Archives for category: Vouchers

Secretary of Education Arne Duncan told a meeting of the Council of Chief State School Officers that the suburban revolt against Common Core has a simple explanation: white suburban moms are discovering that their children are not as brilliant as they thought, and their schools are not as good as they thought.

Here is a description of his remarks and the rationale behind them.

According to blogger Rick Hess, the appalling results of the Common Core tests were supposed to set off a suburban uprising against their public schools and unleash a demand for vouchers and charters. Hess thought it was unlikely, and he was right. Suburban moms and dads of all races–not just whites–are angry at the Common Core, angry at the tests, angry at the state officials who seem determined to hurt their children and destroy their community public schools.

Duncan apparently thinks American students are mostly dumb, and US schools are awful.

Other supporters of the Common Core share his low opinion of our youth.

In July 2012, Jeb Bush–one of the strongest proponents of the Common Core–warned that when the states begin to release the Common Core test results, there would be a “train wreck” and “a rude awakening.” Since Bush is an avid proponent of charters, vouchers, and e-schooling, one may safely assume that he anticipated a flight from public schools to those alternatives, as failure rates were released.

In New York, the fly in the ointment was that with only a few exceptions, the charter schools fared even worse on the Common Core tests than the public schools.

Up until now, Duncan had been blaming the pushback to the Common Core on the Tea Party and extremists.

He really doesn’t get it.

Bottom line: Suburban parents–moms and dads of all races–blame the tests, not their kids or their teachers. They know this is a manufactured crisis (hat tip to Berliner and Biddle). Their kids are not failures. The Common Core tests are.

The Federal GAO released a report sharply criticizing the D.C. voucher program.

According to Stephanie Simon in Politico.com:

“The voucher program in Washington D.C. is riddled with failings and does not maintain adequate controls to ensure that participating private schools are physically safe or academically accredited, according to an investigation by the U.S. General Accounting Office.”

The GAO recommended closer monitoring of the voucher program by Secretary Arne Duncan.

“The GAO report, which was completed earlier this fall but released only today, found that the D.C. Children and Youth Investment Trust Corporation gave “incomplete and untimely information about participating schools” to low-income families using the vouchers to enroll in private schools. The directory of participating schools, which the Trust publishes, “lacks key information about tuition, fees, and accreditation,” so parents “cannot make fully informed school choices,” investigators wrote.

“The report also found an incomplete vetting of participating schools, so that federal scholarship dollars might be going to pay for “students to attend schools that do not meet standards required by law.” It noted that the Trust was failing to conduct mandatory health, safety and building inspections of the schools. It found flaws in the lottery used to award the vouchers to students. And it found that the Trust consistently failed to file financial reports on time….

“The Education Department responded with an eight-page letter.” it said it takes the issues raised by the report “very seriously”….

According to Simon, “the Trust is working on a system to verify that teachers of core academic subjects in the private schools have bachelor’s degrees. The Trust is also moving to require evidence of financial stability and sound fiscal practices before a private school is cleared to accept federal dollars through the voucher program.”

Among the nations of Europe, Sweden has taken the lead in imposing choice, competition, and high-stakes testing. Sweden has vouchers, so students can take their public money to any public or private school they want. Sweden also adopted a national curriculum.

The result: a falling quality of education, lower results on international tests, and increased social stratification. This is an example of what Finnish educator Pasi Sahlberg calls GERM (the Global Education Reform Movement), characterized by choice, competition, and testing.

Swedish educators await the release of the next PISA exam with trepidation, but the education minister of the conservative government is already prepared with excuses, ready to blame the Social Democrats, who were in power until 2006, or to blame teachers, whose profession has fallen into low esteem as a consequence of government policies.

Note that Sweden is demographically similar to Finland, yet its schools continue to decline as Finland attracts the admiration of the world.

What is Finland doing right? What is Sweden doing wrong? Should the Swedish people accept the minister’s assurances and wait “several more years” to see the promised success of vouchers, choice, competition, and other GERM policies?

Governor Chris Christie has made clear that he doesn’t like the public schools in his state. He calls them “failure factories,” as he campaigns for vouchers. (He is a graduate of Livingston High School.) He seems to despise public school teachers. He enjoys berating teachers, especially if they are female. He is one big, tough, strong guy who knows how to put down women.

Melissa Tomlinson is a public school teacher in New Jersey. She went to a Rally for Governor Chris Christie and she held up a sign.

Read this wonderful description on Jersey Jazzman’s blog of Melissa’s courage in confronting a bully.

Her sign said:

“I am a public school teacher.

“We are NOT failing our students.

“N.J. is ranked 3rd in the US.

“Christie’s refusal to finance public education is failing our students.”

She asked him: “Why do you portray our schools as failure factories?” His reply: “Because they are!” He said: “I am tired of you people. What do you want?”

So, the most powerful executive in the state of New Jersey treated this dedicated public school teacher with arrogance, rudeness, and disrespect. She didn’t back down. She had him cornered. She is right. He is wrong. Probably, he knows he is wrong, so he felt compelled to shout her down instead of engaging in civil dialogue.

Melissa Tomlinson was right that Governor Christie has underfunded the schools. He froze the spending that was supposed to be used to repair schools with leaky pipes and mold and crumbling facilities.

But Tomlinson was wrong about one thing: on the 2011 NAEP, New Jersey was second in the nation in reading, behind Massachusetts and tied with Connecticut. In math, New Jersey was second in the nation. Not third, but second.

The districts in New Jersey that are failing are the ones that are controlled by the state, some for decades. The state has no idea what to do other than to hand students and public funds over to private corporations.

As Julia Sass Rubin pointed out in an earlier blog today, the Christie administration has systematically underfunded districts that enroll children of color. It has stripped them of democratic governance. It has overloaded them with charters that skim the best students and increase segregation. Governor Christie praises charter schools that exclude children who have serious disabilities and children who don’t speak English. The state has embarked on a policy of separate and unequal for the districts that are powerless.

Governor Chris Christie should be ashamed of himself for his systematic neglect of the education of New Jersey’s most vulnerable children as well as his rude and disgraceful behavior towards public school teachers. He should stop his war against public education. It will not help him become president. It will be a huge liability.

Here is a blog in California. Governor Christie, your reputation as a bully is going national.

An opinion article by an employee of the voucher-loving Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice argues that it is time for Rhode Island to adopt vouchers. The article is a jumble of mis-statements. For example, it claims that the people of Rhode Island want vouchers, but never admits that vouchers have never (NEVER) won the support of any public referendum in any state. The latest Gallup/Phi Delta Kappan poll showed that 70% of the public is opposed to vouchers. This is the highest level of opposition ever recorded in the history of the survey.

When voters in Florida were asked to pass a referendum one year ago to permit vouchers for use in religious schools, they resoundingly said no.

These inconvenient facts were omitted from this highly misleading and highly partisan article.

Do vouchers improve academic achievement? Not in Milwaukee, which has had vouchers since 1990. Not in Cleveland, which has had vouchers since 1996. Not in D.C., which has had vouchers since 2003. Graduation rates were higher in voucher schools, but the attrition rates were so high that it is hard to know what to make of a higher graduation rate among the survivors (the attrition rate in Milwaukee, for example, was 56% of those who started in a voucher school in ninth grade).

Just how valuable are vouchers? On the National Assessment of Educational Progress, Milwaukee-the city that has had vouchers the longest for the most students–is at the bottom of the nation, outranking only Detroit, Cleveland, and Fresno. In fact, the three cities that offer vouchers were among the nation’s five lowest performing districts on the 2011 NAEP.

Some voucher schools teach creationism and deny global climate change. Some teach from Biblically-correct textbooks. Some lack certified teachers. Some specifically bar gay students from enrolling.

Politico.com recently described vouchers as a $1 billion waste of taxpayer dollars.

Instead of printing propaganda by paid voucher advocates, he Providence Journal should do some research and inform the public that vouchers waste taxpayer dollars, do not improve student achievement, and funnel public money to inferior schools. That’s why 70% of the American public doesn’t want them.

Cindi Pastore created this multiple-choice exam for the people of Infiana.

It illustrates the current crazy situation there. Glenda Ritz won a startling upset victory last fall, winning more votes than Governor Pence. Yet Governor Pence has worked unceasingly to dilute Ritz’s authority and render her powerless to carry out her official duties. He and the unelected state board are thwarting her so they can continue to privatize education in the state of Indiana.

Here is the test:

An Eight Question High Stakes Test for Governor Pence, Brian Bosma, David Long, and Members of the State Board of Education

1. Who was elected by an overwhelming majority (roughly 1,300,000) of the voters (many of whom crossed their party lines) of this state to be the Indiana Superintendent of Public Schools?

a. Claire Fiddian-Greene
b. Brian Bosma
c. GLENDA RITZ
d. David Long
e. Mike Pence
f. Any of the appointed Members of the SBOE
g. Daniel Elsener

2. Who campaigned and won on the platform of re-introducing evidenced-based educational methods, policies, and standards including: more teaching and less testing, more local control for implementing standards, safe and respectful schools, high standards for educators, improved vocational education, and reserving public dollars for public schools?

a. Claire Fiddian-Greene
b. Brian Bosma
c. GLENDA RITZ
d. David Long
e. Mike Pence
f. Any of the appointed Members of the SBOE
g. Daniel Elsener

3. Who is a National Board Certified Teacher, holds two masters degrees with licenses to teach elementary, middle and high school in the areas of special education, general education, and library science, and has won both the Teacher of the Year for Washington Township Schools and a Golden Apple Award?

a. Claire Fiddian-Greene
b. Brian Bosma
c. GLENDA RITZ
d. David Long
e. Mike Pence
f. Any of the appointed Members of the SBOE
g. Daniel Elsener

4. Who held a Community Partners School Improvement Summit and started the Hoosier Family of Readers program since beginning her elected job of Indiana’s Superintendent of Public Instruction?

a. Claire Fiddian-Greene
b. Brian Bosma
c. GLENDA RITZ
d. David Long
e. Mike Pence
f. Any of the appointed Members of the SBOE
g. Daniel Elsener

5. Who has been continually thwarted in her attempts to carry out the duties of her office, the elected Superintendent of Public Instruction, by a bombardment of politically motivated and unnecessary requests for ill-conceived action and irrelevant information?

a. Claire Fiddian-Greene
b. Brian Bosma
c. GLENDA RITZ
d. David Long
e. Mike Pence
f. Any of the appointed Members of the SBOE
g. Daniel Elsener

6. Who is being hurt by the Governor, the members of the SBOE, and those legislators who are being obstructionist to Superintendent Ritz’ work?
a. The CHILDREN of this state
b. The CHILDREN of this state
c. The CHILDREN of this state
d. The CHILDREN of this state
e. The CHILDREN of this state

7. Whose money is being wasted by the creation by Governor Pence of an agency with an non-elected head, that is essentially an attempt to be a duplication of the Indiana Department of Education?

a. The TAXPAYERS of Indiana
b. The TAXPAYERS of Indiana
c. The TAXPAYERS of Indiana
d. The TAXPAYERS of Indiana
e. The TAXPAYERS of Indiana

8. Who will respond to the bullying of Superintendent Ritz by the Governor, the SBOE board members, and members of the state legislature?
a. The VOTERS in Indiana
b. The VOTERS in Indiana
c. The VOTERS in Indiana
d. The VOTERS in Indiana
e. The VOTERS in Indiana

Answer Key: For each of questions 1-5, the answer is c. For each of questions 6-8, the answers are a,b,c,d, and e.

Grading Scale: A= 8 correct answers F= 0-7 correct answers

In the hagiography of the charter school movement, we often hear that Albert Shanker was one of the original proponents of the idea. Shanker was president of the American Federation of Teachers, and his imprimatur is supposed to persuade people that charters have a progressive patina.

This is ironic, because 90% of the nation’s 6,000 charters are non-union and oppose collective bargaining. Some charters have even insisted in federal court and to the National Labor Relations Board that they are private schools to avoid complying with state labor laws that would allow teachers to join a union.

Shanker never intended that charters would be non-union, nor that they would compete with public schools. He thought they would be formed by teachers to create a “school within a school,” and eventually autonomous schools whose purpose was to enroll the students who were bored or disengaged in regular school. He thought that charter teachers would belong to the union and would collaborate–not compete–with public schools.

Here is his 1988 speech describing his new idea at the National Press Club.

By 1993, he had reached the conclusion that he was terribly wrong. He wrote column after column describing charters as a new form of privatization, no different from vouchers.

Corporate reformers should not take his name in vain. He would never have approved of non-union schools and for-profit schools. He denounced privatization in all its forms. As early as1993, he recognized that charters were a back door way to turn public dollars over to entrepreneurs and to attack the foundations of public education.

Fred Klonsky has an excellent summary and hilarious critique of Mike Petrilli’s review of “Reign of Error.”

Mike suggests that I was “a double agent,” hiding in plain sight in rightwing think tanks for thirty years, so I could one day exposé them.

This is funny.

Checker Finn and I founded the Educational Excellence Network in 1981. We published screeds about declining standards for years. Note: That is when my work as a double agent began. When Checker joined the Reagan administration, I took over his role as leader of the Network. Aha, I had to double down on our criticism of the schools to hide my secret identity.

Checker recommended me to Lamar Alexander, who invited me to take Checker’s old job as Assistant Secretary in charge of the Office of Educational Research and Improvement and Counselor to the Secretary. Wow, I was really embedded in the belly of the beast.

After leaving government, I spent nearly two years at Brookings (warning sign of double agent!), turned down the offer to hold the Brown Chair in education (now held by Grover “Russ” Whitehurst, head of education for George W. Bush, who fired me from my unpaid fellowship at Brookings in 2012), and returned to Brooklyn in 1994 and a research professorship at New York University. For a time, it appeared that my days as a double agent were over.

But opportunity soon knocked, and I was paid to be a fellow at the rightwing Manhattan Institute, on whose behalf I went to Albany to testify on behalf of charter schools. The legislation passed, demonstrating that my bona fides as a double agent were in good standing.

Also, after I left government service, all the while pretending to believe in testing, accountability, competition, and choice, I wrote several articles advocating these policies to maintain the pretense. More important, I was a founding member of Checker Finn’s Thomas B. Fordham Foundation (now called Institute, for tax purposes).

I was also a founding member of the Koret Task Force at the Hoover Institution, which consisted of the creme de la creme of the conservative intelligentsia. Now firmly established as a genuine rightwing critic of our failing public schools, I learned all the inside secrets. Nirvana for a double agent! I learned that most of my colleagues hated unions (I already knew that); I learned that testing was the sine qua non of education policy (I knew that too); I learned that the answer to educational malaise was unregulated choice. (No surprise.) I loved the lavish parties, the great wines, I actually liked and enjoyed my colleagues.

But, finally, after thirty years as a double agent, the burden of duplicity became too great.

I had to confess that I preferred children to plutocrats.

I had to confess that I had no faith in the transformative power of unregulated choice (especially after the economic meltdown of 2008).

I realized I could not betray my origins as a graduate of the Houston public schools.

I lost my faith, if faith it was. I blew my cover with the publication of “The Death and Life of the Great American School System.” Author Steve Brill said I sold out for the speaking fees that unions would surely shower on me. How clever of me to plan so far in advance. After many years as a double agent, I laughed at Brill’s theory. I knew where the real money was–and when I blew my cover, so well hidden for thirty years, I knew I was leaving behind the Hoover Institution, the Gates Foundation, the Broad Foundation, the Walton Foundation, and so many others willing to pay handsome fees to those they trust.

After my cover as a double agent was gone, I made a series of recommendations that Mike Petrilli ridiculed as pie in the sky:

Klonsky writes:

“Petrilli sneers:

“The skeptical, hard-nosed (if biased and data-slanting) Ravitch of the first half of her book turns into a pie-in-the-sky dreamer in the second half.

“Consider her “solutions”:

“1. Provide good prenatal care for every pregnant woman.

“2. Make high-quality early-childhood education available to all children.

“3. Make sure every school has a “full, balanced, and rich curriculum.”

“4. Reduce class sizes.

“5. Provide medical and social services to the poor.

“6. Devise actionable strategies and specific goals to reduce racial segregation and poverty.

“(She lists five other “solutions” that simply amount to rolling back reforms: Ban for-profit charters and charter chains; eliminate high-stakes standardized testing; don’t allow “non-educators” to be teachers, principals, or superintendents; don’t allow mayoral control of the schools; don’t view education as a “consumer good.”)”

Klonsky comments:

“That’s what Petrilli considers pie-in-the-sky.

“To me it sounds like a recipe for quality schools.”

Mercedes Schneider here analyzes the tax returns submitted by Michelle Rhee for her two organizations. One engages in political activities, and the other is an advocacy group.

Rhee gives generous contributions to those who seek the privatization of public education.

Schneider notes the close connection between Rhee and the creators of Common Core.

She concludes her review with these thoughts:

“In reading these tax documents, I cannot help but wonder if our democracy is such a farce that it will crumble beneath the weight of the wallets of the wealthy removed. I wonder what it will take for them to realize that they are foolishly destroying the foundation upon which they themselves stand. In their arrogant fiscal elevation they forget that even they require the foundational institutions that form our democracy– public education being one such institution…..

“Here’s a hint: When you hear that a candidate in a local election is being outspent by 10- or 20-to-1, vote for that candidate.”

A progressive Wisconsin newspaper reports that “Reign of Error” has thrown voucher advocates onto the f
Defensive. Despite the obvious failure of vouchers in Milwaukee, Governor Scott Walker has expanded the voucher program to a larger geographical area and lifted the income limits for participants. His goal becomes clear: he has no interest in saving poor children from “failing public schools,” but destroying Wisconsin’s public school system and creating a market system. Markets never serve the needs of the poor. Markets favor the haves, not the have-nots.

“Reign of Error” is an antidote and guide to fighting the privatization movement. Everything they sell is failing. Everything they promote lacks evidence behind it. Some innocents have gone along with the siren song of “choice,” perhaps being too young to remember that “choice” was the battle cry of segregationists.

Don’t let the privatizers, libertarians, and government haters fool you. Defend public education. It belongs to the public, not to the entrepreneurs.