Archives for category: Indiana

Cory Turner and Anya Kamenetz of NPR look at two new voucher studies: one from Indiana, the other from Louisiana. The common thread is that voucher students lose ground academically in the first couple of years. Then, in the third or fourth year, they make up their losses and catch up with their public school peers.

The Indiana study, not yet peer-reviewed, found:

“The researchers studied student data for the program’s first four years and noticed an interesting pattern. If students stayed in their voucher schools long enough, the backslide stopped and their performance began to improve.

“The longer that a student is enrolled in a private school receiving a voucher, their achievement begins to turn positive in magnitude — to the degree that they’re making up ground that they initially lost in their first couple of years in private school,” Waddington tells NPR. “It’s like they’re getting back to where they started” before they enrolled in a private school.

“New voucher students fell statistically significantly behind their public school peers in math after switching. On average, those losses continued for two years in private school before students began making up ground. In the fourth year, those who were still enrolled in a voucher school appeared to catch up.

“In ELA, voucher students also lost ground but, ultimately, surpassed their public school peers by the fourth year.

“This pattern may give new hope to voucher supporters, but it comes with an important caveat: Many students did not stay in the system long enough to see this improvement, instead bouncing back to public schools, especially the lowest-achieving voucher students.”

So the lowest-achieving students returned to public schools, and the better-performing students showed gains. Hmm. No miracles there.

The study also found that vouchers are used by 3% of Indiana students. Half of them had never attended a public school. In other words, the voucher was used to pay tuition for students already attending a nonpublic school.

The other study, reported here yesterday, found a similar pattern of losses followed by a recovery.

Remember we were told for years that vouchers would “save poor kids from failing public schools”? It turns out that this was speculation. It hasn’t happened. The students in voucher schools are not posting amazing gains. It takes four years in a voucher school to catch up to their public school classmates, and modest gains are registered by those who survive.

Indiana has been taken over by the forces of corporate school reform, under a succession of Republican governors devoted to school choice: Mitch Daniels, Mike Pence, now Eric Holcomb. The public schools got a brief respite when educator Glenda Ritz was elected State Commissioner in 2012, but Pence spent four years attacking her Office and taking away its powers. Indiana has the gamut of privatization reforms: charter schools, vouchers, cybercharters.

The epicenter of the privatization movement is Indianapolis, where an organization called The Mind Trust has led the effort to destroy public education.

A teacher in Indiana recently left a comment about what she encountered when she returned to teaching in the public schools: lessons learned from charters.

She writes:

“I believe this “hypernormalization” can be traced back to the use of TFA teachers in our public school system. I had to come out of retirement to go back to the classroom for economic reasons and found an Art teacher position in the Indianapolis Public Schools. I joined a staff of over 50 teachers in a K-6 school with mostly young teachers (less than 10 years experience), TFA teachers, administrators with NO teaching experience and no teacher’s license, and a building with a high needs student population that was in complete chaos. The principal and assistant principal were only concerned only with “creating classroom culture,” or making sure that all the students walked in straight lines with a bubble in their mouth, hands clasped behind their backs. Data collection and testing was the driving force behind everything and it was of utmost importance to point out to any staff member their “numbers” to make sure the customers (parents) would be happy. With all of the emphasis on the outcome and none on actual learning, the building was reduced to violent fights and constant behavior disruption as evidence by the 12 staff members that were dedicated to behavior remediation. When I made comments or brought up ideas about changing the way behavior was addressed, or looking into more emphasis on learning and less on data collection I was regarded as a horrible relic from the past that had no idea how to teach in today’s public schools. I was force fed TFA propaganda, pummeled with articles about data from pro-TFA researchers, and forced to watch videos on the TFA Youtube channel to bring my thinking into the same place as the inexperienced teachers and administrators that demonstrated they knew nothing about how public schools work. As a teacher of over 30 years, with all kinds of recognition and accolades for excellence, I am regarded as an out of step relic who can’t possibly know what I am doing.

“TFA is like a virus that has infected the teaching profession and is slowly killing education. The sad part is that TFA’s philosophy is solidly grounded in the IPS school system, and I don’t see it changing with our GOP led state legislature imposing their micro management of IPS and other large urban school systems in Indiana; and I see the same thing happening in Florida, Ohio and many of the other super-reformy states.

“If any of us have any hope of stopping the normalization of what isn’t normal for learning, then we need to identify the sources such as TFA and end their participation in public education.”

Recently, Betsy DeVos visited the public schools of Van Wert, Ohio, with Randi Weingarten. Randi picked the district to show DeVos public schools that are the heart of their rural community, which is in Trump country. DeVos talked school choice, but encountered the reality of a community with high poverty and no interest in vouchers or charters.

In this article, Indianan Jill Long THOMPSON explains why vouchers would be a disaster for rural schools.

Jill Long Thompson is a former member of Congress and former USDA Under Secretary for Rural Development. She was board chair and CEO of the Farm Credit Administration and is now an associate professor at the Kelley School of Business and the School of Public and Environmental Affairs at Indiana University. She lives on a farm in northern Indiana.

Jill Long Thompson is a former member of Congress from Indiana. She is also a former USDA Undersecretary for Rural Development. She is a visiting associate professor at the Kelley School of Business and the School of Public and Environmental Affairs at Indiana University Bloomington.


Public schools are a cornerstone of communities, and they are a very important component of the rural infrastructure….

For rural communities, in particular, voucher programs create a business model that simply will not work. Running a rural school is very challenging because the resources are always limited, and oftentimes scarce.

Vouchers encourage the creation of small private schools. But, we don’t need more schools in rural communities; we need more resources to strengthen the schools we have. Increasing the number of schools means increasing the overhead, which is why vouchers dilute resources even further.

A school voucher program is the education policy equivalent of a county highway program that would give residents money to build little private roads anywhere they want.

That would not only be costly and inefficient; it would not serve the community’s transportation needs.

One must look no further than our own state, with its aggressive voucher program, to see the problems it causes for small rural school systems.

Since 2011, Indiana has shifted $520 million into the state voucher program.

Unfortunately, many of the schools receiving the vouchers have not performed as well as the public schools that lost funding because of the vouchers.

A voucher program is not the solution to the challenges facing public education.

According to the Penn Wharton Public Policy Initiative at the University of Pennsylvania, “Studies of the federally funded (Washington, D.C.) voucher program found that there was no conclusive evidence that vouchers affected student achievement. In fact, children who were given the school voucher performed no better in math and reading than the children who weren’t given vouchers.”

Additionally, “Similar studies of the longest-running school voucher program in the country in Milwaukee actually found that public school students outperformed voucher students at every grade level on the statewide reading and math tests.”

My husband and I are products of rural public schools. We live on a farm in the same district where my husband completed his elementary and high school education, and where he and his father both served on the local school board.

I know firsthand what the public school means to a rural community. Our school is not just a place to educate our children, but also a vehicle for bringing people together. Our local school is a big part of our identity.

I can think of nothing more important to the rural infrastructure than schools. President Trump’s voucher policies would cause irreparable harm to communities across rural America.

Indiana legislators intend to introduce virtual pre-K as part of their expansion of preschool for the state. It is no doubt a way to save money for the state, just plopping babies in front of a computer, supervised by a parent, and calling it “pre-school.” Would they do it to their own children? Peter Greene wrote about this UPSTART program here.

The news report says, in all seriousness:

“It’s really attractive because it involves the parent specifically in providing the program for the kid and many times the issue with children who are not ready for school is unengaged parents,” Senator Luke Kenely, R-Noblesville, said. “This really engages the whole family. I just believe it’s a much more wholesome approach that will have a better lasting effect.”

The UPSTART online curriculum calls for parents to spend 15 minutes a day with their child five days a week. The program started in Utah and lawmakers hope to bring it to Indiana to reach low-income families in rural counties that might not have access to pre-K education otherwise.

“I think it will be a huge benefit for about 60 counties in the State of Indiana that they have never had that chance before,” Senator Kenley, who serves as the Senate Appropriations Chairman, said.

Lawmakers are planning to allocate $1 million toward the program in its first year. Senator Kenley said the average cost per student is about $1,400 and the program could serve about 700 Hoosiers in its first year.

Peter Greene describes the program, which will be adopted in Utah and probably Indiana, and says:

Pre-K can be done in so many beneficial ways, but none of those ways are focused on academic achievement. What four year olds need to do is play, play slightly organized games, play unorganized games, play by themselves, play with others, and also play. If they feel inclined to explore reading or math or science or art or whatever, that should be encouraged. But enforced or required. No, no, no, and also no.

Supporters will say, “Lighten up– we’re only talking about fifteen minutes a day, five days a week.” And I agree that beats some Pre-K classroom where students are expected to sit and study academic subjects for hours, just as being hit in the face with a hammer is better than being assaulted in the chest with a jackhammer.

But UPSTART also gives tiny humans an early close connection with a screen, introduces them to the idea of learning as a chore that must be done to someone else’s satisfaction, and gets the whole family acclimated to being data mined. It’s a sweetheart deal of the Utah-based Waterford company which makes out well whenever it can get legislators to purchase its product in bulk. Is this good use of Indiana taxpayer dollars? I doubt it. If I were an Indiana voter and taxpayer, I think I’d seriously question the aims of any Pre-K program, and I think I’d want my tiny humans to be interacting with real live humans, not software.

This post was written by a woman in Indiana who requested anonymity to protect the identity of her step-son.

The Reality of Indiana Vouchers

My husband’s child goes to an expensive private Catholic high school in Indianapolis. By a divorce agreement, my husband must pay for the child’s education at this school. To respect privacy, I will call the child “A.” If the administrators of the school were to figure out that A was the subject of this account, A would be expelled even though there are only a few weeks to graduation.

A started at the private school in the 2013/14 school year. At the time, my husband had the financial resources to pay the $20,500 per year tuition and fees. Cancer put an end to his career in the middle of A’s 9th grade school year and suddenly the ability to pay for this school by a court order was in jeopardy. After a discussion with the business office at the private school, it was determined that my husband would qualify for financial aid, but he would have to apply for the state voucher to get the financial aid. My husband had a very public career where he spoke out against vouchers and worked in politics to defeat voucher legislation. Even though he was politically and morally opposed to the vouchers, he was in a position where he had to participate.

“A“ had difficulty with the school from the very beginning of the Freshman year. Teachers often reminded A of the exclusivity of the school, and how A was lucky to be attending, as a reprimand for poor performance in their classes. A’s mother and my husband were encouraged to have A evaluated, and the determination was made that A was depressed and needed counseling. The school psychologist told A and the parents that they should not reveal the depression to the school because A would most likely be “kicked out,” and not allowed to finish the year.

The psychologist changed the diagnosis to ADHD, the mother put A on medication and A was required to be enrolled in the school’s “Learning Center,” a resource room for students with special needs. My husband and the mother of A asked for an Individual Education Plan (IEP) for A, but the school failed to provide the IEP, and there was never any goal or plan for A in the Learning Center, only that A have access to the center. The Learning Center added an additional $2,500 per year to the cost of the school and was often short staffed by only one teacher for over 200 students.

“A” was required to take AP classes and the tests for the AP courses. Although A always scored well on tests, classes were a struggle. Teachers offered A little help and berated A for asking for help. Not once were we contacted or informed about A’s struggle keeping up with homework and assignments. Once we found out, my husband encouraged me as a teacher to assist A with homework and A welcomed the help. A’s mother objected to my participation and went to the school to have both my husband and myself banned from the school premises and outside activities. This was done without any meetings with the principal, any discussion of the issue or any legal proceedings barring us from the school.

In other words, we had no rights as parents of a student to dispute the mother’s claim, although we were required to pay the $6,000 of tuition left after the financial aid and voucher payments, we were not allowed to set foot in the school that we were scraping every penny together to pay for.

In the following years, A continued to have issues with the school because of our economic status. To participate in sports activities (which we could not attend), we had to fork over nearly $1,000 for equipment use and uniforms; band was out because we would have had to purchase or lease instruments for far more than we could afford; class trips or field trips were off the table because of the cost and the requirement that we provide transportation, pay for expensive air travel. The ultimate embarrassment came from having A’s car driving privileges rejected because the 1999 Honda Civic we provided for A to drive was “too old” and did not meet the safety criteria for student vehicles.
A eventually had far too many classroom issues for the school to tolerate in the upcoming senior year; A had to bring up the grades or face expulsion. At the same time, our financial aid was cut in half and we had to pay $10,000 after financial aid and voucher money was applied for the senior year tuition, an amount that was completely out of reach for a family that lived on a teacher’s salary and social security. We worked out a payment deal with the school and A could stay if grades improved which they did. A went on to take the ACT and SAT and received a perfect score on the ACT and a few points shy of perfect on the SAT. Suddenly, the student that was near expulsion was the golden child and the private school took all the credit for A’s remarkable accomplishment. The school wanted to use A’s high test scores as part of a marketing campaign that would claim the “poor kid” on financial aid and vouchers could succeed only because of the private school, not the efforts of A. If we agreed to this exploitation of A, the school would waive half of the $10,000 we owed. Of course, we did not agree. Loans from amazingly wonderful family and friends helped us pay the balance and A will graduate in a few weeks and go on to a state university with a full scholarship next school year.

Private schools are not a good fit for all students. They don’t allow the students and families any rights, the primary interest of the school is financial, and they are accountable to no one. It is clear to me and almost anyone else that had been in our situation, that the sole purpose of state vouchers is to support the students that already attend private schools, and to promote economic segregation. Vouchers fit into the ideology of those that believe there are those deserving of “good” education, and there are those who only deserve training that allows them to function in society; and that is an abuse of our tax dollars but most importantly of the children.

The state of Indiana had to fork over $21,000 in tax dollars to help pay the tuition of religious school that denied A and the family of our rights, forced A to be labeled with a learning disability that was false, blocked A from the normal high school activities such as band, sports and even just driving to and from school because of our economic status. I am sorry we had to do that to the state, but I am sorrier for A and what A had to endure to go to the “good” school. I hope one day these vouchers will stop, solely for the sake of kids like A.

The far-rightwing organization ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Coucil) owns the state of Indiana. ALEC is determined to crush public education. Check out ALEC exposed, a website that show the ALEC agenda for charters, vouchers, and state takeovers. ALEC hates democracy and local control. It hates local school boards, because they interfere with privatization. In Indiana, with Mitch Daniels as governor, then Mike Pence, ALEC got carte blanche.

Bear in mind that state takeovers have been tried many times and always failed.

I received the following update from Cathy Fuentes-Rohwer, parent activist.

“Here at the epicenter of education reform (I suppose every state thinks his/hers is the epicenter–but we do have the distinction of having a model on the ALEC website: Indiana Reform Package), our state legislature is poised to begin state takeover of Gary and now, Muncie.

“Muncie’s parents are reeling from this news. The state legislature was already planning a takeover of Gary’s public schools as they are $100 million in debt (gulp!) and, as I understand it, Gary was asking for this. But no elected official from Muncie requested this—they just slipped them into the bill.

“The economic and educational policies of Indiana have hurt Muncie particularly hard. The property tax caps have had the hardest hits on cities like theirs (this was from 2016: http://www.theindychannel.com/news/local-news/muncie-community-schools-broke-face-115m-budget-shortfall and this from last month: http://indianapublicradio.org/news/2017/03/muncie-community-schools-changes-bus-service-will-apply-for-state-loan/). Although Indiana no longer funds their public schools through property taxes, I believe transportation is part of that and Muncie can no longer afford busing. They were asking teachers to take a 23% pay cut which failed in court! http://www.wthr.com/article/state-rules-in-favor-of-muncie-teachers-association-in-dispute-with-school-district

“In addition to tax caps, the educational reforms have had a dire effect on their schools. In the past four years, Muncie Community Schools have lost $2.5 million to vouchers going to private schools. I am also told that the students transferring out of the city schools into the surrounding smaller community schools –“school choice” in action (taking their per pupil funding) has also led to further bleeding of funds. It’s also clear that there have been some misdeeds on the part of their school board or financial officer (or both) and so some of the community members think that maybe it will be a GOOD thing for the state to take over. I shudder at the thought. I myself grew up in Michigan and went to Kindergarten in Detroit. If ever there were a cautionary tale…

“But regardless of how they got into these financial straits, the state is now setting up to take over the academics as well. All without the okay from the community, local elected legislators or community leaders. In fact, the mayor was quite harsh in response to their financial woes earlier this year: http://www.delawareonline.com/story/news/local/2017/03/06/mayor-blasts-state-over-city-school-crisis/98809108/

Here is an overview of the takeover:

http://www.thestarpress.com/story/news/education/2017/04/05/house-supports-state-takeover-mcs/100064346/

“And this:

http://indianapublicmedia.org/stateimpact/2017/04/03/legislators-muncie-schools-district-opposition/

http://www.thestarpress.com/story/news/education/2017/04/02/state-takeover-muncie-schools-proposed/99954928/

“I’m hoping that more people in Indiana can become aware and contact their legislators to talk about how wrong-minded state takeover is! Solutions to public school problems are certainly complex, but people just don’t seem to understand that giving up local democratic control is not the answer and makes fertile ground for people who can profit off of this situation: charters, vouchers, charter management companies.

“You would like to think that when children drank poisoned water in Flint, the connection between privatization and state takeover of local municipalities would have been made across the country. Yes, you saved money–but look at the cost to children.

“Unfortunately, folks struggle to connect the dots. I fear for not just Muncie, but other school districts that our paternalistic legislators might decide to take over next.

“This is also taking place in a legislative session in which they are taking democracy away from us as a state by changing the state superintendent of public instruction (formerly held by Glenda Ritz) from elected position to an appointed one. Because we can’t even be trusted with that pesky thing called a vote when it comes to education?”

Cathy Fuentes-Rohwer

Karen Francisco, editorial page editor of the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette in Indiana, reviews the state’s disastrous experiment with vouchers. In 2011, state lawmakers started the voucher program with the promise of helping low-income children get better schooling. As time has passed, the income level for eligibility has gone up, the costs have gone up, but the vouchers have never fulfilled their promise. Instead, they have become a permanent drain on public school funding even as the schools remain unaccountable and non-transparent. Over time, they have become a subsidy for private school parents who never sent their children to public schools and never intended to. Over time, they have developed a strong political constituency in the legislature that is unwilling to hold voucher schools accountable for performance.

The Choice Scholarship Program annual report – quietly released by the Indiana Department of Education late last month – shows voucher participation grew by 4.9 percent this year, while the cost grew by 8.4 percent, topping $146 million for the 2016-17 school year. The percentage of voucher students who have never attended a public school also grew, to 54.6 percent. The state improbably claims that it is saving money by sending children to voucher schools, but most of these students would never have attended public schools anyway.

The voucher program has turned into an entitlement for middle-income and low-income families to send their child to a religious school at public expense, and for some, a means of white flight from diverse public schools.

The results of the millions of dollars spent on vouchers are not easily obtained, but they are unimpressive and troubling:

Indiana lawmakers have mostly abandoned the pretense of helping struggling students in favor of an argument that parents should be allowed to choose the best schools for their children. But their failure to hold voucher schools accountable leaves parents without the information they need.

In Fort Wayne, Horizon Christian Academy III earned letter grades of D in both 2013-14 and 2014-15, as enrollment grew from 236 last year to 433 this year. Voucher payments to the Wells Street school increased from $1.14 million last year to $2.43 million this year. At Cornerstone College Prep, voucher funding grew from $631,000 to more than $687,000 this year, even as voucher enrollment fell from 127 students to 122 this year and the school earned an F on its school report card. Its earlier performance results are shielded by student privacy law and no information is available about teacher certification. Only public schools are required to report information about educator evaluations, student performance on college aptitude exams and more.

Transparency is in short supply at voucher schools. Cornerstone’s address is listed as a post office box and its website has been disabled, although a woman answering the phone confirmed the school is at 3501 Harris Road, at Destiny Dome Embassy at Cathedral of Praise Ministries International.

Voucher schools are not subject to public access or open records law; they agree only to “cooperate” in an audit of school records.

When Indiana became a pioneer in so-called school choice, research on the effectiveness of voucher programs was slim, as there were too few subjects to study. Milwaukee was the first major city with a voucher program; Cleveland and Washington, D.C., later adopted programs. Florida had a voucher program for special education students.

Indiana, a follower in almost every other policy area, became the first to approve a statewide voucher program open to all income-eligible students. As large voucher programs developed in Louisiana and Ohio, the data available to study effectiveness have grown.

The results are poor.

• In Ohio, the pro-voucher Fordham Institute commissioned a Northwestern University research team to study the state’s choice program. It found voucher students tend to be more economically advantaged and higher-performing academically when they enter private schools, but they post worse educational results than their peers who stayed behind in public schools.

• In Louisiana, a major study found voucher students – predominantly black, from low-income families and coming from public schools that had received poor ratings from the state – posted disastrous results. Students who started at the 50th percentile in math and then used a voucher to transfer to a private school fell to the 26th percentile in a single year.

Results were still well below the starting point in the second year.

• A report released last week by the Children’s Law Clinic at Duke Law School concluded this of North Carolina’s Opportunity Scholarship Grant Program: “Based on limited and early data, more than half the students using vouchers are performing below average on nationally standardized reading, language, and math tests. In contrast, similar public school students in North Carolina are scoring above the national average.”

• Mark Dynarski of the Brookings Institution summarized large-scale research done on the Indiana and Louisiana voucher programs to find public school students who received vouchers scored lower on reading and math tests compared to similar students who remained in public schools.

“The magnitudes of the negative impacts were large,” Dynarski wrote. “In education as in medicine, ‘first, do no harm’ is a powerful guiding principle. A case to use taxpayer funds to send children of low-income parents to private schools is based on an expectation that the outcome will be positive. These recent findings point in the other direction.”

The accumulating research about the negative effects of vouchers doesn’t matter to Indiana legislators. Indiana already has the largest voucher program in the nation, and the legislature wants to make it even bigger.

Indiana lawmakers aren’t backing down, however. The state has almost 20 percent of the nation’s 178,000 voucher students, yet there were multiple bills filed in this legislative session to increase the eligibility pathways for a voucher. The most noxious is attached to the preschool pilot program expansion.

The House version of the bill makes any child who receives an On My Way Preschool grant as a 4-year-old eligible for vouchers for the next 13 years, provided their families meet the generous income eligibility guidelines (up to $91,020 a year for a family of four next year). The estimated cost? Another $10.5 million added annually to the nation’s most costly voucher program.

A powerful school voucher lobby maintains a tight grip on Indiana’s legislative leaders, who in turn maintain a tight grip on the GOP House and Senate caucuses.

There are many more public school parents than voucher school parents. Why don’t they hold their legislators accountable for transferring public funds to religious schools that get worse results than public schools? Why continue to give public money to failing private schools? Indiana was once known for its community public schools. Soon, it will be known as a national laughing stock for its dedication to a failed idea: vouchers for failing private and religious schools.

A retired teacher shared the story of Mike a Pence’s role in transforming the schools of Indiana:


Our former governor, Mike Pence, absolutely loves vouchers.Under his “leadership” Indiana became a national leader in giving vouchers to students and families. In fact, we have the dubious reputation of being one of the fastest-growing voucher states. We have a ridiculous merit pay system where highly-effective teachers in the wealthy Carmel-Clay school system received a bonus check of $2422, whereas highly-effective teachers in the poorer school system of Wayne Township a few miles away received $42. Because of Pence and the Republican legislature, many schools in areas of high poverty are struggling financially. I retired from Muncie Community Schools where I was offered an early retirement incentive of staying on the teacher health insurance plan until I turned 65. Hundreds of other employees and I took the “bait” and were promptly dropped from the plan, leaving us without health insurance. Now because of the inequitable funding to schools (and because of a new local superintendent who doesn’t appear to like teachers much), the school board has made its final contract offer to teachers (as reported in our local newspaper, the Star Press):

• A 10 percent reduction in salary for teachers making between $36,005 and
$61,006 for 2015-16.

• A 28 percent cut, including a 20 percent reduction in salary retroactive to July 1,
2016 and the cancellation of two pay checks in the 2016-17 contract.

• Contributing a fixed total to insurance premiums, equal to about 68 percent to the
health insurance option

• Eliminating sick bank contributions

• Eliminating additional pay for teaching a sixth period

• Eliminating the $150 professional development stipend for teachers

• Eliminating retiree benefits

• A one-time salary raise to the minimum of $37,000 for any teacher currently
making less

Thank you, Vice-President Pence, for ruining the teaching profession in Muncie and in the entire state of Indiana.

The IndyStar reports that former Governor Mike Pence used a personal AOL account to conduct state business, and that his account included sensitive information about security.

Vice President Mike Pence routinely used a private email account to conduct public business as governor of Indiana, at times discussing sensitive matters and homeland security issues.

Emails released to IndyStar in response to a public records request show Pence communicated via his personal AOL account with top advisers on topics ranging from security gates at the governor’s residence to the state’s response to terror attacks across the globe. In one email, Pence’s top state homeland security adviser relayed an update from the FBI regarding the arrests of several men on federal terror-related charges.

Cyber-security experts say the emails raise concerns about whether such sensitive information was adequately protected from hackers, given that personal accounts like Pence’s are typically less secure than government email accounts. In fact, Pence’s personal account was hacked last summer.

Is it time to start chanting “Lock him up”?

Phyllis Bush is a retired educator and a member of the board of the Network for Public Education who lives in Fort Wayne, Indiana.

She writes here about the hidden cost of vouchers, which are a gift of public dollars to private schools with no accountability.

Here is an excerpt:

Vouchers drain state tax dollars from the entire education funding pot. This often causes district budgeting deficits and/or the need for tax increases, referendums and the like. That loss of revenue to public schools increases class sizes and diminishes student resources such as counselors, support personnel, supplemental materials and buses.

From the vantage point of a traditional public school supporter, vouchers are a gift of taxpayer funds given to private schools without any accountability. Additionally, the expansion of choice is creating two separate school systems. In this parallel system, one pathway will be for those who can afford quality choices. The other pathway will be to an underfunded, separate-but-unequal road, marked by poverty and by zip codes. As most people know, public schools are required to accept all students while “choice schools” have the option of choosing the students who fit their agenda. Choice schools are allowed to reject students with behavior issues, students with low scores, students with disabilities, and students who don’t speak English.

The probable result of this further expansion of choice schools will be that the children with the most difficulties will be housed in the least well-financed schools. Sadly, many legislators have chosen to be willfully unaware of the consequences of “school choice.”

While the reformers and the takeover artists and the hedge fund managers talk and talk and talk about the miraculous results of school choice, research shows that these results are uneven at best. As thoughtful citizens and taxpayers, wouldn’t it be prudent if we asked ourselves what is best for our traditional public schools, our communities and our kids?

Perhaps the fundamental question is what does society stand to lose in the name of “school choice?” Whose choice is it, anyway?”