Archives for category: Pennsylvania

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.

 

 

A columnist in Pennsylvania reports that the billionaire Koch brothers are disappointed by Governor Tom Corbett.

They feel that he didn’t push his voucher bill hard enough, so they are planning a major advertising campaign to put pressure on legislators.

There is no reason for them to pay attention to the unimpressive results of twenty-one years of vouchers in Milwaukee, where kids in voucher schools got no better test scores than their peers in public schools. And no reason to pay attention to vouchers in D.C., where there were no test scores gains in either math or reading.

What matters most is to break the public education system.

If you are a historian, you have to have a long memory or know where to find out what you need to know.

I remember when charters first started. One of the arguments that charter advocates made was that they would cost less; they would be more efficient and would save the taxpayers’ money. After all, they wouldn’t have all those administrators and overhead found in public schools.

But as time goes by, charters are forgetting the original promise (they never made them) and demanding parity with public schools.

That’s the purpose of the “Gates Compact,” where the Gates Foundation gives a district a big cash award if they agree to treat charters on equal footing with public schools.

And now we see charters in Pennsylvania making a plea to up their state reimbursement for tuition.

In a time of fiscal austerity, every dollar that goes to charters comes out of the budget for public education, meaning less money for public schools.

Charters are learning that the cost of education is what it is, unless you pay teachers less or make a point of having large numbers of young, inexperienced teachers who are at the bottom of the salary scale. Or, go online, in which case, students can be put in front of a computer and the virtual class size may be 50 or more, with none of those pesky brick-and-mortar expenses, like heating, cooling, custodians, a school nurse, a library, etc.