Archives for category: School Choice

Here is an event you won’t want to miss:

CONSIDER IT: SCHOOL CHOICE AND THE CASES FOR TRADITIONAL PUBLIC EDUCATION AND CHARTER SCHOOLS

September 19 @ 5:00 PM – 8:00 PM Hilton Reading

Berks County Community Foundation
Panelists:

Carol Corbett Burris: Executive Director of the Network for Public Education

Alyson Miles: Deputy Director of Government Affairs for the American Federation for Children

James Paul: Senior Policy Analyst at the Commonwealth Foundation

Dr. Julian Vasquez Heilig: Professor of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies and the Director of the Doctorate in Educational Leadership at California State University Sacramento

Karin Mallett: The WFMZ TV anchor and reporter returns as the moderator

School choice has been a hot topic in Berks County, in part due to a lengthy and costly dispute between the Reading School District and I-LEAD Charter School.

The topic has also been in the national spotlight as President Trump and U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos have focused on expanding education choice.

With this in mind, a discussion on school choice is being organized as part of Berks County Community Foundation’s Consider It initiative. State Sen. Judy Schwank and Berks County Commissioners Chairman Christian Leinbach are co-chairs of this nonpartisan program, which is designed to promote thoughtful discussion of divisive local and national issues while maintaining a level of civility among participants.

The next Consider It Dinner will take place Tuesday, September 19, 2017, at 5 p.m. at the DoubleTree by Hilton Reading, 701 Penn St., Reading, Pa. Tickets are available here. For $10 each, tickets include dinner, the panel discussion, reading material, and an opportunity to participate in the conversation.

https://bccf.org/event/consider-it-2017/

The One Wisconsin Institute compiled a list of the organizations that have been funded by the far-right Bradley Foundation of Milwaukee. It is a remarkable documentation of the largesse that is showered on advocates for privatization of public schools.

You will notice the relationship with Betsy DeVos’ American Federation for Children, adding more shekels to the school choice honey pot. DeVos’ AFC has pumped millions of dollars into Wisconsin legislative races to assure that its privatization agenda is protected by the legislature. We are reminded again that our Secretary of Education is an extremist who opposes public schools.

Bradley-funded activities work to prevent any accountability or audits for private schools that receive public funds. And they seek every opportunity to siphon money away from public schools to benefit voucher schools.

Among the notable recipients of Bradley funding:

*American Enterprise Institute (where EdWeek blogger Rick Hess is education director) received $4.3 million from their Bradley paymasters.

*Black Alliance for Educational Options (founded by Howard Fuller) got $1,475,000. BAEO sends speakers to black communities to try to persuade them that charters and vouchers are best for black children. You can be sure that BAEO does not tell its audiences that its activities are funded by a rightwing foundation run by reactionary white men.

*Center for Education Reform, run by former Heritage Foundation aide Jeanne Allen, which exists to smear public schools and promote privatization. 620,000.

*Center for Union Facts, led by PR man Rick Berman, whose goal is to defame teachers’ unions: $1,550,000. About 10 years ago, I attended a meeting of the rightwing Philanthropy Roundtable, where Berman gave a pitch for funding, based on his campaign to demonized the New Jersey Educational Association. When I asked him to explain why the top-performing states are unionized, and the lowest are not, he answered: I am a PR man, not an educator.

*Charter Growth Fund: $28 million. Not familiar with this one, but it serves to remind us that charter schools are high priority for the extremists of the right.

*Donors Trust, $3.1 million. An organization assembled by the Koch brothers and Dezvos family to funnel money to pet causes while hiding the donors’ identity. Dark money.

*Foundation for Excellence in Education, $435,000. Jeb Bush’s pastime.

*Heartland Institute, $647,500. Rightwing think tank.

*Heritage Foundation, $623,500. The senior citizen of far-right think tanks.

*Hoover Institution, $1.6 million. Sponsor of Education Next and other school choice initiatives.

*Marquette University, $1.7 million. This may be another subsidy for Howard Fuller and the Black Alliance for Educational Options, since Fuller is based at Marquette.

*National Council on Teacher Quality, $445,000. This organization was founded by the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute with the explicit purpose of harassing traditional teacher education programs. Started as a maverick, this rightwing group now grades teacher education institutions for US News & World Report and is quoted by the mainstream media as if it were a credible source.

*Partnership for Educational Justice, $200,000. This is Campbell Brown’s organization, whose goal is to eliminate teachers’ rights and unions.

*Rocketship Education, $375,000. The charter chain that piputs poor kids on computers.

*Thomas B. Fordham Institute, $522,000. One rightwing foundation funding another.

*University of Washington, $500,000. This would be a subsidy for Paul Hill’s Center on Reinventing Public Education, which promotes portfolio districts. You know, like stock portfolios.

That’s a sampling.

Think about this list of handouts the next time some rightwingers complains about unions subsidizing civil rights groups. No equivalency.

The report can be found here.

Alexandra Neason wrote an excellent and comprehensive article in Harper’s about the aggressive school choice movement in Arizona, which has been chipping away at public education for more than two decades.

She begins her story by focusing on a hard-working teacher of children with disabilities. She teaches in a windowless trailer. Her starting salary was $31,000. Now, after several years, she is earning $40,000. She buys supplies for her classroom and her students.

The legislature and the governor oppose public education. First, they introduced charters, which are unregulated and engage freely in nepotism and conflicts of interest. Then, they began shifting public funds to voucher programs.

This spring, while public school districts serving minority families and disabled children couldn’t afford basic supplies or comforts, Arizona’s legislature approved the broadest, most flexible interpretation of what Betsy DeVos, the secretary of education, and her allies tout as “school choice.” Governor Douglas Anthony Ducey, buoyed by fellow Republicans on both sides of the statehouse, signed a law expanding Empowerment Scholarship Accounts, Arizona’s take on school vouchers. Typically, vouchers use tax dollars to pay private institutions; through E.S.A.’s, money that could otherwise fund public education is loaded directly onto debit cards that select parents can use to subsidize private tuition and related expenses. Similar programs exist elsewhere — in Florida, Mississippi, and Tennessee — though those limit eligibility to families with children who are disabled; Nevada developed an unrestricted program, but courts have blocked its funding. More than any other state, Arizona has managed to bolster E.S.A.’s as a way to advance alternatives to traditional schooling. That makes it a model for conservatives across the country, yet Piehl and her colleagues view the legislature’s decision as the latest example of a disturbing trend: divestment from public education.

Today, Arizona is home to more than 500 charters, both nonprofit and for-profit. And its legislature is eager to divert more money to religious and private schools.

500 charters — both not-for-profit and for-profit — operate throughout the state.

In 1997, Arizona further expanded its school choice offerings by passing the nation’s first tax-credit program for education. Through this program, people could donate money to nonprofit organizations that had established scholarships for kids to attend private schools; the donor would receive a dollar-for-dollar tax break, a benefit initially expected to cost the state $4.5 million per year.

Private schools receiving funds this way, many of them religious, began to increase their tuition and publish step-by-step guides instructing parents in how to apply for the scholarships. (Among these schools was Northwest Christian, in Phoenix, whose elementary science and social studies curricula were developed by BJU Press, a creationist publishing house.) Over the years, the legislature passed bills to expand the program — including one that enabled companies to participate — and the tax breaks eventually topped $140 million. Between 2010 and 2014, one group, the Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization, received $72.9 million in donations, triggering the same amount in tax breaks. By law, such organizations are allowed to keep 10 percent of donations to pay for operational costs, and in 2013, according to IRS filings, the executive director of Arizona Christian received $145,705. The executive director, as it happens, was Steve Yarbrough, a Republican who is now the president of the state senate. His earnings were reported to the public; the tax-credit program nevertheless continues to thrive.

The parents and educators of Arizona are finally fighting back. They gathered more than 100,000 signatures to get a referendum on the ballot in 2018, which will challenge the expansion of vouchers.

Eighty-five percent of the students in Arizona go to public schools. If their parents and educators stand up for them, the voucher program will be routed next year, as it has been in every state that has held a referendum. Expect the Koch brothers and other billionaires to pour money into Arizona to fulfill the dreams of Betsy DeVos. Don’t be surprised if the DeVos Foundations (there are more than one) fund the fight to disinvest in public education.

The Virtual Community School in Ohio won’t open this year. It must First sort out how much it must pay the state for overstating its past enrollment. It owes millions. This is the kind of “school” that Betsy DeVos is promoting.

http://www.dispatch.com/news/20170814/online-charter-virtual-community-school-ordered-to-pay-back-millions

“Virtual Community School of Ohio has announced it won’t open as scheduled Tuesday for the upcoming school year. On the school’s Facebook page, parents were told they should consider enrolling in another school for the upcoming year.

“During an emergency meeting July 31, the VCS board agreed to a “temporary suspension by our sponsor while a financial investigation is conducted,” according to a notice on the school’s website. At that time, its sponsor was the Reynoldsburg School District, which created VCS in 2001 with the help of a former ECOT administrator.

“VCS had billed the state for an attendance of 835 students for the 2015-16 school year; a department audit of student attendance found that should be reduced to 280 students. Based on that, the school would have to repay about $4.2 million of the $6.33 million it was paid that year. The state found VCS, like ECOT, couldn’t document how much time students were participating in classwork.”

Valerie Strauss describes the accomplishments of Betsy DeVos in her short time as Education Secretary. Most would think that such a list would cover less than a page, because none of her priorities has been enacted into law. Fortunately.

But don’t be fooled. She has used the “bully pulpit” to send her message: Choice. Choice. Charters. Vouchers. Charters. Vouchers. Tax credits. Charters. Vouchers. Choice. Choice. Choice.

She has also intervened in telling states how to fix their schools under the Every Student Succeeds Act, which is contrary to the letter and spirit of the law. Then there is the fact that she doesn’t have a clue about how to fix any school, other than closing it down and giving everyone a voucher to a private or religious school.

She has made clear that civil rights enforcement is not high on her list of priorities. In cases of rape, she and her designated Acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights have aligned themselves with the alleged perpetrators, not the victims.

She even endorsed Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Paris Accord on climate change. The irony, of course, is that she claims to be encouraging girls to go into STEM fields (aided by that great scientist Ivanka Trump), even as she denies the science of climate change, of evolution, and of anything that is not in accord with her religious views.

A reader sent a letter signed by Governor Rick Snyder and the State Superintendent Brian Whiston lamenting the poor performance of Michigan’s schools on the National Assessment of Educational Progress.

Please note that the Governor makes no reference to the failure of the state’s obsession with school choice over the past 15 years.

Nor does he say anything about the proliferation of charters, most of which operate for-profit, and most of which perform worse than the public schools.

Nor does he acknowledge that the state’s education agenda is a wholly owned enterprise of the DeVos family.

Nor does he mention the disaster of the Educational Achievement Authority, into which the state of Michigan poured millions of dollars and overpaid administrators sent by the Broad Academy, only to see the EAA collapse in failure.

This is a politician who does not know the meaning of the word accountability. He is accountable for nothing and responsible for nothing. He should be held accountable not only for the Flint Water Crisis but for the dismantling of what was once a great public school system in the state of Michigan.

For shame, Governor Snyder.

Sad. Very sad.

David Smith of The Guardian, a British publication, writes that Betsy DeVos “is viewed by many in the sector as its most dangerous and destructive since the post was created by Jimmy Carter in 1979. DeVos, a devout Christian, stands accused of quietly privatising schools, rescinding discrimination guidelines and neutering her own department’s civil rights office. Along with the attorney general, Jeff Sessions, she is said to be at the tip of the spear of Trump’s illiberal agenda.”

Trump doesn’t care for the details of policies he supports. He has left DeVos alone to do whatever she wishes.

Neil Sroka, spokesman for the liberal pressure group Democracy for America, said: “Trump doesn’t care about education, much like he doesn’t care about healthcare in any meaningful way. Betsy DeVos has been given a blank cheque to do pretty much whatever she wants. And what she is doing in the department of education is the dream of the rightwing ideologues who work on education policy.”

Critics point to DeVos’s record in Michigan, where she used her wealth to push legislators to defund public education in favour of for-profit charter schools. Students’ test results have plummeted as a consequence, they argue.

Sroka, who is based in Detroit, said: “What’s so amazing is that Betsy DeVos and the DeVos family have almost singlehandedly destroyed public schools in the state of Michigan. They’ve gone from some of the best in the country to among the worst in the region. It’s mind-boggling that anyone would put her in charge of education policy.”

If Michigan is her petri dish, DeVos has demonstrated that her ideas have failed. And now she is free to push them obsessively on the nation.

Chris Taylor, a Democratic State Assemblyman from Madison, Wisconsin, joined ALEC so he can learn what the far-right advocacy group is up to. He attended the recent conference in Denver where Betsy DeVos spoke.

He wrote about what he learned here.

He writes:

The issue of the moment for ALEC is public education—that is, undermining it. ALEC members are foaming at the mouth for the now-endless opportunities to further privatize public schools, long a central goal. When he was governor of Wisconsin in the early 1990s, Tommy Thompson implemented the first state voucher scheme in the nation—an idea he acquired from an ALEC conference.

Taylor describes DeVos’s speech.

And he adds:

DeVos, like most of the people at ALEC, dismisses the collective good in favor of the individual benefit. Our public education system was designed to collectively educate the masses, in hopes that democracy would thrive. Her priority, and ALEC’s agenda, are otherwise.

After bashing the federal government and federal program, her answer for change is…get ready…a federal program to promote school choice, charters and vouchers!

Proponents know their universal voucher scheme, where public dollars flow directly to families rather than to schools, makes it impossible for a public-school infrastructure to survive. How do you maintain public school facilities and staff when you have no guaranteed funding?

For ALEC, it is all about tearing down our public-school infrastructure so corporate privatization efforts can move in and make a buck.

Proponents of privatization have abandoned their claim that vouchers offer better education, so now they are selling choice for the sake of choice.

Graham Vyse, an editor at The New Republic, shows how Betsy DeVos has created a fissure within the Democratic party over school choice.

By her passionate advocacy for charters, vouchers, and every other alternative to public schools, she has put pro-school choice Democrats like Cory Booker into a bind. Booker has vociferously supported both charters and vouchers, yet as a Democrat with hopes for the future, felt compelled to vote against DeVos. It is somewhat amusing to watch him and others try to put distance between themselves and DeVos when she is carrying out the same ideas they have publicly espoused. Any Democrat who is aligned with DeVos on any part of her repugnant agenda should change parties.

“The ground definitely is more fertile,” said Preston Green, an education professor at the University of Connecticut. “I think President Trump’s support of choice does make it difficult. It might make people think twice about it, and especially DeVos’s selling of it…. You’re definitely starting to see a shift.” Meanwhile, the Trump administration’s education agenda and criticism from civil rights groups “might have made it easier for those who oppose charters to oppose them more vociferously.”

Brookings Institution fellow Jon Valant made a similar case in February, writing that “the Trump administration’s support of charters and choice may be distracting from—and contributing to—an emerging political threat to school choice programs, especially charter schools: renewed skepticism from Democrats.” In other words, with her extremist position on school choice, DeVos may be harming the very movement she helped build.

The recent report by the NAACP calling for regulation of charter schools is another straw in the wind, a very large straw, suggesting that the Democrats’ embrace of school choice is politically hazardous.

DeVos is a gift to those of us who have warned for years that privately managed charters is a decisive victory for privatization and a significant step away from democratically controlled public education.

The message of her tenure in office is that school choice is a radical rightwing strategy that defunds public schools.

She gives Democrats a new opportunity to separate themselves from the favorite cause of the Walton family, the Koch brothers, and the Republican party.

As the recent Democratic gubernatorial primary in Virginia showed, candidates who support public schools without qualification can energize their base of teachers and parents. Democrats who favor any form of privatization will be unable to call upon that base.

If Democrats hope to win back a significant share of House seats in the 2018 election, they must put support for public schools at the top of their agenda. That’s where the voters are.

Jersey Jazzman, aka teacher Mark Weber, reviews the blossoming of choice-choice-choice this summer.

Behind it, he says, is a failure of honesty and will.

In recent weeks, we have been besieged with testimonials and heartening stories about choice.

“The clever thing about this construction is that anyone who challenges the narrative is immediately put on the defensive: Why are you against helping people get a better education? Why don’t you care about these children? It must be that you care about your own interests more than theirs…

“There is little evidence that the fraction of “choice” schools that appear to get better results do so because they are “innovative” in their educational practices. But the “choice” schools that do get gains all seem to have structural advantages, starting with resource advantages — gained through a variety of strategies — that allow them to offer things like longer days, longer years, smaller student:staff ratios, and extended educational programming.

“By all appearances, we seem to be able to adequately fund our schools in the affluent, leafy ‘burbs, even as we shrug our shoulders at the prospect of doing the same for urban centers enrolling many students who are in economic disadvantage. Millburn has what it needs; Newark does not. Gross Point has plenty; Detroit doesn’t. New Trier is fine; Chicago is not. Lower Merion thrives; Philadelphia withers.

“It’s a story that plays out across the nation. Somehow these affluent communities manage to scrape together enough to provide adequate educations for their children, even when burdened with unionized teachers and step contracts and democratically elected school boards. Somehow they manage to get their schools what they need without giving up transparency and governmental accountability and agency for all of their citizens through the democratic process.

School “choice” is the result of a failure of honesty and will.

“The failure of honesty comes from failing to fully acknowledge that structural inequities — inequality, chronic poverty, racism, inadequate school funding — lead to unequal educational outcomes. It also comes from failing to acknowledge that the advantages a select few “choice” schools have accrued to themselves are directly responsible for their outcome gains.

“The failure of will results from a failure to act collectively in ways that would move adequate resources to all schools where they are lacking, without giving up democratic governmental control.

“Neither Kristof nor Lemmon nor Hardy nor anyone else has given us any reason to believe that the only way to get more resources into schools that need them is to abandon governmental control. There is, however, plenty of reason to believe shifting school control to private entities will reduce transparency, student and family rights, and efficiency — both here and abroad.

“When children live lives free of want and attend well-resourced, government-controlled schools they do very well. Certainly, there are problems and room for improvement. But communities don’t need to give up control of their schools if the pre-conditions for success are in place.

“Instead of upending the entire system, why don’t we try that?”