You will enjoy reading this interview with parent activist Kemala Karmen. She grew up in Louisiana in a family of activists, experienced racial discrimination, and now lives in New York City, where she is active in the Opt Out movement and works with film maker Michael Elliott.
How do we start a revolution and change education for the better for every student?
Start by learning from Kemala.
This is a stunning and shocking expose by Mercedes Schneider, who has corresponded with a teacher at one of the Bay Area Rocketship charters and fed her documents about standard practices and policies. This is a scary documentation of child abuse.
A small sample:
“In a description of the “charter school nightmares” blog, “rkshp employee” notes the following:
“More about my school. We have:
no cafeteria
no school nurse
no on-site custodian
no school library
school is 7:45 – 4 PM (8.25+ hours) daily
recess is 15 minutes
lunch is 15 minutes and kids are not allowed to talk during lunch
every student (from pre-K to 5th grade) has mandatory computer class for 90 minutes a day
“In another post, “rkshp employee” notes, “Our 3 principals are all TFA (Teach for America) alum.””
This is worse than Dickensian.
If we had a functioning Office for Civil Rights in the U.S. Department of Education, it would launch an immediate investigation.
This is child abuse. Why do parents put their children in these absive institutions?
Tom Ultican writes a warning about a program called the National Math and Science Initiative.
“The National Math and Science Initiative (NMSI) was founded by a group of Dallas area lawyers and businessmen. Tom Luce is identified as the founder and Rex Tillerson, the CEO of ExxonMobil and present US Secretary of State, provided the financing…
“Tom Luce is a lawyer not an educator but his fingerprints are all over some of the worst education policies in the history of our country. His bio at the George W. Bush Whitehouse archives says, “… Luce is perhaps best known for his role in 1984 as the chief of staff of the Texas Select Committee of Public Education, which produced one of the first major reform efforts among public schools.” The chairman of that committee was Ross Perot.”
Luce can claim credit for Texas’ expensive and wasteful obsession with testing and data. Hundreds of millions of dollars—maybe billions—were squandered by Texas in pursuit of data and scores. Thanks, Tom Luce.
Ultican writes:
“Mark Twain said, “To a man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail.” For Ross Perot, the founder of Electronic Data Systems the problems in education looked like data problems. He and his Chief of Staff, Tom Luce, decided standardized testing and data analysis were the prescription for failing public schools. Unfortunately, standardized testing is totally useless for analyzing learning and public schools were not actually failing.
“Tom Luce was also directly involved in implementing NCLB (a spectacular education reform failure) while serving at the US Department of Education.”
So Luce helped deploy billions of dollars more in data gathering.
Now the NSMI is promoting Luce’s philosophy of teach to the test and bribes.
The fact that these policies have failed dramatically for 15 years at the national level and for 30 years in Texas does not slow the momentum of their advocates.
One of the most remarkable turnarounds in the nation happened in Ohio. There have been so many charter scandals that the major newspapers have become skeptical, as well they should be. They have noticed the scams, frauds, phantom schools, phantom students. They’ve noticed how many charters get scores lower than the public schools they were supposed to compete with.
They are no longer entranced by the marketing of the charter school industry.
In Ohio, the biggest scandal is the Electronic Classroom of Tomorrow, known as ECOT.
This editorial appeared in the Columbus Dispatch. The editorial board is no longer fooled by the charter industry.
It was founded in 2000. It developed some very bad habits that cheated the public of millions of dollars.
“Alas, the school’s owner, who had no background in education, began to realize that education is really hard. And keeping the attention of at-risk students is really, really hard. The owner began to realize that many students who signed up for his school almost never logged in. Didn’t show up. His virtual classroom was half-empty. But tracking down these students and hounding them to get online and learn something would be time-consuming, expensive and, in many cases, nearly impossible.
“The owner quickly realized something else. Keeping an honest account of how many students were logging in to meet state attendance requirements would reduce the amount he could charge the state — by millions of dollars. Every year. The owner made an unfortunate choice. He decided to charge the state for a full year of instruction for each student signed up, even if a student logged in for only a few minutes each month.
“This is the sad story of ECOT — the Electronic Classroom of Tomorrow, Ohio’s largest online charter school. Since its founding in 2000, the school consistently has billed the state for students whose participation it could not document.
“In November 2001, then-State Auditor Jim Petro determined ECOT received $1.7 million for students not enrolled. Despite these early warnings, ECOT continued to charge Ohio’s taxpayers for phantom students, in increasing numbers.
“State audits from 2000 to 2016 revealed how lucrative this pattern has been for ECOT owner Bill Lager. Although organized as a nonprofit, ECOT contracts with two Lager-owned, for-profit entities for management and software services. From 2000 to 2016, ECOT paid the two businesses a tidy $192.8 million.
“At long last, in 2016 the Department of Education had had enough. It began insisting on honest accounting. After reviewing log-in durations and offline documentation for the 2015-2016 school year, the department concluded ECOT had reported 15,322 full-time students, while only 6,313 could be verified. The State Board of Education required ECOT to repay about $60 million of the $108 million it had received.
“This upset the owner. So he sued the state and its taxpayers, claiming the education department has no right to look under the hood, no right to check whether students actually are logging in. Fortunately, this argument was rejected by both the Franklin County Common Pleas Court and Court of Appeals. The case now is before the Ohio Supreme Court.”
ECOT has the lowest graduation rate in the nation.
How much longer will the taxpayers of Ohio allow this “school” to collect millions for students who never participated in class?
The American Civil Liberties Union issued a blistering report about the charter industry in Arizona, claiming that charters choose their students, instead of the other way around.
The title of the report is Schools Choosing Students: How Arizona Charter Schools Engage in Illegal and Exclusionary Student Enrollment Practices and How It Should Be Fixed
The 26-page report begins:
In the 1990s, Arizona became one of the nation’s rst adopters of charter schools. The vision was to give parents more academic choices for their children and to provide learning environments more tailored to students’ individual needs. In many cases, however, Arizona’s charter school program has had the opposite result: Charter schools are choosing students who fit their mold.
Indeed, more than two decades after charter schools emerged in Arizona, admission policies and procedures at many of the state’s charter schools unlawfully exclude some students or create barriers to their enrollment. Many schools have been able to get away with exclusionary practices for years without accountability.
Though charter schools operate independently, they are part of Arizona’s
public education system and use taxpayer funds. As such, they are required to “enroll
all eligible pupils who submit a timely application.”1 If more students apply than
can be accommodated, schools can randomly select students through a lottery system.2
Arizona charter schools are also forbidden from discriminating against students on the basis of “ethnicity, national origin, gender, income level, disabling condition, proficiency in the English language or athletic ability.”3
But an analysis of Arizona charter schools’ enrollment materials shows many schools have policies and procedures that are clearly illegal or exclusionary. Speci cally, out of the 471 Arizona charter schools that were analyzed,
at least 262, or 56 percent, have policies that are clear violations of the law or that may discourage the enrollment of certain students.
Do you think that Betsy DeVos cares? Will the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights take action to reduce and eliminate illegal discrimination?
Mark Weber, aka Jersey Jazzman, worked with Bruce Baker at Rutgers University to review the progress of the “reforms” (aka privatization and disruption) in Newark. This post is the first in a series that will summarize their findings.
The National Education Policy Center published a lengthy report written by Dr. Bruce Baker and myself that looks closely at school “reform” in Newark. I wrote a short piece about our report at NJ Spotlight that gives summarizes our findings. We’ve also got a deep dive into the data for our report at the NJ Education Policy website.
You might be wondering why anyone outside of New Jersey, let alone Newark, should care about what we found. Let me give you a little background before I try to answer that question…
In 2010, Mark Zuckerberg, the CEO and founder of Facebook, went on the The Oprah Winfrey Show and announced that he was giving $100 million in a challenge grant toward the improvement of Newark’s schools. Within the next couple of years, Newark had a new superintendent, Cami Anderson. Anderson attempted to implement a series of “reforms” that were supposed to improve student achievement within the city’s entire publicly-financed school system.
In the time following the Zuckerberg donation, Newark has often been cited by “reformers” as a proof point. It has a large and growing charter school sector, it implemented a teacher contract with merit pay, it has a universal enrollment system, it “renewed” public district schools by churning school leadership, it implemented Common Core early (allegedly), and so on.
So when research was released this fall that purported to show that students had made “educationally meaningful improvements” in student outcomes, “reformers” both in and out of New Jersey saw it as a vindication. Charter schools are not only good — they don’t harm public schools, because they “do more with less.” Disruption in urban schools is good, because the intractable bureaucracies in these districts needs to be shredded. Teachers unions are impeding student learning because we don’t reward the best teachers and get rid of the worst…
And so on. If Newark’s student outcomes have improved, it has to be because these and other received truths of the “reformers” must be true.
But what if the data — including the research recently cited by Newark’s “reformers” — doesn’t show Newark has improved? What if other factors account for charter school “successes”? What if the test score gains in the district, relative to other, similar districts, isn’t unique, or educationally meaningful? What if all the “reforms” supposedly implemented in Newark weren’t actually put into place? What if the chaos and strife that has dogged Newark’s schools during this “reform” period hasn’t been worth it?
What if Newark, NJ isn’t an example of “reform” leading to success, but is instead a cautionary tale?
These are the questions we set out to tackle. And in the next series of posts here, I am going to lay out, in great detail, exactly what we found, and explain what the Newark “reform” experiment is actually telling us about the future of American education.
[I am reposting this because it was wrongly attributed to Richard Schwartz, when in fact, as I just learned, it was written by the brilliant educator and photographer Susan Lee Schwartz. She sent it to me using her husband’s email, which caused my confusion.]
As readers know, I wrote an article <a href="http://www.detroitnews.com/story/opinion/2017/12/13/charter-schools/108585724/“>about how to help Detroit public schools. After 25 years of charters, it should be obvious that they have failed and they are now the status quo.
In response, a Michigan blogger associated with the DeVos-funded Mackinac Center misleadingly summarized my article as a plea for “sports teams,” when in fact it made the straightforward proposal that poor kids need what rich kids expect to get every day. But my critic insisted—absurdly—that my big ask was for “sports teams.”
Then came a rebuttal by our friend Susan Schwartz:
“I have been saying for a long time now, that no society or civilization survives if the decisions they make are based on lies.
“In this post-truth society, where propaganda is permitted to compete with facts in the name of ‘free speech, genuine journalism is Not practiced. In this day of ‘balanced’ news, where every opinion gets to be aired as if it truthful, serious conversation is impossible.
“An example of this appeared before me today, regarding the subject of the truth about charter schools. You see, I read and write at the blog of Dr. Diane Ravitch, a brilliant, dedicated educator who was Ass’t Sec’y of State for Bush — who told him how his NCLB act would end public education.
“She is one of Politico’s MOST ‘IMPORTANT AMERICANS’ and is recognized as the top Academic in America; Thus, the Detroit News invited her to write a plan to revive education in Detroit — a city which has been a Petri dish for reformers for 25 years, and where Everything they tried has failed.,
“Diane wrote this proposal.
“Today, she writes about “the response ” that the paper published. “He or she ignored everything I said to focus on what I mentioned in passing… claiming that I believe what public schools need is sports teams. Sports teams? What about the arts, a full curriculum, experienced teachers, small classes, a nurse and social worker, well-tended facilities, robotics, dramatics? Nope. Just “sports teams.””What about “poor kids need what rich kids take for granted.” Nope.”The writer is defending a failed status quo.”DIane’s article was clearly hitting some nerves, otherwise the misrepresentations and defense of charters would not be so calculated to ridicule what she actually wrote.
“Diane, my dear friend, the Daily News ‘balanced’ your expert report with the propaganda from The Mackinac Center for Public Policy– a non-profit free market think tank headquartered in Midland, Michigan — a well-known critic of public institutions, unions, and anything that is not clearly captured for profits.
“No wonder American cannot figure out anything. No wonder so many Alabamans can be sold a predator as a senatorial candidate.
“And, at this moment, the GOP ‘s media is selling a tax plan that is GRAND THEFT from the pockets of the middle class.
“Sigh!”
Thank you, Susan.
Mackinac, stop lying.
MACKINAC, STOP LYING, EVEN THOUGH YOU ARE PAID TO DO SO.
What is laughingly called “Reform” is actually an interrelated group of education policies that have failed repeatedly. Reformers are never discouraged by failure. They ignore evidence. They like to fund any effort that will demoralize teachers and lead to privatization of public schools.
Laura Chapman reviews some of the current crop of reform efforts built on guess, conjecture, and ideology.
She writes:
“The Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation is trying to dominate policy in Kansas City. It has a parallel in Indianapolis called the Mind Trust.
“The Kauffman Foundation is part of the Education Cities network promoting “new” and “great” schools, but it is not just a member. It is a major contributor to that network, along with the Broad, Walton Family, Bill and Melinda Gates, Michael and Susan Dell foundations. Education Cities is part of a large network of “reform” organizations.
“Empower Schools.org, for example, is an adjunct to Education Cities. Empower Schools says: “We work with policymakers and education system leaders to adopt “Third Way” policies, structures, and strategies that allow for schools of all types, including both traditional district schools and schools led by proven and promising independent leaders. We capture and share the most promising Third Way practices to inform and shape the national conversation on education reform.”
“In other words, Empower Schools is far more than a starter of a “conversations.” The network connects 18 programs/organizations, among these the New Teacher Project, Relay Graduate School of Education, Teach for America, and others intent on de-professionalizing education.
Click to access An-introduction-to-the-Third-Way.pdf
“The Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation also funds the “Education Innovation Cluster” initiative, part of a USDE funded Digital Promise program (Obama era) and intended to bring together in one mega network people and groups identified as entrepreneurs, funders, researchers, educators, and other community stakeholders (families, local government, non-profits) to “design, launch, iterate on, and disseminate breakthrough learning practices and tools.”
“Breakthrough learning practices and tools” really refers the expanded use of on-line learning, competency-based awards such as badges and certificates for students and teacher education, learning enabled with mobile devices and so on. USDE appears to have outsourced this program http://nextgenlearning.org/blog/education-innovation-clusters-help-way
“The Kauffman Foundation has also been praised as a reason for Kansas City to be included in The U.S. Education Innovation Index: Prototype and Report, a rating system for cities released in September 2016 by Bellwether Education and the Digital Promise Innovation Clusters.
“This index measures “innovation activities “and conditions of urban schools along 42 indicators in nine categories: Innovation Culture (e.g., mayor control, Gates compact); Need for Academic Improvement ( e.g., scores of schools on state tests), Collaboration and Coordination Mechanisms (e.g., OneApp), Talent Supply and Quality (TFA a plus), Innovation-Supporting Institutions (e.g., the Kauffman Foundation in Kansas City, the Mind Trust in Indianapolis).
Innovation-Friendly Policies ( e.g., tax incentives) , Innovation Investment (venture capital flowing to education startups), District Deviation (a measure of how public schools budget money across eight categories compared to other similar school districts in the state), and Dynamism (a fancy word referring to the opening and closing of schools, market churn for schools). More detail on the rating system is outlined in Table A2: “Indicator Scoring Method.”
“This “innovation index” project from Bellwether was inspired by a similar effort on an international scale and funded by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) http://www.oecd.org/unitedstates/Measuring-Innovation-in-Education-USA.pdf.
“Bellwether’s index was also influenced by another index, published in 2013: Alive in the SwAmp 3. Assessing DigitAl innovAtions in eDucAtion.” That quirky typeface is in the title. The title is also prescient.
“Alive in the Swamp was published with support from Pearson, NewSchools (venture philanthropy), and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. It features colorful charts to show the potential influence of technology on learning and color-coded rating scheme for digital innovation in education.
“One of the authors of the digital index is Michael Fullan, a distinguished Canadian scholar in education whose ideas have been used to develop a “School Quality Improvement Index for California’s “CORE” distracts. The second author, Katelyn Donnelly, is an economist and director of Pearson’s venture fund for low-cost schools in the developing world. The examples of innovation cited in the report include Rocketship Education, School of One, Kahn Academy, and Learn Zillion, each of these rated for likelihood of producing “transformative outcomes.” These examples certainly tell us about inhabitants and supporters of the swamp-lands in education. See especially, page 13 and Appendix A.”
The Detroit News invited me to write a plan to revive education in Detroit.
Detroit has been a Petri dish for reformers for 25 years. Everything they tried has failed.
Here is my proposal.
http://www.detroitnews.com/story/opinion/2017/12/13/charter-schools/108585724/
Edwin Rios of Mother Jones writes here about the early Christmas gifts that Congress has included in its tax plans for Betsy DeVos.
True, she didn’t get that tax break for Hillsdale College, which her brother Erik attended. That was a stocking stuffer. She gots plenty of other goodies, under the DeVos tree.
For starters, the Senate plan includes a provision that will help the private and religious schools DeVos has long championed: an expansion of a tax-free college savings program to include families who put their kids in private K-12 schools or even those who homeschool. At the same time, changes to state and local tax deductions could put a strain on how districts fund the very public schools DeVos is tasked with overseeing. And that doesn’t include several attempts Republican senators made to put provisions in the bill that favored religious schools and incentivized school choice, including a tax credit for corporations and individuals to nonprofits that provide scholarships.
“This bill,” says Noelle Ellerson Ng, associate executive director of policy at AASA, the association of the country’s public school superintendents, “is designed to prioritize the privatization of education.” Specifically, she argues, the Republican tax plans could both undermine public school financing and encourage private school attendance.
First, thanks to Vice President Mike Pence’s tie-breaking vote, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) added an amendment expanding 529 college savings accounts to allow parents to withdraw up to $10,000 each year for private and secondary K-12 schools. Cruz’s amendment also incentivizes families to use account funds for educational expenses and therapies for students with disabilities “in connection with a homeschool.” (At one point, the measure expanded college savings account eligibility to include unborn children, but the provision was removed because it failed to comply with the “Byrd Rule,” which blocks changes in the measure that don’t directly relate to taxes.)
“Expanding 529s to include any educational option,” DeVos told the Associated Press, “is a common-sense reform that reflects the reality that we must begin to view education as an investment in individual students, not systems.”
Expanding college savings accounts to cover K-12 private schools and homeschooling would “make it easier for people to choose out of public education.”
While some school choice advocates welcome the expansion of these savings accounts, others, like Michael Petrilli of the conservative think tank Thomas Fordham Institute, point out that the 529 savings program mostly benefits wealthy families and wouldn’t likely help low- and middle-class families. Mathew Chingos, a senior fellow and director of the education policy program at the Urban Institute, told Mother Jones in November that the expansion represents “a decent-sized government handout to people who would send their kid to private school anyway.” Ellerson Ng agreed, noting that the expansion of college savings accounts to cover K-12 private schools and homeschooling would “make it easier for people to choose out of public education.”
The Senate tax plan would also scale back state and local tax deductions (SALT), a move that Ellerson Ng warns could put pressure on already-squeezed state and local budgets. Originally, the Senate plan proposed eliminating all deductions for income, property, and other taxes, a move that could have resulted in a loss of $370 billion in state and local revenue over 10 years and put 370,000 education jobs at risk, according to an analysis by the National Education Association. But senators changed course and added a provision put forward by Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) that would allow people to deduct up to $10,000 in state and local property taxes.
Nora Gordon, an associate professor at Georgetown University’s McCourt School of Public Policy, wrote that changes to state and local tax deductions could make it harder for districts to raise revenue to fund public schools. Ending deductions on federal income, Gordon wrote, would make taxpayers who use them “less likely to vote for policies that could raise their state and local tax bills in the future.”
/em>
