Archives for category: Louisiana

Louisiana will begin testing large numbers of preschool children this fall to determine their academic readiness.

If they are found to be not ready, it is not clear who will be held accountable: their teachers? Their families?

“The goal, they say, is to create a grading system like the current School Performance Score reports for public elementary and secondary schools, which are ranked for student performance on standardized tests and progress made from year to year.

“But whether pre-schools will be rewarded for academic progress, or sanctioned for lack of it, like elementary and secondary schools are, remains to be seen.”

John White says that testing toddlers will promote equity.

Governor Bobby Jindal eliminated a $4 million program that provides home care for people with developmental disabilities. You know, the state can’t afford it.

But the state treasurer pointed out that the Louisiana Department of Education spent an astonishing $615 million on consultants in the five years from 2005-2010.

According to the local media:

“State Treasurer John Kennedy gave Gov. Bobby Jindal an idea last week of where to find dollars to expand home services for the developmentally disabled.

“Jindal vetoed $4 million that would have allowed more disabled to get care that keeps them out of institutions.

“Kennedy said in his “opinion column” that even though “money is tight” there is a way to restore the funding. A “good start” would be for Jindal to reverse his axing of a legislative plan to cut $2 million in consulting contracts.

“The state Department of Education pays tens of millions of dollars to consultants each year, many of whom are out-of-state,” Kennedy wrote. “In fact, from 2005 to 2010, the department issued 5,499 consulting contracts worth $615,773,580.74.”

Some of the $615 million spent for consultants:

Contract #662421; “Create a public awareness campaign targeting multiple
audiences in Louisiana to establish a positive image of high school
redesign;” $341,465.48.
Contract #655743; “Contractor to provide services related to interactions
with media, arrange interviews and provide reporters with information, draft
written materials;” $100,000.
Contract #663689; “Contractor will select and train focused individuals from
within education, as well as former educators, to become leaders in the
RSD;” $200,000.
Contract #672113; “Contractor to provide program that will assist students
to learn valuable social skills through organized play on their recess and
lunch periods;” $94,000.

Thanks to tireless bloggers and parents, who FOILed the emails, you can now read about how and why Louisiana State Superintendent John White decided to turn over confidential student data to the Murdoch-Gates collaboration.

Do you want to know what the powerful say to each other? Read this fascinating account of The Art of the Deal.

Mike Deshotels is a retired educator in Louisiana who blogs at http://louisianaeducator.blogspot.com/.

He sent the following letter to the media:

“To the Editor

As an experienced, retired educator I feel I must speak out about the serious damage being done to public education in Louisiana by Governor Jindal and State Education Superintendent John White.

Many educators are shocked and disappointed about the drastic cuts to higher education, however my greatest concern is for K-12 education, where I was privileged to have a rewarding career as a teacher and education leader. It is like watching a slow motion train wreck to see the thousands of dedicated teachers who are retiring early because of the insane education policies of this administration.

The attempted privatization of public education using vouchers and charter schools is doing serious damage to education. Contrary to what our new non-educator leaders claim, Louisiana has had a basically sound system of public education. Our student performance was steadily improving before Jindal. All we needed to do was authorize our school administrators to restore basic discipline and safety to some of our troubled schools and make sure that our school curricula included both strong college prep and excellent career programs.

Instead Jindal and White policies are now putting our school tax dollars into the hands of profiteers and education charlatans.

Basically all the state takeover schools converted to charters have been absolute disasters both in student performance and in fiscal management. The so called Recovery District remains the second lowest performing school district behind St. Helena.

The recent audits of the voucher schools have been a total sham. The State Superintendent pronounced the voucher schools in compliance with state requirements even though almost none of them kept proper books to demonstrate compliance.

Finally and most damaging, Jindal and White have rammed through a terribly inaccurate and unfair teacher evaluation system that is driving our most dedicated educators out of the profession. Our teachers are being forced to do almost nothing but rehearse students for state tests instead of real teaching.

Teachers were not the problem to begin with. It was the poverty in our state and the lack of positive parental involvement compounded by the arrogant polices of a State Department of Education which is now dominated by amateur educators.

Let’s restore sanity to our education system, stop the teacher bashing, and support our professional educators in doing the effective job they desperately want to do for our children!

Sincerely,
Michael Deshotels, retired educator
Zachary, Louisiana, 225-235-1632
email: mikedeshot@aol.com”

The following account of Delmont Elementary School was written by Jill Saia, who was its principal.

I have deleted the “Dream School” folder on my computer. I am hoping that enough time has passed since our school was closed that I can write about it clearly and rationally, even though what was done to us was neither clear nor rational. For the last ten years that folder on my computer has contained all our plans, hopes, and ideas for a school run by professional educators for children who need it most. We knew that if we could put the highest-quality team of teachers together that we could affect true change in the lives of children in an at-risk school.

Two years ago when I was given the opportunity to become principal of Delmont Elementary School, I cautiously accepted the position. You see, I never wanted to be a principal. My graduate work in Educational Administration and Supervision confirmed this for me: being a school principal was too stressful and too far removed from teaching and learning. So I finished my degree and became certified, although I was certain I would never use this credential.

After 28 years in public education, I was offered the chance to become the Instructional Leader of Delmont. This would give me the chance to put into practice everything I had learned about high quality instruction and ongoing professional development. The position had been very carefully designed so that I would have autonomy in decisions and would be able to focus my time on classrooms and instruction instead of administrative duties. I would never have accepted this position if those guidelines weren’t clear.

Those guidelines remained in place for about two months. I was able to hire a very skilled staff, six of whom were National Board Certified Teachers. But my request for an Assistant Principal and Dean of Students was denied, even though there was money in the budget for it. I very quickly encountered resistance at all my personnel suggestions, and it began to seem as though the district didn’t really want us to succeed. The next two years were the most rewarding of my educational career, but also the most disheartening.

A change in top-level leadership at the district caused the team that had written the plan for Delmont to be totally dismantled. The new administration did not seem to know or understand why we were designated a “turnaround school” and what that meant in terms of academic freedom. I started carrying the SIG plan around with me when I went to meetings so I could explain what we were trying to do and show what the guidelines spelled out. Yet I increasingly encountered resistance from the Director of Turnaround Schools, who was a former superintendent of the failing Recovery School District. Looking back on it now, I think that this was all by design; “leaders” in the Central Office really didn’t think we would be able to turn Delmont around, so they created obstacles to keep it from happening.

One such obstacle presented itself in our first year. After having spent the summer hiring a top-notch staff and building a collaborative team, the district swooped in on October 10 to move two teachers and one aide out of our building. My plea to stop this from happening fell on deaf ears, and I was even cited for insubordination when I tried to show them what the SIG plan said about staffing. (That we were entitled to additional staff because it was a turnaround effort). So we said goodbye to three valuable staff members, shuffled kids into new classes, and kept going.

We did not make tremendous progress on test scores in the first year. We did change the culture and climate of the school, increase enrollment, and foster a high level of parental involvement. At the end of our first year, we packed everything up and moved out, because the district had chosen to remodel our 60-year old building. It is hard work to pack up an entire school, but we hoped that the renovations would make for an even better learning environment.

We were allowed to move back in two days before school started. We began the move and the readjustment to new classrooms, then had to stop for a half-day district “convocation” called by our new Superintendent. After district officials, community leaders and politicians had all given us their “rah-rah!” speeches about what a terrific year it was going to be, we boarded our yellow school bus back to Delmont and got back to work getting set up for the first day of school. Office staff and I stayed until after 10:00 p.m. that night to make sure we had everything ready for kids and parents the next day.

What a joy when the kids returned on the first day of school! They were so excited to see all of us again, to know that we were still here, and now in brand new buildings and classrooms. Hugs and high fives everywhere, and all the hard work of the summer instantly paid off when we saw their smiles. These children had suffered through tremendous staff turnover in the past, and it took a toll on their academic achievement and emotional well-being.

There were still the usual battles with the central office, but we were finally granted our extended day program that was in the plan the first year, but that the district chose not to fund. In the second year we convinced them that it wasn’t really their choice not to do it – it was written in the federal grant. So after Labor Day (and after Hurricane Isaac, which caused us to lose a week of school), we began doing extended day four days a week, with half a day on Wednesdays for team meetings and professional development. This gave us extra time to do targeted interventions, and also time to meet with each other and plan collaboratively.

We began to turn the corner – more children were reading, asking questions, and flourishing. Less behavior problems, more time on task. Children were communicating with each other, with teachers, with staff. They understood what the parameters were for being a student at Delmont, and they rose to our challenges. We planted our vegetable garden, had choir concerts, and participated in the Kennedy Center for the Arts program to integrate arts into the curriculum. We partnered with the local hospital’s health program to host the “Big Blue Bus” every week, which provided medical and mental health care to children and families. We were awarded a sizable grant from a local foundation to adopt a parenting program, and worked with a local university to design a new playground.

Then in November things started changing. Our new Superintendent announced his “Family of Schools” plan, which restructured many of the schools in the district. He called me into his office for a meeting on the afternoon of the first community forum held to discuss the changes. He told me that he was going to close Delmont. I remember being so stunned that I couldn’t even react at first. We did not see this coming; we were on our way up. But Dr. Taylor didn’t want to hear that, didn’t want to be reminded of how much he loved our school when he visited earlier in the year, or how endearing the kids had been to him. This was a business decision, and he preferred to keep emotions out of it.

Much of our staff was in disbelief when I told them, and when they heard it later that evening at the forum. Many had been at Delmont for ten years or more, and had not planned on leaving. They loved the fact that Delmont was a true neighborhood school with a family atmosphere, and just couldn’t understand why or how that family could be disintegrated. And I had trouble explaining it, because honestly I still don’t know why this decision was made.

At the next set of community forums, the family of schools plan was tweaked, and Delmont was now going to remain open as a K-2 school. This of course would remove us from state scrutiny of test scores by getting rid of the high-stakes test grades. Then in the next proposal, Delmont was going to be a Pre-K center. This is the proposal that the school board voted for, which somehow changed before the next day to it being a PreK – K center.

The March School Board meeting had a packed agenda, and at around 9:00 p.m. they finally got to the item about Delmont. Several school board members spoke out about how much they supported our efforts, and knew that we were doing great work. But when the vote came, they all voted for the motion to turn Delmont into a PreK-K center. The Superintendent had successfully convinced them that we were going to be taken over by the state if they didn’t make this move. No mention was made of our 3-year SIG plan and the fact that we were only in year two…

The school board member representing the region Delmont is in declined to speak, and abstained from the vote.

On the Wednesday of state testing week, the district sent the deputy superintendent to Delmont to meet with parents and staff to tell them of the decision to close the school. Yes, in the MIDDLE of STATE TESTING WEEK! The insensitivity was astonishing. Parents who walk their children to school were the most upset, because the school that their children were now assigned to is three miles away. (It is also an “F” school), Teachers and staff members were assured that the district would do everything they could to find new positions for them, and that many of them would follow their students to the assigned school. No surprise here – not a single Delmont teacher or staff member has been hired at that school. They all found their own jobs, without help from the central office; many have moved out of state or at least out of the district.

As for me, well, because I stood up for my school and tried to keep it open, I was given another letter of insubordination. I was also rated “ineffective” at midyear because of my refusal to change my ratings of teachers to match their pre-identified quota in the value-added system. Their assumption was that if test scores were low, then the teachers must be ineffective. Therefore, I must not know how to evaluate teachers. I was placed on an Intensive Assistance plan. Two months later, I turned in four binders full of data, observations, meeting notes, mentor reviews, etc. My mentor was a local award-winning principal who was part of the original “Dream School” team. Needless to say, she loved Delmont and what we were doing there. She even brought her assistant principal with her on one visit so she could have another perspective. After looking at all of my documentation, the director said that it “looked complete”, but then a week later told me that I was still ineffective and would have to wait for his final evaluation.

I chose not to wait for that final evaluation. I began the job search, had several very promising interviews, but it soon became clear that no public school district in this area would hire me because of my track record in a “failed” school. I really wanted to stay in public schools, because it is where I have spent my entire career, and because I truly believe in them. But in this case the system let me down. After 29 ½ years in the state retirement system, I was looking at having to retire with less than full benefits – a sizable financial difference. And up until this last year, I have had a stellar record in public education. No blemishes, no letters, no confrontations.

I can’t begin to describe what this last year has done to both my physical and mental health. I have been bullied and blackballed, all because I stood up for the children and families that needed us most. I knew I could no longer work for a system that is so dysfunctional, whose superintendent has already threatened to quit a few times when he didn’t get his way. (He, by the way, does NOT have a stellar track record.) Our dream school turned into a nightmare.

I have now resigned from the district and accepted a position as Dean of Instruction at a public charter school about ½ mile from Delmont. Many of the parents have heard that I am here now, and have enrolled their children. This is a brand new facility with a young faculty and plenty of opportunities for me to build instructional leadership. Their test scores rose dramatically last year, and they have begun to stabilize after a few rocky starting years. I am looking forward to the challenges of this new school, but also can’t help but look back.

The two years at Delmont profoundly changed my life, and I would like to think that it changed the lives of some of the children. I cannot begin to describe the last week or day of school. It was a blur of tears, hugs, graduations, celebrations, and uncertainty. I moved through it on auto-pilot; no one ever trained me how to say goodbye to 400 students and families, not to mention a beloved staff. We are now all scattered – students to at least three different schools, and teachers and staff to many more. We vowed to keep up with each other, but I know that we will eventually move on.
By the way, test scores in year two were outstanding. While we don’t yet have a final SPS from the state, preliminary data from our chief of accountability show that we made AYP and would no longer be a “failing” school. Our fourth-graders had a 20% jump in the number of students rated proficient; the district average growth was 6%.

So, this is what “reform” has done; it has transformed our dream school into a nightmare. I hope that we all wake up from it soon in a better place, but I know that for a few years, there was no better place than Delmont.

Robert Mann, a professor of communications at Louisiana State University, tries to imagine how Bobby Jindal and John White would react if they heard that Headstart centers kept sloppy records and couldn’t pass an audit.

He writes:

“Imagine if almost every one of those schools could not produce any records to prove that their expenditures did not constitute “gross irresponsibility or gross individual enrichment.”

“What do you think would be the reaction of Louisiana Republican leaders?

“What if the audits of these Head Start schools were littered with the following statements: ”We were unable to perform the [investigative] procedures because the school did not have a separate checking account or other procedures to account for [government related] expenditures separate from other expenditures.”

“Can you imagine the outrage we’d hear from Gov. Bobby Jindal and state Education Superintendent John White?

“Well, what if similar audits turned up showing the same kind of sloppy record keeping at almost every private voucher school in Louisiana? What do you imagine the reaction would be to that?

“Well, we don’t have to imagine.”

It is okay by them if voucher schools keep bad records. It doesn’t matter at all.

No problem. Just throwing taxpayer dollars out the window with no accountability at all.

But when most voucher schools could not produce the records needed to be audited, John White shrugged it off.

John White wrote a letter to the editor to defend his record and praise the sweeping, bold, innovative reforms that he has led.

Mercedes Schneider subjected White’s letter to a severe fact check and found it deficient, especially in relation to basic accuracy.

She cuffs him about the head and says:

“Reformers like White thrive on promoting the false dichotomy that “disagreeing with me” equals “a return to the old days.” Another reformer false idea is that everything about the past ways of functioning is “bad” and the “bold, new, sweeping reforms” are automatically “good.” Not so. Critically-thinking individuals consider what works, whether from past or present. It is a shame that I find myself having to defend such a basic idea.

“You are the one playing the game, John White. You write a letter thinking that people will divorce your words from your previous deceptive behavior. You think that the public does not read the other pages in the newspaper, including the pages on your voucher program failure and fraud. You fail to realize that your distorted words only provide fodder for more blog postings for the likes of me. Rest assured, people will read this and share it in other social media settings. They will see you once again as the deceiver that you are. They will once again see through the emptiness of your words.”

The voucher program in Louisiana continues to amaze. It is a living demonstration of what happens when public officials abandon responsibility for the children and institutions in their care. Watch what happens when the state gives children a voucher for public funds and then says that whatever choice they make is okay. John White memorably said last year: “To me, it’s a moral outrage that the government would say, ‘We know what’s best for your child,’” White said. “Who are we to tell parents we know better?”

And that is why the Louisiana Department of Education sent hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars to the New Living Word Church school, making fools of taxpayers while abdicating any interest in the quality of education received by the children. An audit revealed that the school overcharged the state by nearly $400,000, so White has excluded the school from the voucher program and is suing to recover the money.

But the school was not excluded because of its poor education, only because of financial impropriety.

Robert Mann, a professor of communications at Louisiana State University, writes: “Would you pay $6,300 in tuition to send your child to a private school with uncertified teachers, insufficient computers and no proper classrooms, and at which the “teaching” occurred mostly by plopping students in front of televisions to watch lessons on DVDs? Of course you wouldn’t. But the Louisiana Department of Education would.”

Mann writes:

“In a moment of Orwellian inspiration, Jindal and the Legislature dubbed their voucher plan the “Student Scholarships of Education Excellence Program.”

“Despite embarrassing questions last year from legislators and the media about the school’s abysmal instruction, its lack of classroom space and the absence of qualified teachers, state Education Superintendent John White awarded the voucher slots.

“Actually, calling this Ruston fly-by-night operation a “school” is like calling beef jerky prime rib. Yet, with full knowledge that the institution was little more than a shell of a school, White and Jindal handed it more than $600,000 of your money.

“The damage to the state’s budget could have been worse. White’s department initially awarded New Living Word more voucher slots than any other school in the state. Only after the Monroe News-Star exposed the sordid mess was White forced to trim the number from 315 to 165. Last school year, the “school” enrolled only 93 voucher students.”

Why in the world would White offer more vouchers to this school than any other in the state? Maybe because the well-established religious and private schools would not accept more than a handful of students. And White needed the numbers.

And more:

“White, of course, feigned outraged – but not about the fact that he’d wasted hundreds of thousands of tax dollars subsidizing shoddy instruction. “It shows a basic lack of competence,” he said about the school, not himself. “It can’t be tolerated.”

“What White can tolerate is inferior instruction of your children via DVD. In his statement, he offered no explanation for his recklessness and incompetence.

“And of the audits (basically internal investigations conducted by two Baton Rouge accounting firms), White trumpeted them as proof that his voucher program – save for New Living Word – is an unqualified success. The headline on a Department of Education press release proudly declared, “99 Percent of Schools Show No Violation.”

“There’s just one problem with that statement: It’s patently false.”

What did the audits reveal?

“In fact, the audits revealed that the afore-mentioned standard “could not be completed for forty-nine of the fifty-one private schools reviewed.” One audit is littered with the following statement, concerning the records of dozens of voucher schools: “We were unable to perform the procedures because the school did not have a separate checking account or other procedures to account for scholarship expenditures separate from other expenditures.”

“Most of the schools were also unable to verify that their “expenditures do not constitute gross irresponsibility and are not individually enriching.” These are not insignificant findings except, apparently, to White. The state will spend about $45 million in the current fiscal year on vouchers for about 8,000 students.”

Louisiana’s problem is a lack of accountability. The state has no accountability at the top. When will John White be held accountable for the unaccountable voucher program? When will he be held accountable for the disastrous “course choice” program, that seeks to funnel millions of dollars to for-profit vendors? The highest court in the state declared unconstitutional the funding of both the voucher and course choice programs. Jindal and White will not be allowed to take money out of the public school fund to pay for their privatization plans.

What Louisiana shows for all to see is that the privatization movement is not about improving education. It is not “for the kids.” It is about money, power, and ego.

Remember last year when Governor Bobby Jindal rammed through his voucher proposal, whereby more than half the state’s children were eligible for a voucher to attend any private or religious or entrepreneurial school? Remember that critics said that Superintendent John White gave out vouchers without due diligence and that the school that got the most vouchers had no classrooms, no teachers, and no curriculum for the influx, which would triple their enrollment? And remember that White said that “parents know best” and that it was not his role as state superintendent to tell anyone how to educate their child?

It is also worth remembering that Jindal’s voucher plan (and charters and online charters and course choice for entrepreneurs) was saluted by Jeb Bush’s Foundation for Excellence in Education hailed the plan as a formula for bold change. And Bush’s “Chiefs for Change” issued a statement endorsing the program; then-Indiana superintendent Tony Bennett called it “student-centered” and said, ” “Students will no longer have to settle for failing schools. Countless families will be able to select the best education option for their unique student’s needs. And superintendents and principals will be empowered to hone faculties of talented, dynamic, and effective educators. Armed with these bold reforms, Louisiana will soon lead our country in quality public K-12 education.”

That was then, this is now.

Well, now we know that White has barred New Living Word from accepting vouchers, not because of the quality of its education but because of financial improprieties. It seems that they were receiving more money from the state for voucher students than they charged their own students, and the church now owes the state nearly $400,000.

Today the New Orleans Times-Picayune published an editorial saying that the vouchers awarded to this school were a waste of taxpayers’ dollars.

Not only did the school overcharge the state, but test scores were abysmal there, as they were in many of the voucher schools.

The editorial says:

“LEAP scores for third- through eighth-graders released in May showed that only 40 percent of voucher students scored at or above grade level. That compares with a statewide average of 69 percent for all students.

Seven schools in Jefferson and Orleans parishes posted such poor results that they are being barred from accepting new voucher students this fall, although they can keep those they already have.

New Living Word’s iLEAP scores for third-, fifth- and sixth-graders were substantially lower than their counterparts in Lincoln Parish public schools and the state as a whole, according to the Department of Education report.

Those poor results wouldn’t have triggered the school being removed from the voucher program this year, though. A school has to post three years of poor LEAP results before getting sanctioned.”

Lot of critics warned that vouchers should not be paid for out of the state’s Minimum Foundation Budget for public schools; the Jindal administration ignored them, and the voucher funding was struck down by the state’s highest court.

Lots of critics warned that the state should set consistent standards for all schools receiving public dollars, but the state ignored them.

In a democracy, public officials would do well to listen to their critics before committing to a disastrous and radical course of action.

 

Last year, when Governor Bobby Jindal persuaded the Louisiana legislature to pass the nation’s most sweeping voucher program, the school that was selected to receive the largest number of voucher students was the New Living Word Church school. Although it lacked the facilities, the teachers, or the curriculum to triple its enrollment, Superintendent John White approved the school to enroll 193 voucher students. While responded to criticism by reducing the number of vouchers to 93, still nearly half the school’s enrollment.

Classes were taught by DVD to students in the church gymnasium. The school’s principal and pastor promised to build a new building to accommodate the influx of new students.

This past week, Superintendent White banned the New Living Word School from further participation in the voucher program. It seems that they charged the state more than they charged non-voucher students, and the church pocketed the difference, which was hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars annually.

According to Superintendent White, the school now owes the state nearly $400,000 in overcharges.

Blogger Lamar White (no relation to the superintendent) in Louisiana had this to say about the fiasco:

“Although it’s easy and completely understandable to feel outraged by New Living Word’s exploitation of the voucher program, I find it impossible to have any sympathy for Superintendent White. Time after time, for over a year, he was warned repeatedly about this particular school; he was routinely criticized for the lack of oversight and accountability employed by the Department of Education, for his decision to not conduct even a bare modicum of due diligence on schools that sought hundreds of thousands, if not millions, in state government funding. Remember, the voucher program, ostensibly, was sold to Louisiana citizens as a way of ensuring children have access to better educational opportunities.

“As Zack Kopplin’s research reveals, at least a third of voucher schools are teaching from anti-scientific and anti-historical textbooks, and as we learned just last month, voucher students scored almost thirty points below average on the LEAP examination.

“In his statement to the media yesterday, Superintendent White also said, “In my view it is financially irresponsible according to the law. In my view it is incompetence and we will not tolerate it.”

“I’d submit that before Superintendent White lectures anyone else on financial irresponsibility or incompetence, he should first read up on negligence and dereliction of duty.

“I, for one, do not believe that New Living Word is the only school in the program that charges voucher students more than non-voucher students. Stay tuned.”