Archives for category: Pennsylvania

Yinzercation

YINZER NATION + EDUCATION = YINZERCATION

The Elephant at the White House

— AUGUST 31, 2012

So there we were at the White House. Forty “education leaders” from Pennsylvania invited to meet with President Obama’s senior policy advisors as well as top staff at the U.S. Department of Education (USDE). The room contained district superintendents, school board members, principals, college presidents, education professors, representatives from a host of education associations, a super-PAC school privatizer, educational consultants, and various non-profit directors. And one elephant.

This elephant in the room fittingly started as a Republican beast, but has gained so much traction with Democrats over the past decade that it could just as well have been a donkey lurking there in the corner. Whatever its animal form, No Child Left Behind (NCLB) was casting a pretty big shadow and it was time to talk about the consequences of labeling our public schools as failures, high stakes testing, and the demonization of teachers.

And so during the first discussion session, I stood to address Roberto Rodriguez, the President’s senior policy advisor on education. I reminded him of what I had told him back in March, when I implored the White House to stop participating in the national narrative of failing public schools. (See “What I Told the White House.”) And then I gave him the view from the ground here in Pennsylvania where our grassroots movement has been fighting massive budget cuts, to let him know what it looks like when our country stops believing that public education is a public good. When it chooses to cut teachers, tutoring programs, nurses, special ed, school buses, music, art, foreign languages, and even Kindergarten.

NCLB has created a culture of punishment and fear, with student “achievement” measured by highly problematic standardized tests that don’t begin to assess real learning, and teachers evaluated on those test scores and little else. It has narrowed the focus in our schools to reading and math, jettisoned real education in favor of high stakes testing resulting in a plague of cheating scandals, and nurtured a system of “teaching to the test” on top of weeks of school time spent on test taking and nothing else. NCLB set a pie in the sky target of 100% proficiency for all U.S. students by 2014, and as that deadline has approached and the proficiency bar has moved ever higher, more schools have “failed” and more teachers have been blamed.

All this supposed failure and blaming has served as convenient cover to gut public education in states like Pennsylvania, where Governor Corbett and the Republican controlled legislature acted as fast as they could to slash $1 billion from public schools, install voucher-like tax credit programs, and privatize struggling districts, handing their schools over to corporations run by their largest campaign donors. But they had plenty of help from the other side of the aisle, because faced with the relentless media barrage of the failing-narrative, far too many people have lost confidence in public education as a pillar of our democracy.

And this has been happening all across the United States, with the backing of mountains of ultra-right superPAC money and ALEC-inspired legislation as well as major new foundation players including the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Broad Foundation. This is truly a national battle, and we can’t win this fight isolated in our trenches. We need tone-changing leadership from the top.

My report from the grassroots met with a rousing round of applause from attendees and was followed by a series of equally urgent remarks. Larry Feinberg of the Keystone State Education Coalition warned that President Obama’s policies have looked nearly identical to Republicans on education (with the exception of vouchers, which he does not support) and that he may backfire at the polls with teachers and educators. Feinberg sits on the Haverford school board, a wealthy district near Philadelphia, and reminded the President’s staff that middle-class students in well-resourced schools actually score at the top on international tests. We are ignoring poverty while adding ever more testing, which will drastically expand yet again this year in his district and many others. Similarly, Susan Gobreski of Education Voters PA argued that we ought to have a new national narrative of equity, and that we have choices and need to help the public see that we can make different ones.

For their part, the White House advisors and senior USDE staff seemed to agree. Roberto Rodriguez emphasized that we “need more investment in public education, not less” with a focus on early childhood education, curriculum, wrap around programs, and parent engagement. He reported on the 300,000 teaching jobs lost in recent years, noting the economic implications for the U.S. and warned that sequestration – which will happen if congress does not head off looming mandatory budget cuts this fall – will mean billions of dollars cut to Title I, special ed, higher ed, and other student programs.

Massie Ritsch, Deputy Assistant Secretary at the USDE, talked about the fact that NCLB will be up for renewal next year, and that we here at the community level need to keep talking about “the lunacy that this law has allowed to perpetuate.” Yes, those were his actual words. Think about that. Of those Americans who say they are very familiar with NCLB, nearly half now say that the law has made things worse in this country (and only 28% say it’s better). (See “What the Polls Say.”) And here was the top brass at the USDE agreeing, calling the fallout from this federal law “lunacy.”

Deborah Delisle, USDE Assistant Secretary noted that 30 states have now applied for NCLB waivers to gain some flexibility in dealing with its ever more stringent requirements. However, Pennsylvania is not one of them. Many in the room expressed serious frustration with Governor Corbett’s apparent preference to have our schools labeled failures and refusal to seek relief through the waiver program. And it was readily apparent that the PA Department of Education declined to send anyone to this White House forum, which was hardly a meeting of Corbett’s political foes (after all, Students First PA was there: that’s the group that funnels superPAC millions to the campaigns of legislators who promise to deliver vouchers and give away public funds to private and religious schools through tax credit schemes.)

Delisle also commented on the polarizing effect that NCLB has had on our nation. It has created a climate in which those who embrace the corporate-marketplace-inspired reform mantra of choice, competition, and test-based accountability smear professional educators and public school advocates as “defenders of the status quo” who only care about union perks and not children. But this educational “reform” movement of the past decade has been a bit like the king’s new clothes. A wide swath of America has lined the parade route – Republican and Democrat alike – loudly cheering for the king’s beautiful new royal robes of privatization, but there’s nothing there covering his privates.

This “reform” movement is premised on a false idea that American schools have been in steady decline for the past forty years, which is not supported by the evidence. Despite ample data to the contrary, these reformers continue to insist that our students are falling further and further behind their international peers and promote the NCLB inspired narrative of failing public education. (For an excellent analysis of the data, see Diane Ravitch, The Death and Life of the Great American School System.) What’s more, they accuse those who point out the obvious – that privatization is not working, that charter schools and tax credits are draining our public coffers of desperately needed resources, that we have to address the astonishing high rate of child poverty – of being satisfied with the persistent racial achievement gap and using poverty as an excuse.

We are at a cross-roads with public education in our country. If we are going to get serious about making sure that every student has the opportunity to attend a great public school – “A school,” as Assistant Secretary Deborah Delisle said, “that every one of us would send our child to” – then we have to get serious about restoring this country’s belief in the public good of public education. It’s time to name the elephant in the room, have a serious conversation about overhauling NCLB, and make the choice to adequately and equitably fund our public schools.

A reader comments on previous posts (see here and here) about Governor Corbett’s appointment of a voucher advocate to be the “chief recovery officer” for financially stressed Chester Upland, Pennsylvania. This is a district that allocates 1/3 of its scarce budget to a for-profit charter school that pays its owner a management fee of $16 million. Oh, and one other thing: First Lady Michelle Obama invited a teacher from Chester Upland to sit with her during the State of the Union Address earlier this year, presumably to acknowledge the staff’s decision to work without salaries while the district was in deep trouble.

Thanks for bringing the Chester Upland, Pennyslvania scandal to national attention. It is not accidental that this is happening in the poorest school district in the state, with the highest African American percentage in the state, with the worst test results of any district in the state, and where there has been an elected school board in control only two out of the last 18 years. Pity the children.

Thanks to a reader who forwarded this fascinating and informative article about the situation in Chester Upland, Pennsylvania.

I posted previously about the Governor’s appointment of a “recovery officer” to help the district get back on its feet.

The Governor appointed a prominent advocate for vouchers and charters to a position that puts him in complete control of the district and its future. Ironically, the “recovery officer” has been a consultant to the charter school in the district that takes away 1/3 of the district’s stressed budget. The charter school is owned by the governor’s biggest campaign contributor. The charter school owner collects $16 million each year as a management fee.  So many interesting coincidences!

It seems likely that the district won’t get back on its feet. More likely there won’t be a district in the future.

This “recovery officer” law sounds an awful lot like the law permitting the governor in Michigan to appoint emergency financial managers. These EFMs arrive in financially troubled districts and decide that the cure was to close down public education and to hand the children over to for-profit charter chains. The most amazing one is Muskegon Heights, where the district has a $12 million deficit; the for-profit charter chain plans to extract a profit of $8.75 million to $11 million. And that’s just for starters.

Somehow all this seems to be aligned with the ALEC agenda of dismantling public education by fiat, the sooner the better.

It’s Chester Upland and Muskegon Heights today.

Who’s next?

Imagine a governor rushing to the aid of a financially distressed public school district by naming a voucher advocate to run it.

Imagine that this new manager–with unprecedented power to determine the future of the district–has worked as a consultant to the big charter school in the district.

Imagine that the district pays one-third of its budget to that same charter school.

Imagine that the very wealthy owner of the charter school collects $16 million a year in “management fees” from the charter school budget.

Imagine that this same businessman who owns the charter and collects $16 million a year is also the single biggest contributor to the governor.

What, you can’t imagine such a thing could happen?

Neither could I.

It’s too improbable, too outrageous.

Why the national press would be all over this story, wouldn’t they?

Imagine that.

Sometimes something happens that is so astonishing, so breathtaking, and simultaneously so disturbing that I don’t know how to characterize it.

The public school district of Chester-Upland, Pennsylvania, is in financial trouble. It was under state control for many years. It was at one time managed by the Edison company. After years of inept state management, it was returned to local control in 2010. It has a for-profit charter school run by a politically connected millionaire that has attracted half the students in the district. The New York Times wrote about how the charter school was being sued by and losing resources to what one educator described as a “charter school on steroids.” The district went bankrupt earlier this year, and the teachers and staff worked without salaries. There have been massive layoffs and budget cuts and the facilities are in disrepair.

One way of looking at Chester Upland is that it has been brought down by state interference, state abandonment of its responsibilities, fumbled efforts at privatization, an inadequate tax base, poverty, budget cuts, and competition with a voracious charter school that sucks millions of dollars out of the underfunded public schools.

Education is a state responsibility. So what is the state doing to preserve public education for the children of Chester Upland?

Ron Tomalis, the secretary of education for the state of Pennsylvania, has appointed Joe Watkins as recovery manager for the school district. Joe Watkins is the head of the PAC in the state that advocates for school choice.

According to the local newspaper: “Watkins is the pastor of Christ Evangelical Church in Philadelphia and a Republican political analyst for MSNBC.
Watkins also is both a registered lobbyist and the chairman for Students First, an advocacy group supporting “comprehensive school choice.” Students First donated thousands of dollars to the campaign of Republican Gov. Tom Corbett, according to published reports…Having since appointed Watkins as Chester Upland’s chief recovery officer, the school board now has 14 days to determine whether it will work with Watkins to develop a financial recovery plan. If the board declines, Tomalis can petition the courts to place Chester Upland under receivership. The financial recovery plan can include closing schools, cutting staff and transforming schools into charters.”

What do you think will happen to the public schools of Chester Upland?

An astonishing $6 million plus has been pumped into the voucher campaign in Pennsylvania in the last year alone.

As this article notes, Tea Party activists were getting cold feet about vouchers because they objected that vouchers might be too generous to poor children.

Not to worry: Governor Tom Corbett and his allies in the Legislature changed the formula to make sure that some of the hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars will be spread to more affluent districts.

All this money for vouchers will be extracted from public school budgets at the same time that Corbett & Co. are cutting those same budgets.

It seems as though the Republican conservatives want to decimate public education.

Who are these people?

In little more than a year, activists like Michigan’s Betsy DeVos, of the Amway fortune; the heirs of Wal-Mart founder Sam Walton; and three wealthy Main Line hedge-fund traders have doled out an astonishing $6-million-plus in campaign cash to top Harrisburg pols, while they and allies have spent millions more on rallies, inflammatory mailers and lobbyists.

Betsy DeVos’s group, the American Federation for Children, pushes for vouchers under the guise of it being a “civil rights” issue. Just trust the rightwing to protect the civil rights of poor children. And then there is the Walton family, which gives generously to anyone who promotes vouchers and charters (as well as TFA and KIPP and Rhee). And of course, the hedge fund managers. These are the 1%. They don’t have any use for public education. They use their vast resources to undermine the public sector and to advance the cause of privatization.

 

I just received this comment. This parent should be invited to appear on NBC’s “Education Nation,” on Morning Joe, on Rachel Maddow, on CNN’s “Newsroom,” and on any other talk show, most of which put people on camera who have never been public school parents or teachers or principals. She is more knowledgeable than Michelle Rhee or Bill Gates or any of the other “reformers”:

Dear Dr. Ravitch,I was composing my own letter to Frank Bruni early this morning, and didn’t see your post until later. Thanks, as always, for your advocacy. Below is a copy of the letter I emailed to Mr. Bruni this morning.

Sincerely,
Rebecca Poyourow

Dear Mr. Bruni,

While I usually enjoy your opinion articles, I was dismayed by yesterday’s article on parent trigger laws. It seems to me that you do not know much about the issue and are relying for your talking points on the PR campaigns of the groups that support them, ironically not grass-roots parents’ groups but primarily astroturf groups with financial, policy, and personnel links reaching back to groups like ALEC (groups which you are certainly no fan of when it comes to their impact on other policy areas).

You seem to take for granted several ideas I would challenge you on: (1) that American public schools and teachers are failing, (2) that middle-class families should desert urban, public schools, (3) that charter schools are the answer to any problems in the current public educational system, and (4) that parent trigger laws would a helpful tool for remedying problems.

For the record, I am a parent with two children in my neighborhood public school in Philadelphia. Our school manages to hold together and serve well a coalition of low-income, blue-collar, and middle-class families with striking racial as well as socioeconomic diversity in a Philadelphia neighborhood–61% of our students are economically disadvantaged, 45% white, 45% black, 5% Latino, and 5% multiracial and other designations. We are not a rich school and cannot stage fundraisers such as the ones held by the Upper West Side public schools in NYC profiled in the NYT earlier this summer. In fact, we (and all public schools in PA) were hit hard by the education budget cuts enacted when a wave of extremist state legislators came into our state government in 2010. $1 billion has been cut from public education statewide in PA, and it has impacted our school heavily, raising class sizes while stripping the school of necessary teaching and support personnel, contracting the curriculum (music and language teachers were cut last year, and the school had no money previously for an art teacher), and leaving kids behind academically without the tutoring previously provided.

Yet our school remains strong, continuing to make AYP and to attract neighborhood parents, primarily because of the cross-class coalition using the school. Even if we haven’t raised $1 million for our school, many parents volunteer, run after-school clubs, and try to solicit community resources to help the school provide what has been eliminated because of cuts at the state level. The reward is that our children get to attend an integrated, academically sound public school in our city neighborhood that is open to all. We are part of a growing movement in several cities (including NYC) that has parents choosing to invest their time and energy in public schools, not only for their own families’ good but to strengthen the fabric of their neighborhoods and cities.

Which brings me back to your op-ed. I am a public school parent–not a teacher and not a union employee. I find the representations of the state of public education in the U.S. promulgated by films such as “Won’t Back Down” and “Waiting for Superman” to be harmful and inaccurate depictions of the current dilemmas faced by public school students, parents, and teachers.

Private schools have done a good sales job over the last decade or so, feeding the cultural panic among middle-class parents, creating anxieties in them that they cannot use the public schools and must purchase high-priced private schooling, tutoring, etc. at any price if their children are to succeed in life academically and economically. However, it is the class and educational background of parents that is the most critical variable in children’s success. While many currently make the claim (which you echo) that U.S. public schools are way behind other countries, when socioeconomic class is taken into account, American students do as well or better than the countries we say we wish to emulate. It is poverty that is our greatest problem. Middle-class children who attend urban public schools, even those in schools with very low average scores, do fine. If we want to solve the educational crisis that does exist for kids from low-income families, then creating jobs, stable health care, and an economic security net for their families is one key–and finding ways to create schools integrated by race and socioeconomic background is another–and providing appropriate funding, early childhood education, and smaller classes is a third.

The voucher, charter school, and parent trigger movements aim in precisely the opposite direction by draining public schools of funds desperately needed in this climate of scarcity and creating a two-tier system of schools, segregating kids even further by race, class, English language learner status, and disability. Indeed as the CREDO study by Stanford University shows, charter schools do not provide better educational opportunities; many provide worse. The people behind the push for parent trigger laws are not idealistic parents but chain charter operators hoping to expand their profits at the public expense–and their right-wing backers hoping to undermine our understanding of education as a public good. I hope you do some research on this topic and reconsider your opinion.

Sincerely,
Rebecca Poyourow (a usually appreciative reader)

According to the state of Pennsylvania, the Hazleton Area High School is a low performing school.

One day its staff may be fired and the school may be closed and replaced by privately managed charter schools, or who knows, its students may be sent to register for online homeschooling.

But a Pennsylvania reader says that a member of the Mars rover team is a graduate of this high school. What gives?

 

PSSA testing in Pennsylvania

Dr. Jill Tombasco Seubert is a 2001 graduate from Hazleton Area High School, a school just designated by Pennsylvania as a low performing school. She was part of the team that just landed the Mars Curiosity rover. Can such a “bad” school (according to the test) produce such a brilliant scientist? Here’s a quote from the article:

“The Jet Propulsion Laboratory has the world’s best track record in deep space exploration, but everything about this landing event was more difficult and had never been demonstrated in spaceflight before. No matter how confident we were that the mission would succeed, we still partook in the traditional ‘good luck peanuts,'” the 2001 Hazleton Area High School graduate wrote in an email to the Standard-Speaker.

Here is the link:

http://citizensvoice.com/news/area-native-played-role-in-mars-landing-1.1357757

A few things we know about the Pittsburgh public schools.

They were led by Broad-trained superintendent Mark Roosevelt. Now they are led by his deputy Linda Lane, also trained by the unaccredited Broad Superintendents Academy.

They received a $40 million grant from the Gates Foundation for teacher evaluation.

They have a bold plan to close the achievement gap.

Scores in 2012 in Pittsburgh dropped for the first time in five years.

Scores dropped across the state and it may have been because of heightened security. 

A Pittsburgh parent posted this comment:

Don’t forget our Broad influence either — our “reforms” were begun with Mark Roosevelt being named superintendent with the backing of a foundation supported “community watchdog group.” He was replaced by his second in command and also a Broadie, Linda Lane. He said when he left that he’d “planted the garden” and all we had to do know was to tend the growth. We just got a new Broad fellow this year, too, to join our crop. Teachers have been furloughed, but administration has been doing fine.

A reader of this blog who teaches in the Pittsburgh school posted the following comment:

I teach in Pittsburgh Public Schools and can attest to conditions in Pittsburgh being similar to those faced by children and teachers and parents around the country. Simultaneously, the social fabric of the lives of our children and their parents has become more and more unraveled (jobs, housing, income, public transit, cost of higher ed, etc. wrecking havoc) AND their schools are victims of radical budget cuts and huge focus on curriculum modified to get those test scores up AND teachers, as everywhere, are vilified and furloughed and humiliated and attacked. But we teachers and our union keep doing our best to hold our heads up and keep our eyes on the real only important thing, and that is trying to hold things together for our beautiful children. And we will keep doing that, because that’s who we are. There is so much more to our children and our schools and our teachers than these test scores. Of course.

The $2 billion William Penn Foundation has funded the Philadelphia Student Union for 17 years.

However, the student union does not support the foundation’s radical plan to privatize large numbers of public schools in Philadelphia.

Surprise! The William Penn Foundation will no longer fund the Philadelphia Student Union.

William Penn, the large-hearted man for whom the foundation is named, would not approve.

It’s a shame that the richest members of society use their money to stifle dissent from the plans that they are foisting on the poorest members of society.

The youth of Philadelphia should be listened to, not just the Boston Consulting Group.