Archives for category: Vouchers

The Network for Public Education needs your help NOW to stop Betsy DeVos’ latest effort to introduce federal vouchers.

DeVos and some Republican members of Congress have introduced legislation to convert a federal $1 billion program called Impact Aid into vouchers for military families. Impact Aid was designed to reimburse public schools that educate the children of military families and also to compensate public school districts because of the loss of federal revenues due to large federal facilities that don’t pay taxes.

HR 5199 and S. 2517 were introduced in the House and the Senate about a month ago. Carol Burris, executive director of NPE, wrote about this effort here. 

Military families have made clear that they don’t want vouchers. They want good public schools.

The Heritage Foundation is lobbying the House and Senate Armed Services Committees to get the voucher bill tucked into the National Defense Authorization Act (the annual budget for the Department of Defense), and that DeVos herself is lobbying Secretary of Defense James Mattis to get his support.

Please open the link, which makes it easy to contact  your representatives.

Don’t let the privatizers pull a fast one. Read this appeal, which contains resources as well as an easy way to reach out to your representatives. 

Stop DeVos now!

 

Shulem Deen was raised in an Orthodox home. He wrote an opinion article in the New York Times today about the low quality of education he received in religious schools.

He writes:

”Last Friday, as observant Jews hurried with last-minute preparations for Passover, one Orthodox Jew was in Albany, holding up the New York State budget. He was insisting that this roughly $168 billion package include a special provision that would allow religious schools to meet the state’s educational requirements by using their long hours of religious instruction.

“In recent years, education activists, among them former Hasidic yeshiva graduates, have pushed aggressively to bring the yeshivas into compliance with the state’s education laws. Simcha Felder, the state senator from Brooklyn who represents the heavily ultra-Orthodox neighborhoods of Borough Park and Midwood, was on a mission to get legal permission for the state to turn a blind eye to the near-absence of secular instruction in many yeshivas. The upshot? Tens of thousands of children would continue to graduate without the most basic skills.

“I know about the cost. I was one of those kids.

“I was raised in New York’s Hasidic community and educated in its schools. At my yeshiva elementary school, I received robust instruction in Talmudic discourse and Jewish religious law, but not a word about history, geography, science, literature, art or most other subjects required by New York State law. I received rudimentary instruction in English and arithmetic — an afterthought after a long day of religious studies — but by high school, secular studies were dispensed with altogether.

“The language of instruction was, for the most part, Yiddish. English, our teachers would remind us, was profane…

”When I was in my 20s, already a father of three, I had no marketable skills, despite 18 years of schooling. I could rely only on an ill-paid position as a teacher of religious studies at the local boys’ yeshiva, which required no special training or certification. As our family grew steadily — birth control, or even basic sexual education, wasn’t part of the curriculum — my wife and I struggled, even with food stamps, Medicaid and Section 8 housing vouchers, which are officially factored into the budgets of many of New York’s Hasidic families….

”I now have two sons, ages 16 and 18. I do not have custody of them — I lost it when I left the Hasidic world, and so I have no control over their education. Today, they cannot speak, read or write in English past a second-grade level. (As for my three daughters, their English skills are fine. Girls, not obligated with Torah study, generally receive a decent secular education.)

“Like me, my sons will be expected to marry young and raise large families. They too will receive no guidance on how to provide for them and will be forced into low-wage jobs and rely heavily on government support.

“They are not alone. Across the state, there are dozens of Hasidic yeshivas, with tens of thousands of students — nearly 60,000 in New York City alone — whose education is being atrociously neglected. These schools receive hundreds of millions of dollars in government funding, through federal programs like Title I and Head Start and state programs like Academic Intervention Services and universal pre-K. For New York City’s yeshivas, $120 million comes from the state-funded, city-run Child Care and Development Block Grant subsidy program: nearly a quarter of the allocation to the entire city.”

These are the schools to which Betsy DeVos would supply vouchers. What a shame. The children deserve better education.

States that establish vouchers follow a strategy of putting the camel’s-nose-under-the-tent. They usually begin by offering a  voucher for students with disabilities. Then they add a voucher for children who are low-income or a voucher for students in schools with low test scores (to “save poor children from failing schools). Then another, and another, and another until everyone is eligible for a voucher to go to a private or religious school, defunding the state’s public schools since the money follows the child.

But the students with disabilities who use a voucher take a huge risk because they abandon the protection of federal law, for which disabilities groups have worked so long. The General Accountability Office issued this warning in November 2017; now that Trump and DeVos are in charge, don’t expect to see these warnings in the future.

The Education Law Center reports:

GAO REPORT: TAKE A VOUCHER AND FORFEIT SPECIAL EDUCATION RIGHTS

By Jessica Levin

Over half of the state programs providing vouchers for private schools are targeted to students with disabilities, and proposals for new or expanded voucher programs continue to be introduced in state legislatures across the country.

Given the growth of vouchers for students with disabilities, a recent report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) about the impact of vouchers on special education rights is alarming. The report, Private School Choice: Federal Actions Needed to Ensure Parents Are Notified About Changes in Rights for Students with Disabilities, issued in November 2017, found the availability and accuracy of information provided by states to parents seriously lacking. Parents are often not informed that special education rights are drastically diminished when students with disabilities use vouchers to attend private school.

Students with disabilities enrolled in public school or placed in a private school by a local education agency have robust rights under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The centerpiece of the federal law is the right to a free appropriate public education (FAPE) with the individualized programs and services students need to access a FAPE.

In sharp contrast, students “parentally placed” in a private school – including those using vouchers – lose their right to FAPE and to receive some or all of the special education and related services public schools are legally obligated to provide under IDEA. These children also lose the right to be educated with their nondisabled peers to the maximum extent appropriate (the “least restrictive environment” requirement) and forfeit IDEA’s procedural protections against inappropriate discipline.

In enacting voucher programs, states do little or nothing to inform parents of the legal ramifications of using vouchers. Shockingly, the GAO report concluded that “in school year 2016-17, 83 percent of students enrolled in a [voucher] program designed specifically for students with disabilities were in a program that provided either no information about changes in IDEA rights or provided information that [the U.S. Department of] Education confirmed contained inaccuracies about these changes.”

Additionally, the GAO’s review of a national sample of the websites of private schools participating in voucher programs found that no more than half even mentioned students with disabilities. Fewer than a quarter of the websites for private schools participating in voucher programs designed specifically for students with disabilities provided information on key special education issues, such as the types of disabilities served by the schools and whether teachers were trained to work with students with disabilities.

The GAO report recommends federal action. First, Congress should consider requiring states to notify parents of the changes in federal special education rights when parents place their children in a private school. The IDEA does not currently require such notice, and the U.S. Department of Education (USED) has taken the position that it has no authority to do so. Second, USED should review the information states are currently providing on changes to legal rights and protections for students in voucher programs and work with states to correct inaccuracies.

The GAO report is a stark reminder that students with disabilities forfeit many legal rights and protections when they use a voucher for private school. In highlighting the serious lack of notice about these changes, the report provides compelling support for the case against authorizing or expanding voucher programs for students with disabilities. States should not be spending scarce public dollars on voucher programs that not only fail to serve students with disabilities, but also undermine their legal rights.

Jessica Levin, Esq., is an attorney at Education Law Center. ELC is a partner in Voucher Watch with Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP in Los Angeles.

Education Law Center Press Contact:

Sharon Krengel

Policy and Outreach Director

skrengel@edlawcenter.org

973-624-1815, x 24

 

Parents and teachers in Arizona gathered over 100,000 signatures to force a referendum on the unlimited expansion of vouchers. The Koch brothers and the DeVos family are pushing for vouchers, and they sent in their top legal team to try to stop the referendum. They are terrified of democracy.

They fought the referendum in court and they lost. The parents and teachers won. The referendum was going forward.

Now they have a new trick up their sleeve. The masters of dark money will get the legislature to repeal the original bill and re-enact it, so as to block the referendum. The SOS Arizona team will have to start all over, by gathering signatures for a new referendum and hiring lawyers to defend the referendum.

The Koch brothers and the DeVos family are hereby added to the blog’s Wall of Shame. They hate public schools and they hate democracy.

Please send a contribution to SOS Arizona to help them continue the fight for public schools!

This came in today from SOS Arizona:

Just when we thought we were safe…They’re at it again. Within 2 weeks of the Arizona Supreme Court’s dismissal of the dark-money lawsuit brought against SOSAZ, the Legislature is preparing to repeal Prop 305 entirely or replace it with another ESA expansion bill

From the moment we turned in 111,540 signatures last summer, voucher supporters have been scheming to “bait and switch.” Especially since polls have indicated that Prop 305 will likely be defeated if voters have their say. Voters know that vouchers hurt our schools, our kids, and our state.

Bottom line–the state with the WORST funding for schools should be the LAST state to divert public funds to private schools.

How can you help ensure that Prop 305 will get to the ballot so we can defeat the voucher expansion once and for all?

  • Call Governor Ducey’s office at 602-542-4331 and say you oppose any voucher expansion replacement bill;
  • Contact your representatives and senator now to let them know any replacement bill is unacceptable. Hint: here is how they voted on the original voucher expansion bill last year.
  • Sign the SOSAZ Pledge to Vote No on Prop 305, and ask 10 of your friends to do the same;
  • Talk to 10 friends, family, neighbors and colleagues. Our passionate volunteers are our biggest allies. Help us get the word out!

Our work to protect our volunteers’ hard work and signatures does not come cheap. Please help us meet our bills with a one-time or recurring donation today.

Thank you for all you do!

Beth Lewis

Chair, Save Our Schools Arizona PAC

Phil Downs, superintendent of the Southwest Allen County schools in Indiana, explains here how the cumulative effect of vouchers reduces spending in every public school in the state. 

There are about 1,040,000 students in Indiana. There are 35,500 voucher students in the state, most attending religious schools. Most have never attended a public school in the past, and only 274 were issued to students leaving F-rated public schools. Each voucher is worth about $4,258. Basically, the state is using public dollars to subsidize tuition at religious schools (which the state constitution explicitly prohibits but which the state courts approved).

He writes:

It is conventional wisdom that the voucher program only affects big cities. While voucher usage is higher in big cities, the financial effect is felt in every school district because the voucher dollars come out of Tuition Support, in effect reducing the dollars supporting students in all public schools…

The impact of the voucher program is not based on how many vouchers are used in your district. It is based on each year’s voucher program cost to the Tuition Support budget across the state, regardless of the number of vouchers used within the district. For example, Lebanon Schools lost more than $530,000, Plainfield Schools lost more than $770,000, and Carmel Schools lost more than $2,365,000 this year. Currently, there are 23 school districts where no vouchers are used. They are small districts and the voucher program costs them more than $4 million this year combined. Peru Schools is the largest of these districts and it lost more than $321,000.

Here are this year’s losses in Allen County: East Allen County Schools, $1.38 million; Fort Wayne Community Schools, $4.47 million; Northwest Allen County Schools, $1.13 million; and Southwest Allen County Schools, $1.08 million.

To make this complicated issue much simpler…think of a loganberry pie. Indiana has baked a smaller pie and expects it to feed a larger number of people. More kids, fewer dollars.

Put simply, one million students are suffering loss of school funding so that the 35,000 students previously enrolled in religious schools get a subsidy. The one million pay for the others. The one million lose teachers, get larger classes, and have fewer programs. Is that fair? It is certainly not wise.

 

Perhaps it is no surprise that the privatization vultures descended on Puerto Rico after the devastation of a Hurricane Maria. What is surprising is that the privatization movement has been led by a non-local from Philadelphia.  That city has experimented with privatization of its schools since the Paul Vallas regime (2002-2005), and the results have devastated the public schools.

The Nation reports:

“Six months after Hurricane Maria, Puerto Ricans are understandably frustrated with their government officials. One might expect discontent to center around the head of the power company who oversaw months of blackouts or the governor who awarded hundreds of millions of dollars in private contracts with little or no oversight. But instead it is the secretary of the department of education, Philadelphia-native Julia Keleher, who has become the focus of people’s anger. In the past few weeks, Puerto Ricans have been calling for her resignation, making her the object of a viral hashtag campaign, #JuliaGoHome. On Monday, the school system was paralyzed by a strike as thousands of teachers protested the education-reform bill her office has spearheaded.

“For observers from the 50 states, it might come as a surprise that Puerto Rico’s secretary of education hails from Philadelphia. Indeed, it is the first time a non–Puerto Rican has held the job since the colonial appointees in the period after the US took possession of the island in 1898. But in the four years leading up to her appointment, Keleher’s education consultancy firm, Keleher & Associates, had been awarded almost $1 million in contracts to “design and implement education reform initiatives” in Puerto Rico. The results of those efforts were never described to the public, but when Governor Ricardo Rosselló Nevares tapped Keleher for the position in January 2017, the selection was initially met with some guarded optimism. Some hoped that a non–Puerto Rican would be able to rise above local politics, end corruption, and lead the agency with professionalism and expertise.

“From the beginning, many critics expressed concerns about her sizable salary, which at $250,000 is more than 10 times the average salary of a teacher in Puerto Rico. In an island beset by an unpayable debt and austerity measures, Keleher has managed to secure an income that is more than double that of her predecessors and over three times that of Rosselló, the governor that appointed her. It’s even 25 percent greater than that of Betsy DeVos, the secretary of the US Department of Education, and larger than that of 95 percent of education leaders around the world.

“As secretary, her salary is capped by law, so in order for Keleher to receive this level of compensation, she was given additional contracts that established her as an adviser to her own agency. These contracts were facilitated through the Fiscal Agency and Financial Advisory Authority (AAFAF), the agency created in 2016 to manage the island’s fiscal crisis and implement austerity measures. As with other controversial appointments, such as that of the fiscal-board director Natalie Jaresko, the exorbitant salaries are rationalized as necessary to recruit the kind of talent needed to resolve the island’s financial crisis.

“Those who supported Keleher’s confirmation responded to criticisms over her eye-popping salary by insisting that she had the kind of “world-class” skills and credentials that Puerto Rico’s education system sorely needed. She was hailed as a gifted technocrat and an expert in the use of data-driven, evidence-based practices and performance metrics. She was also described as someone who, precisely by virtue of not being from the island, would be immune the kind of partisan politics that corrupted the work of previous secretaries and the performance of the government as a whole. That appears not to be the case, with Puerto Rico’s Civil Rights Commission already investigating her office for ethics violations and political favoritism.

“As it turns out, her policy and practice reforms have also been anything but transparent, and the “data” of her “data-driven” rationale has not been made widely available. One of her very first moves, for example, was to shutter more than 150 schools. But she never explained how she chose the schools that would be closed beyond a vague reference to “loss of students” due to migration.”

Do you think Julia should go home?

#JuliaGoHome

 

The Center for American Progress published a useful review of voucher research, which concludes that going to a voucher school is equivalent to losing 1/3 of a year of schooling. Over the past year or so, I have posted the individual studies of vouchers as they appeared, and it is helpful to have them summarized in one place.

The authors of this research review—Ulrich Boser, Meg Bender, and Erin Roth—are senior analysts at CAP. They have done a good job in pulling together the many studies and analyzing the negative effects of vouchers on children. Researchers do not agree on the wisdom of converting test score gains or losses into “days of learning,” a strategy invented by researchers at CREDO, but the authors here use the device against the choice advocates who use it to bash public schools.

CAP is a puzzle to me. Throughout the Obama years, it was a safe haven and cheerleading squad for everything associated with the Obama administration, including the failed, odious, and ineffective Race to the Top.

As this carefully researched paper makes clear, CAP opposes vouchers. But where is CAP on charters? Is it still defending the Obama-Duncan line that school choice is good and traditional public schools are not? Is it willing to do the same research-based review of charters that it did of vouchers?

Does CAP still believe in school choice? Does it support half of the Trump-DeVos agenda? Or will it help return the Democratic Party to its roots by acknowledging the importance of strong public schools, democratically governed, subject to state and federal laws, doors open to all?

 

 

 

This is a good article in the New York Daily News by Alyssa Katz, of the Daily News about Cynthia Nixon’s challenge to Andrew Cuomo in the Democratic primary in New York.

She says that Cynthia Nixon should not be written off.

Cuomo has raised $30 million, almost all of it from fat cats and Wall Street.

Nixon, unlike Cuomo, is a genuine progressive.

Cuomo has helped Republicans retain control of the State Senate, even though Democrats have a numerical majority. Cuomo has allied himself with a breakaway group of rightwing Democrats (the Independent Democratic Caucus), who side with the Republicans and keep the Republicans in power. At Cuomo’s last election, he persuaded the Working Families Party to endorse him by promising to help Democrats win back the Senate. The day after he won the WFP endorsement, he broke his promise. That is why the leader of the State Senate is a rightwing Republican, John Flanagan, who defeats every progressive measure.

Nixon promises to change Albany’s culture of corruption. One of Cuomo’s closest aides was recently convicted of taking bribes.

She is way ahead of Cuomo on education issues. She went to public school, and she sends her own children to public schools. She understands that the state has failed to fund the public schools in response to court orders. She knows that Cuomo does the bidding of the charter industry, who have given generously to Cuomo. She knows that Cuomo supports vouchers, in a blatant appeal to religious groups. She remembers that Cuomo promised to “break up the public education monopoly” by funding billionaire-backed charters.

Cynthia is intelligent, quick on her feet, and unafraid of Cuomo, who likes to bully people.

At Cuomo’s last Democratic primary four years ago, Zephyr Teachout won 34% of the vote, with no money or media exposure or  name recognition. She swept upstate New York. Now she is treasurer of Cynthia Nixon’s campaign.

If Nixon can win Teachout’s 34% by building on her New York City appeal, and add to it with the free media and name recognition that Teachout never had, Cuomo should worry.

 

 

 

Ever since the School Choice Movement got momentum in the early 1990s, its proponents have claimed that charters and vouchers would “save poor kids from failing schools.” Their metric, of course, was scores on standardized test scores, and they welcomed No Child Left Behind and its successor Race to the Top. They were certain that choice schools—free to select their students, free to kick out students, free from bureaucracy, free from unions, free to pay differential pay to teachers—would prove their value by generating sky-high test scores.

There are some charter schools that get high scores, but most don’t. Most studies find that some charters get high scores, some get the same scores as nearby schools, and some are far worse than the so-called “failing schools.”

Recent voucher studies have converged on the finding that students who use vouchers actually lose ground as compared to their peers who won a voucher but didn’t use it. The more optimistic say that the voucher students make up the lost ground in 3-4 years, but they don’t take into account the attrition of the weakest students from the voucher schools.

A new paper by three school choice advocates concludes that test scores are not the best measure of success (whoa! Who knew?). Other long-term impacts, they say, matter more, like graduation rates. Why are they moving the goal posts? Voucher programs show no academic gains, but they do show higher graduation rates, so that’s what really matters. There is a trick here, however. Every voucher program has a high rate of attrition, which pro-choice researchers ignore or downplay. The “higher graduation rates” in evaluations of voucher programs in Milwaukee and D.C. do not acknowledge the high number of kids who started ninth grade and didn’t make it to the end of twelfth grade.

Patrick Wolf of the Department of Educational Reform at the University of Arkansas (funded primarily by the Walton Family Foundation) conducted the official evaluations of both Milwaukee and the District of Columbia. In his initial report about Milwaukee, he wrote that the attrition rate was 75%, but decided that was an error and revised the attrition rate to 56%. Either number is huge. Huge and huger. 

The survivors had a higher graduation rate than the students in the Milwaukee Public Schools, which included the kids who dropped out of the voucher schools.

Wolf’s D.C. evaluation does not break out the attrition rate, but it is likely to be significant. William Mathis of the National Education Policy Center reviewed Wolf’s Congressionally mandated evaluation of the D.C. voucher program but could not determine with certainty how many students had dropped out before graduating, but it appears to be nearly three-quarters.

All of this is background to Secretary Betsy DeVos’ nonchalant response to the latest [2017] negative evaluation of the D.C voucher program.  She never expected vouchers to raise test scores, she says. And it doesn’t matter.

 

 

Another victory for the Trump-DeVos agenda of school choice, this one in Puerto Rico, which is still struggling to recover from massive hurricane damage.

Politico Morning Education reports:

SCHOOL CHOICE PROPOSAL MOVES AHEAD IN PUERTO RICO: One of the island’s legislative chambers approved this week an education reform plan that would usher in charter schools to the territory and roll out a program of school vouchers in 2019. The plan was pitched by Gov. Ricardo Rossello as the island’s education system grappled with a tough recovery and mass migration to the states following Hurricane Maria. It has been criticized by teachers unions, which fear that turning over education to private entities will disrupt public schools there.

– The legislation allows for the creation of charter schools, or for the conversion of existing public schools into charters. Schools must be run by non-profit operators, and must be non-sectarian. Students from across the island would be able to participate in enrollment lotteries, though schools have to give preference to students in neighboring communities. Teachers who chose to work for charter schools in Puerto Rico would be given a leave of absence from the Education Department, which would hold their jobs for up to two years.

– Responding to concerns that Puerto Rico’s system would emulate post-Katrina New Orleans, where nearly all students attend charter schools, lawmakers instituted a cap on the number of charter schools equal to 10 percent of all public schools there.

– As for school vouchers, lawmakers are proposing a rollout in the 2019-2020 school year that would allow 3 percent of students to attend schools of their choosing – including private schools. That number would rise to 5 percent the following year. It’s unclear how much money would be granted to each student, but the legislation calls for no more than 70 percent of what is already allocated per public school student.

The lesson: If you can’t fund your schools adequately, offer school choice instead. It will intensify social and economic segregation and it won’t improve education, but it will give the illusion of reform.