support services and facilities.

And while charter-school enrollment has jumped significantly over time, payments to the schools are far outpacing their actual rates of growth in admission.

All that is according to a report on Pennsylvania’s charter schools issued Thursday by the Pennsylvania School Boards Association, made up of nearly 4,500 school board members.

In a 35-page study that came after rounds of records requests during the last 15 months, the conclusions present a broad picture of Pennsylvania’s 173 charter schools, which have become part of an ongoing national debate about what effect the charter-school movement is having on traditional public schools.

“This is not intended to be any sort of an attack on charter schools,” said Andrew Christ, education policy analyst for the organization, during a conference call Thursday.

But, he said, “charter schools need to be held to the same standards of accountability and transparency as traditional public schools.”

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie went to an open meeting with parents and other concerned citizens where the topic was the impoverished district of Camden, which has been under state control for three years.

In the meeting, education activist and Camden resident Sue Altman debated Governor Christie and didn’t back down. This video is going viral.

All Christie knows about education is that 1) it costs too much, and, 2) charters do a better job for less.

Altman explained that the charters don’t enroll the same demographic as the public schools.

Public ed advocate/Camden resident Sue Altman stood up and held her ground against Gov. Christie for nearly 6 minutes – correcting him on how long the state’s run Camden schools, calling him out on the hypocrisy of planning far less for Camden than his own administration’s report says is needed, reminding him the kids there can’t even drink the schools’ water….At one point, Christie just gives up and throws Altman the microphone.

For context about the event and about Camden, read this post by Professor Steven Danley (who happens to be Sue Altman’s husband).

Sue is a star. The way she handled the Governor, with knowledge, persistence, wit, and a smile is a lesson to all of us.

PS: I corrected this post to show that Sue is not yet a parent. She and Steve were married this summer.

Our regular reader Chiara, who lives in Ohio and is a public school parent, is disturbed by the diversion of public dollars for private purposes.

She wrote earlier today:

“The US Department of Education is using public funding to support and expand a whole new category of for-profit providers:

“Arne Duncan ‏@arneduncan Aug 18
So important that short-term tech courses, where skill acquisition leads to real jobs, have access to Pell funding.”

“But don’t worry. They say they’ll regulate it this time. Which is exactly what they said about for-profit colleges and for-profit charter school operators.

“I’m not clear on why the public is funding GE employee training. Has GE fallen on hard times or something? Why are we paying to train their employees? Can’t they pay to train their own employees or did all the extra cash go to executive compensation?

“When did it become the responsibility of the public to pay for job training for specific companies and sectors? What happened to entry level jobs at these places, where they invest their own money in their own employees?

“This is risk-shifting, from the private sector to the public sector. We’re picking up the risk and the sector is getting a windfall benefit. If these employees we trained don’t work out at these companies the private sector entity has their exposure covered. It’s win/win for them and win/lose for the public.”

In a major victory for the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers, the state Supreme Court ruled that the city’s School Reform Commision may not unilaterally cancel the teachers’ contract, as it sought to do in 2014.

“This is a total and complete repudiation of the position taken by the SRC when it surreptitiously met on Oct. 6, 2014, and passed a resolution to cancel the terms and conditions of the PFT contract,” said PFT president Jerry Jordan. “It means that the SRC has to honor the contract, and it’s my hope the SRC will return to the bargaining table and negotiate a contract with the PFT.”

“At that meeting, when the District said it was facing a funding shortfall of $71 million the following year despite closing dozens of schools and eliminating thousands of jobs, the commission announced that it was restructuring teachers’ health benefits to save $44 million. Commissioners said they would use the money to restore counselors, teacher aides, language classes and other services that had been drastically cut back.”

G. F. Brandenburg, retired math teacher in the D.C. public schools and major-league blogger, asks the most important question about the funding of public education in America: what if every child had the same quality education as the children of Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, and President Obama?

That would mean small classes; experienced teachers; a broad and rich curriculum; a wide choice of courses in the arts; beautiful facilities; an excellent offering of sports and physical education; and more.

Surely you will say, “We can’t afford that!” Yet we had problem spending trillions on wars in the Middle East that cost many lives and did not end terrorism, probably increased it.

The greatest barrier to funding excellent schools is political will.

People of Kansas: Tomorrow is your chance to vote for legislators who support your community’s public schools!

Vote for the candidate who pledges to oppose Governor Brownback’s tax cuts. Vote for your public schools.

Kansas has become a textbook case of conservative incoherence. Conservatives are supposed to “conserve,” but in Kansas and elsewhere they are destroying traditional institutions. Governor Sam Brownback has cut taxes to stimulate business and cut school budgets. Public schools that were once the pride of their community are struggling to stay afloat. You can be sure that in the wings are charter entrepreneurs and peddlers of vouchers.

The battle is being waged in affluent suburbs, which value their public schools yet elect conservative legislators who slash their budgets. The election this fall will see challenges to many of those legislators.

Kansans are faced with a stark choice: good public schools or lower taxes.

Small-government Republican conservatives face a political backlash in Kansas because of the state’s budget problems and battles over education funding, and the epicenter is in sprawling Kansas City suburbs where residents have cherished public schools for decades.

But the Democrats and GOP moderates hoping to lessen the grip Republican Gov. Sam Brownback’s allies have on the Legislature must contend with a political paradox in Johnson County, home to those affluent suburbs. Its voters regularly approve bonds and property tax increases for schools while electing conservative legislators who’ve backed the governor’s experiment in slashing state income taxes.

More than two dozen conservative Republican legislators face challengers in Tuesday’s primary, including 11 in Johnson County, the state’s most populous. Challengers there have made education funding a key issue.

“You could rely on one thing, and that was public education,” said Gretchen Gradinger, a lawyer and Johnson County native who moved back from Missouri two years ago so her young son could attend the public schools she knew growing up. “For 60 years, you could rely on one thing.”

Kansas has struggled to balance its budget since the Republican-dominated Legislature heeded Brownback’s call in 2012 and 2013 to cut personal income taxes as an economic stimulus. He won a tough re-election race in 2014, but his popularity has waned with the state’s ongoing budget woes.

Meanwhile, the Kansas Supreme Court could rule by the end of the year in an education funding lawsuit on whether legislators provide enough money to schools to fulfill a duty under the state constitution to finance a suitable education for every child. The State Board of Education is recommending phasing in an $893 million increase in aid over two years.

We now know that the national convention of the NAACP endorsed a strong resolution opposing the expansion of charter schools, saying that they foster segregation, target communities of color, remove community and parent voice, and impose harsh discipline.

But what do civil rights groups think about testing?

Our reader Laura Chapman wrote about this question.

She wrote:

Before ESSA was passed, about 30 members of the 200 member of the “Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights” lobbied Congress and USDE to continue the use of use of disaggregated test scores as if this was the only “objective” way to identify disparities in education. NAACP, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., participated in this effort.

Of course, the charter industry exploits these disaggregated measures to justify their test-centric schools and to promise they can do better than public schools in providing ”high quality seats” in struggling urban districts.

In April of 2016, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights sent a letter to John King requesting that these features of ESSA not be compromised in the guidance letters he might issue to states.
http://www.civilrights.org/advocacy/letters/2016/ESSA-implementation-framework.html

Also in April, the “Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights” published a survey of African American and Latino parents on what they want from schools. The survey promotion had this headline and lead-in:

“Parents: Schools Not Preparing Students of Color for Future.” http://www.colorlines.com/articles/parents-schools-not-preparing-students-color-future

The survey was conducted by Anzalone, Liszt, Grove Research “a public opinion research firm specializing in message development and strategic consulting. For nearly 20 years, we have helped clients ranging from President Obama, to EMILY’S List, to Microsoft achieve their goals.”

The Survey promotion continued “From lack of funding to low expectations, a new survey finds that Black and Latino parents don’t trust public schools to help their kids succeed.”

Given this lead-in, I thought the survey might deal with “trust in public schools.” Not so. In fact we do not know much about the survey other than the published methodology does not meet minimal standards for research: For example, we do not know if the parents who participated in the survey by landline or mobile phone had children in public, charter, or parochial schools. We do know that the 400 African American and 400 Latino participants lived in Chicago or in Philadelphia. Perhaps Julian can discern the messaging function of the survey get the full survey not just the survey, and discern why the headlines were framed around “trust in public schools.”

https://www.dropbox.com/s/99tklsqp6aykxgk/New Education Majority poll summary.pdf?dl=0

My impression is that this is a push poll created to support a messaging campaign. I note, for example, that the “Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights” received $878,338 in October 2015 from the Gates Foundation ”to make the national education policy conversation more reflective and inclusive of a civil rights framework of equity and access by including more diverse voices and perspectives.” That is Gates-speak for promoting access to charter schools.

The Gates Foundation has a sure-fire method of winning hearts and minds.

Jersey Jazzman takes pundit Alexander Russo to the woodshed in this post.

Russo is a good writer who leans reformy and can be counted on to stick a dagger in critics of corporate reform, like me. He recently slammed me on Twitter for daring to express concern about segregation as a problem. He claimed this was unheard of from me. I suggested he read “Reign of Error,” wherein I identify segregation and poverty as a “toxic mix” that harms children.

This is not the first time he has given me one of his not so subtle jabs. Usually I ignore them because I know that he lashes out in hopes of driving traffic to his Twitter account.

JJ doesn’t worry about defending me–I can do that on my own–but he takes the time to correct Russo’s mistaken belief that social justice is somehow disconnected from over-testing and underfunding. JJ argues that you can’t separate these issues from any discussion of social justice in schools, because there will be no sustained social justice in our schools in the absence of adequate and equitable funding.

JJ has honed his research skills and his rhetorical skills to a point where it is fruitless for critics to take him on. He wins every time. That’s what his experience as a teacher, a writer, and a doctoral student has produced. He is formidable. And right.