Archives for category: Hoax

Here are the U.S. News rankings of the “best” high schools in America. Allegedly. Apparently no one bothered to look at attritionrates.

Amistad Academy is identified as the “best” high school in the state. No one noticed that 75% of its students disappeared between 6th and 12th grade. Hmmm.

After reading Gary Rubinstein’s post this morning about KIPP and the U.S. News’ rankings, a reader sent this data about Amistad Academy:

 

https://www.publicschoolreview.com/connecticut/amistad-academy/900024-school-district/high

Notice anything about their enrollment trends?

of Students in Pre-Kindergarten: – –

of Students in Kindergarten: 92 92

of Students in 1st Grade: 93 93

of Students in 2nd Grade: 90 90

of Students in 3rd Grade: 90 90

of Students in 4th Grade: 79 79

of Students in 5th Grade: 102 102

of Students in 6th Grade: 102 102

of Students in 7th Grade: 81 81

of Students in 8th Grade: 79 79

of Students in 9th Grade: 59 59

of Students in 10th Grade: 57 57

of Students in 11th Grade: 34 34

of Students in 12th Grade: 26 26

of Ungraded Students:

And here are their scores –

Click to access hss_ct_pub2015.pdf

Hey! Why did the 102 students in sixth grade dwindle to only 26 in senior year? Where did they go?

Obviously, the folks who do the rankings at U.S. News don’t screen for high attrition rates–like losing 75% of your students.

If you have ever wondered about the validity of the U.S. News & World Report rankings of high schools, you will enjoy reading Gary Rubinstein’s explanation of how the rankings are calculated. This year, 34 of the top 100 high schools, according to U.S. News, are charter schools. Readers of this blog know how assiduous many charter schools are in choosing their students and in getting rid of the low performers. Without information about attrition, it is hard to know what to make of these rankings.

Gary teaches at Stuyvesant High School, which is an extremely difficult school to gain admission to. Incoming students must pass a rigorous exam and must receive very high scores. Yet one of the New York City KIPP high schools was ranked higher than Stuyvesant.

This piqued Gary’s curiosity, and he looked closely at the KIPP data. What he discovered might surprise you. If nothing else, it will persuade you–as it did me–that the U.S. News rankings are baloney.

Kathleen Oporeza, executive director of Fund Education Now in Florida, urges all Florida citizens to contact their legislators–by email, by telephone, in person–and urge them to vote against any legislation that refers to “Schools of Hope,” which is a blatant effort to hand public schools over to charter entrepreneurs.

Urge the House & Senate to oppose any bill containing “Schools of Hope/HIgh Impact Charters” language

This dangerous concept has worked its way into at least a dozen bills, making it intentionally harder to track. All of this activity feeds the goal of making it easier to slip this bad public policy into one of several massive “train” bills far removed from public view.

Take action now. Tell our Senators and Representatives to oppose all bills, including HB 5105, SB 796, and SB 1552, that contain “Schools of Hope/High Impact Charter Networks” language.

“Schools of Hope”/“High Impact Charter Networks” create two separate, unequal publicly funded school systems – one under the control of duly elected school boards and the other controlled by outside private corporations under the direction of the appointed State Board of Education.

The deck is stacked. The BOE picks and chooses which district turnaround plans are accepted or rejected while at the same time exercising oversight authority over competing High Impact Charter Networks.

Because the BOE determines cut scores on state assessments and the calculation of school grades which can be manipulated to increase the number of D and F district schools this language will clearly drive the expansion of “Schools of Hope/High Impact Charter Networks.”

Use your voice now! One click easy. Please do not let “Schools of Hope/High Impact Charter Networks” trigger the immediate transfer of 115 “D & F” public schools and their 77K students into private, for-profit hands.

This isn’t about helping our most vulnerable students; it’s about promoting unmitigated charter school growth in an effort to erode district schools.

The Charter “Schools of Hope/High Impact Charter Networks” exponentially expand the effort to allow for-profit charters to keep grabbing tax dollars and tapping new markets to beef up the annual reports of corporate charter chains. None of this has been proven to help students or improve education.

Please tell the Florida Legislature to vote no on the “Schools of Hope/High Impact Charter Networks” language, SB 796, SB 1552 and HB 5105 with its $200M slush fund and block its inclusion in the Senate Budget and prevent it from being slipped by either chamber into a “train” bill.

Your voice has power. Our children are depending on us

Regular readers of this blog might find this article amusing. Public school activists in Florida are angry! The charter fans in the legislature want to allocate $200 million to encourage charters to locate in close proximity to schools with low grades. The extra $200 million will allow the charters to offer extra services that the public schools can’t afford. Meanwhile, the state plans to raise the passing scores on state tests, meaning that tens of thousands of students will be labeled “failing,” setting up more schools for takeover by charters.

The article calls this analysis–that the purpose of the $200 million “Schools of Hope” package is a giveaway to the privatization industry–a “conspiracy theory.”

Like if you see a bandit holding up a bank and call the police, you are really just indulging in a conspiracy theory.

Who are you going to believe: the people writing this dreadful legislation or your own eyes?

Gene V. Glass, one of our nation’s most eminent education researchers, writes here about the Big Lie embedded in Arizona’s voucher program.

http://ed2worlds.blogspot.com/2017/04/what-goes-around-comes-around-voucher.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed:+EducationInTwoWorlds+(Education+in+Two+Worlds)&m=1

The program began as vouchers for students with special needs (although we now know that students with disabilities abandon their rights when they leave the public system).

Glass writes:

“Originally intended only for special needs students, it was broadened to include children of military serving in Iraq & Afghanistan, and then children living on Indian reservations. The cynical intent is obvious.

“The latest incarnation of the program will expand the program by 5,000 students per year until a cap of 30,000 is reached.

“Even Republicans were reluctant to support the expansion, probably because of persistent non-support of vouchers among the voting public. The latest PDK Gallup poll continues to show more than 60% of parents opposed.

“Big lobby pressure to expand the program came from the local Goldwater Institute. When a compromise on the 5,000 per year expansion was reached, the reluctant Republicans fell in line.”

And then the scammers at the Goldwater Institute scammed their dupes in the Legislature. They immediately boasted that the cap would soon be abolished altogether, and everyone could get a voucher.

The Legislature proved itself to be lap dogs of the Goldwater Institute and Betsy DeVos. They betrayed public schools and their constituents by extending the privatization of a democratic institution.

Arizona is in a Race to the Bottom.

I am way too late in starting this new feature of the blog. It is called the Wall of Shame. The Arizona Legislature and Governor Ducey will be the first to receive this Badge of Shame.

Gary Rubinstein has become a master at unmasking “miracle” claims, you know, the schools where 100% of the students in a poor neighborhood (formerly served by a public school) graduate or 100% go to college or some equally implausible miracle. None of these claims ever turn out to be true. Gary explains again and again that the “miracle” is made possible by attrition of the kids who were not on track to graduate.

He recently discovered a charter school in Indianapolis whose motto is “College or Die.”

The principal of this school just was put in charge of charter schools in Memphis.

Watch Gary analyze the data from the school in Indianapolis. How many went to college? How many “died”?

Gayle Green is a professor of English at Scripps College. She is writing a book about the corporate reform in higher education.

In this article, she describes how corporate reformers have taken guidance from Orwell’s “1984” in their deliberate distortion of language to mask reality.

She writes:

“In this post-truth age that’s done away with facts, George Orwell’s 1984 has soared to the top of the charts. But in the world of public education, it’s been 1984 for quite some time. And we didn’t even need the clumsy apparatus of a totalitarian dictatorship to bring it about. All we needed was some slick PR and smiley corporate faces and a media ready to spit back the buzzwords they’d been fed – failing public schools, no excuses, accountability, choice, access for every child, closing the achievement gap – repeating them so often that they passed for truth.”

In the current dystopian world of public education, the new Secretary of Education is the leading enemy of the nation’s public schools.

DeVos should be no surprise. She is the culmination of nearly two decades of creeping privatization.

“But DeVos should come as no surprise: she is the culmination of the way things have long been headed. No Child Left Behind, signed into law in January 2002, brought to us by George W. Bush and the moneyed interests he represented, arrived in clouds of rhetoric about “access” and “civil rights.” It announced itself as “an act to close the achievement gap with accountability, choice, flexibility, so that no child is left behind.” But this was never about reform or access or leveling the playing field: it was about opening up public education as a market, siphoning off tax dollars to charters and for-profit vendors, shifting public funds from a system that had public oversight and control to private interests. Education was a rich, untapped market with billions of federal dollars there for the taking. Schools, panicked at having their survival based on standardized test scores, invested heavily in testing technology. Multinational testing corporations, publishing companies, ed-tech ventures rushed in with their wares: software for administering tests, test preps, pre-tests, post-tests, tests scoring, lesson plans, teaching modules, assessment devices; entire new industries sprang into being….

“It’s been quite a feat, transforming teachers, who were once our friends and allies, to the enemy. A real sleight of hand, getting the public to trust those altruistic billionaires over those greedy, opportunistic teachers. Trust a billionaire to have the public’s interest at heart – that spin worked so well it landed us with Trump. But in the world of 1984, two plus two equals five: “Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by [the Party’s] philosophy.”

Put kids in front of computers, increase screen time, increase class size – and call it personalized. Depersonalized might be a better word – or perhaps personalised, for Pearsons, the multibillion-dollar transnational corporation that’s siphoned off untold billions of federal money. When teachers protested that students from disadvantaged backgrounds tend not to test well, having not had the benefit of tutors and test-prep programs, GWB said they were making “excuses,” showing “the soft bigotry of low expectations.” Yet it’s painfully clear that using test scores to determine the survival of schools only further disadvantages the disadvantaged, and, far from leveling the playing field, tilts it even more. “No excuses” became a mantra of corporate reformers, an excuse for shutting down public schools and moving in with charters, an excuse to ignore poverty and blame teachers for conditions that make teaching impossible – conditions assured by inequities that billionaire reformers have themselves brought about.”

Hundreds of schools have been closed. Thousands of teachers drummed out of their profession. Philadelphia’s Rescue Plan devastated the public schools. Arne Duncan’s Renaissance 2010 came and went with more public schools closed, more children sent to privately managed charter schools. “Choice, choice, choice,” the corporate reformers say, but neglect to mention that the schools make the choices, not the families. The one choice that is off the table is the neighborhood school.

“The confounding of language at its most basic level reduces us to a state of civic catatonia: we can’t think about these issues, let alone discuss them or act against them, when they’ve been so obfuscated, when words have been so twisted.”

The deliberate distortion of language has enabled a corporate coup, the selling out of public education to billionaires and entrepreneurs.

This is an article you can send to your friends who want a short summary of one of the biggest scam of our lifetimes.

In this illuminating podcast, Jennifer Berkshire (formerly known as EduShyster) and Jack Schneider (historian of education) explain how the tax credit programs work. They are proliferating as a way to adopt vouchers without using the V word.

Schneider gives a thumbnail history of the state Blaine amendments.

Then the pair introduce tax policy expert Carl Davis to explain how tax credits are a poorly disguised way of laundering money to religious schools that the state constitution forbids. Since no state has ever approved a voucher referendum, the voucher advocates have been forced to come up with euphemisms and backdoor ways to implement what they want: Public money for private and religious schools. If they were honest, they would put the question to voters and ask them to change the state constitution, but they know the public is not on their side. Thus, the ruse.

Derek Black, law professor, writes that Arizona is a state that funds its schools poorly and inequitably. It is one of the lowest-spending states in the nation on education. Worse, the kids who need the most get the least. So, instead of fixing its funding system, it has passed an expansive voucher system, which will be most helpful to students in the most affluent districts to underwrite the cost of their private and religious schools. Once again, Arizona stabs its neediest students in the back with underfunded schools. Think Arizona: Think white retirees who don’t want to pay to educate poor Latino and Native American children. Vouchers are the fix for white retirees. But not for the kids.

He writes:

The “program allows parents to take between 90 percent and 100 percent of the state money a local public school would receive to pay for private or religious education. The average student who isn’t disabled will get about $4,400 a year, but some get much more.” The funding mechanism and its expected cost to the state is murky. “The original Arizona plan was estimated to cost the state general fund at least $24 million.” Now, a revised plan and estimate are supposed to save the state $3.4 million by 2022.

What is clear, however, is that Arizona’s per pupil funding for public schools currently ranks 47 out of 50 states. To make matters worse, it distributes those meager funds unequally. The Education Law Center’s 2017 School Funding Fairness Report grades Arizona’s funding distribution as an “F.” Schools with moderate levels of student poverty receive only 88 cents on the dollar in comparison to schools with no student poverty. The comparison is even worse between high poverty school districts and low poverty school districts. In other words, Arizona spends the least on students who need the most.

That same report also shows that Arizona is doing almost nothing to fix its low funding levels or unequal distribution. Arizona ranks 49th in the nation in terms of the level of fiscal effort it exerts to fund its schools.

These background facts place Arizona’s new voucher program in a troubling light. These cold hard facts show that the state is not really interested in supporting adequate and equal education for its students. Thus, it is no surprise the state would double down and make matters worse. If gross inequity and inadequacy in public schools does not bother the state as a general principle, why would robbing those schools of more money be a problem? Why not just cap the state investment in a students’ education, send that student to private school, and tell the family and or the private school that they need to make up the difference? If things do not work out in the future, that is on the family and the private school.

These background facts also mean that the rhetoric of political leaders lacks credibility. Speaking of the voucher program, the Governor tweeted: “When parents have more choices, kids win.” If one understands the facts, one understands that this voucher program is not about helping kids in Arizona “win.” It is about raw politics and continuing the longstanding trend of depriving public schools of the resources they need to succeed. If parents in Arizona want vouchers (or charters), it is not because those policies are normatively appealing. It is because the state has been robbing them of the public education they deserve. Many families now surely believe they have no other realistic option. In short, the state has created the factual predicate of failing public schools to create the justification for its own pet project of privatizing education. The kids caught up in the mess simply do not matter.

Julian Vasquez Heilig has deep ties to the state of Michigan, as he is from Lansing, and he graduated from the University of Michigan. He has made his mark as a scholar of education policy at the University of Texas and now Sacramento State in California. Although he has established a reputation as a well-informed critic of charters, he could not pass up the opportunity to open a chain of charters in his home state of Michigan, where anyone can open a charter school and the financial rewards of for-profit charters are large. What’s principle when profits are so alluring?

The five charters will open this September, which is kind of quick, but then they are mostly online schools. It is no problem that Julian will continue to live in California, because, well, the weather is better.

It took only four weeks to have his request approved, so why wait to get started?

Here are three of his five new charters. You will have to open the link to read about the other two. They are doozies:

SELL Academy: SELL Academy will be primarily online and have a statewide attendance zone and serve grades 9-12. The school plans to implement an online real estate and sales curriculum through partnership with Trump University. The school aims to integrate sales into project-based learning experiences to allow students to develop critical thinking skills and a deeper understanding of sales— including real estate deals. Tremendous! There will be a brick-and-mortar location at a Trump property to be determined later.

Perfect Graduation Academy for Boys: Perfect Academy for Boys will be primarily online have a statewide with a brick-and-mortar location on land to be purchased by school and then leased back to me by my Charter Management Organization at a “great” price. Perfect will serve grades 9-10. The school will be a single-gender charter school that provides a rigorous, college preparatory program for grades 9-12. We will have a 100% graduation rate for everyone that is still at our school after four years. I promise. Perfect Academy for Boys will offer an extended day, week and year religious-based educational program. The focus is on boys, because, well, you know boys.

Exodus Academy for Girls: Exodus Academy for Girls will be primarily online have a statewide with a brick-and-mortar location on land to be purchased by school and then leased back to me by my Charter Management Organization at a “great” price (see above). I am actually thinking I might sell this school before it opens or mid-year. I’m taking offers— I’m ready to exodus.

He says he knows that Betsy DeVos will be thrilled with his success and that he was inspired by her comparison of schools to Ubers and other disruptive innovations in ride-sharing. He wants to be part of the new economy.

Need I say that Julian will be leaving the board of the Network for Public Education as of close of business today?

(April Fool!)