Archives for category: Vouchers

A science teacher read the post about the textbooks used in some of Louisiana’s voucher schools. As we know, Governor Jindal is eager to pay public money to send children in Louisiana to religious schools that teach creationism as fact. So is Republican candidate Mitt Romney, who looks to Jindal as an education expert and who praises vouchers for religious schools. The teacher writes:

Hopeful Monster Theory!!!!! Since when is there any such thing outside of the creationists imagination.  The Flying Spaghetti Monster perhaps but that was created to point of the fallacious arguments made by Intelligent Design.
Romney giving Jiindal the time of day for any education position is beyond ridiculous.  This is like giving the president of Exxon the position of EPA director.

Some of the schools getting voucher students–not all, but a significant number–use textbooks that teach creationism.

Jonathan Pelto posted what is found in a science textbook used to teach creationist “science”:

 

  1. “Biblical and scientific evidence seems to indicate that men and dinosaurs lived at the same time…. Fossilized tracks in the bed of the Paluxy River near Glen Rose, Texas, also give evidence that men and dinosaurs existed simultaneously. Fossilized human footprints and three-toed dinosaur tracks occur in the same rock stratum…. That dinosaurs existed with humans is an important discovery disproving the evolutionists’ theory that dinosaurs lived 70 million years before man. God created dinosaurs on the sixth day. He created man later the same day.”

    The ACE, (Accelerated Christian Education®) curriculum is being used in a number of Louisiana schools that receive public funding as a result of Jindal’s publicly funded voucher program.

    ACE claims that it maintains “high Biblical and academic standards and remained committed to setting children on a path for success. The goal is the same today: to prepare children for the world today and give them the academic and spiritual tools necessary to achieve their God-given potential.”

  2. “In a desperate attempt to keep the ‘sinking ship’ of evolution afloat, recent ‘scientists’ have proposed a new theory. This theory states that certain organisms experienced (for some unexplained reason) a dramatic genetic disturbance that hurled them across the gap left by the missing links. This theory, called the ‘hopeful monster’ theory, has no scientific basis.” ( Accelerated Christian Education, Science 1107)

I got a tweet from Britain saying that Michael Gove, the minister of education, has approved three new schools for state funding that teach creationism as science.

We know that Gove has been consulting with Joel Klein and the leaders of KIPP and has expressed great interest in charter schools. This seems to be the next step.

It does make you wonder if the world is spinning backwards. When will we see a replay of the Scopes trial?

I was re-reading Albert Shanker’s columns from the late 1990s this morning, and he warned that the greatest danger of the charter school idea was that each would “do its own thing,” have its own curriculum, and even its own version of truth. He was right.

UPDATE: Here is another view of creationism in UK schools: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jul/18/creationist-free-schools-hysteria?intcmp=239

We must remember that US debates are different from those played out in other nations.

A reader responded to a post about Michigan with the following comment.

I perked up because I was reminded of something I heard on CNN recently. Fareed Zakaria was interviewing Steven Rattner about hedge funds, equity investors, and outsourcing. Zakaria asked why so many capital investors end up sending jobs overseas, and Rattner answered very concisely. He said, and I paraphrase, “in a global economy, capital always seeks to lower costs. In a competitive marketplace, if you can’t cut costs, you go out of business. The name of the game is who can cut costs the most.”

What does this mean in an education marketplace? The school that can lower its costs the most wins. How do you lower costs? You increase class size and/or hire the least experienced, low-cost teachers.

So, the “winner” is the school with the largest class sizes and the least experienced teachers.

But these are not the factors associated with quality education. This would not describe the education at our nation’s elite schools, like Sidwell Friends, where the Obama daughters are enrolled, or at Exeter or Groton or Deerfield Academy, where so many of the corporate reformers send their children.

Snyder’s proposal to improve education by maximizing parental choice implicitly rests on the Adam-Smith-”invisible-hand” doctrine — that is, in a free market, the sellers who offer the best product will survive while the sellers who offer inferior products will fail.However, the invisible hand only works when the market works. As commenters have noted in responses to recent posts in Diane’s blog, there are major market failures in the school-choice marketplace, particularly in the low-SES/inner-city areas.Most buyers (parents) have little/no accurate information regarding the quality of competing schools and no practical way of obtaining accurate information.Similarly, many/most buyers (parents) do not know what mix of educational services would best serve their particular children’s education needs — i.e., strict vs. relaxed discipline, whole-language vs. phonics reading instruction, 1 well-paid experienced teacher or 2 poorly-paid inexperienced teachers/class; lots of computerized instruction vs. minimal computerized instruction.For even the most concerned, well-educated parents, the school choice decision would be largely a crapshoot and would probably be driven by factors unrelated to school quality — i.e., neighborhood rumors, where the children’s friends are going, ease of transportation.And, in low-SES areas (the only areas where we’re seriously concerned that school quality is too low), many of the parents will be relatively unconcerned with the school choice decision and virtually none of the parents will be well-educated. So, the school choice decisions of most parents in these areas will be entirely a crapshoot with the result that, in these areas, there is no reason to believe that Adam Smith’s invisible hand will operate — that is, there is no reason to believe that the schools chosen by the parents will be the schools that offer the best product.

For these reasons, under Snyder’s proposal, there is a strong incentive for a school to minimize operating costs and little incentive for a school to improve instructional quality, particularly in low-SES areas. We’ll see an explosion of low-cost, low-quality for-profit schools serving the low-SES areas providing an inferior educational product while making a high profit margin.

I received an email from Lottie Beebe, a member of the Louisiana Board of Elementary and Secondary Education. She is an experienced educator who won a seat on the board and has been a voice of sanity in a dark time.

As a member of the Louisiana Board of Elementary and Secondary Education (BESE), I want to thank you for your continued efforts to inform education stakeholders across our wonderful country and beyond of the concerns related to Louisiana’s education reform. As an experienced educator of 27 years, I decided to seek the BESE position because I truly wanted to contribute to the responsible reform of our educational system. However, shortly after securing the District 3 BESE seat, I realized my voice would be muffled by a group outnumbering me whose vision is strictly that of CHOICE.
My desire is to preserve traditional public education; however, I don’t see this happening in Louisiana. My idea of reform is to identify the strengths of the education system and build from those without totally dismantling the traditonal public education system. I recognize our society is broken. Until we acknowledge the poverty, apathy, dysfunction, lack of parental involvement, and all other factors that adversely impact student learning, we will continue to struggle to improve our educational ranking at the local, state, federal, and international levels–regardless of the educational setting. We can no longer continue to bury our heads in the sand. To quote a Louisiana legislator in a letter to his colleagues, he stated, “our society is broken and we can’t fix it.” Thus, in my opinion, the blame was placed on educators and there was a rush to “fix education.”
On another note, I am so proud of the educators throughout Louisiana who exhibited professionalism despite the constant criticism heard throughout the education reform debates. I applaud our educators for their continued commitment and desire for educational excellence despite the teacher bashing that occurred this year leading up to and during the Louisiana legislative session. Television commercials aired frequently showing students banging their heads against lockers in an attempt to vilify our hardworking teachers and administrators. Despite the educator bashing, the release of 2012 test scores revealed academic improvement across Louisiana’s public schools. Imagine this! The improvement was attributed to the most recent education reforms. (Not true). For the last decade, Louisiana’s test scores have improved and can be verified via the Louisiana Department of Education website.
In closing, I will say to those in other states who want to emulate Louisiana’s education reform–BEWARE! As Ms. Raviitch and many others have communicated, where is the Accountability? Louisiana’s traditonal schools will be compelled to adhere to stringent federal and state guidelines where voucher and charter schools can exercise flexibility in curriculum, teacher evaluation, certification requirements, etc. How do we measure success when we are not comparing apples to apples or competing on an equitable field? Competition has been a resounding theme in Louisiana’s education reform debate. Imagine a football game—how fair is it for traditional schools (without the football gear) to compete with vouchers and charters who are in full game attire–helmets, etc? Who do you think stands the better chance of winning? My point, exactly! I am a voice for responsible education reform and welcome the competition as long as it is fair! THis is not the case in Louisiana and I predict it is only a matter of time before this ed reform movement will find its way to your communities.

A reader in Louisiana points out that the research I cited this morning was prepared by a 19-year-old who is fighting for quality education and real science education, not religious indoctrination. This is an uphill battle in Louisiana today, in light of the state’s decision to give public funding to schools that teach creationism as science.

 The young man whose blog you cited, Zach Kopplin – 19,  is a shining example of the ability and power that our youth have when they speak out and take action against injustice and just plain bad policy.   Zach has recorded a video for me to share at the Save Our Schools People’s Convention August 3-5 explaining his work to repeal Louisiana’s Creationist law when it was proposed. I will publish it on my blog as soon as it is edited and ready.  Zach testified yesterday at our Board of Education meeting when our Supt. John White presented his worthless accountability plan for private and parochial schools that received vouchers.   His testimony that many of the approved receiving schools bypass the proper teaching of science and replace it with creationism was compelling and presents the case that they are therefore unqualified to receive public funding because their curricula would not meet the “quality” criterion.    It should be one of the issues that is presented in the lawsuit filed by two of our state unions and a group of district school boards against the new voucher legislation. 

The voucher legislation in Louisiana will send millions of dollars to Christian academies that repudiate evolution and teach creationism. Their students will never learn about evolution other than to hear it ridiculed.

At least 20 of the religious schools that receive voucher students teach creationism, and as this researcher shows, that may be only the tip of the iceberg.

This is a descent into ignorance.

But in the eyes of a group of state superintendents called Chiefs for Change (the state superintendents of Florida, Oklahoma, New Jersey, New Mexico, Maine, Louisiana, Rhode Island, and Tennessee), this is called bold and visionary “reform.”

We are in deep trouble if we continue in this direction.

The Louisiana reforms should be recognized for what they are: An embarrassment to our nation.

Louisiana has made itself an international joke.

But for the children, it’s not funny.

John White spelled out the rules for nonpublic schools receiving vouchers, and few if any will be held accountable for student performance.

Most of the students taking public money with them are in kindergarten, first and second grades, where they are not tested.

And there will be no consequences for the voucher schools if their students fail:

White’s plan requires voucher students in grades 3-11 to take standardized tests like public school students, including the LEAP exam taken by fourth- and eighth-graders take. [But not all the students in the school.]

However, unlike public school students voucher recipients will not be required to pass LEAP to move to the next grade.

Private schools will not get letter grades, which their public school counterparts do.

The Reuters story about the voucher system spells it out: Even if students fail the state tests,there will be no accountability for the private schools.

Now we begin to understand what the voucher program is about.

It is not about helping the children. They can continue to fail and the state doesn’t care.

It is not about improving public education, as the money will come out of the public schools’ budget.

It is not about accountability, as the voucher schools won’t’ be held accountable.

So what is it really about? Is it about defunding public education? Is it about “choice” for the sake of choice, without regard to the consequences?

What’s the point?

 

I just discovered that I forgot to post the link to the story about the McKay Scholarship Program published by the Miami New Times, so I am reposting this entry. Gus Garcia-Roberts, the reporter who conducted this investigation of fraud in the voucher program for students with disabilities, was honored by the Society for Professional Journalists for this story.

Marcus Winters is one of those researchers who always advocates for vouchers. He often writes opinion pieces in places like the New York Post and the Wall Street Journal, extolling the virtues of vouchers and private management.

In this article in Rupert Murdoch’s New York Post, Winters explains why New York should follow the example of Florida and give vouchers to special education students.

Winters extols Florida’s McKay Scholarship program but fails to mention that it became immersed in scandal after a Miami newspaper wrote an expose.

The schools receiving vouchers are unregulated; the state never inquires about their curriculum or their facilities.

A brief excerpt from the story in the Miami New Times:

While the state played the role of the blind sugar daddy, here is what went on at South Florida Prep, according to parents, students, teachers, and public records: Two hundred students were crammed into ever-changing school locations, including a dingy strip-mall space above a liquor store and down the hall from an Asian massage parlor. Eventually, fire marshals and sheriffs condemned the “campus” as unfit for habitation, pushing the student body into transience in church foyers and public parks.

The teachers were mostly in their early 20s. An afternoon for the high school students might consist of watching a VHS tape of a 1976Laurence Fishburne blaxploitation flick —Cornbread, Earl and Me — and then summarizing the plot. In one class session, a middle school teacher recommended putting “mother nature” — a woman’s period — into spaghetti sauce to keep a husband under thumb. “We had no materials,” says Nicolas Norris, who taught music despite the lack of a single instrument. “There were no teacher edition books. There was no curriculum.”

In May 2009, two vanloads of South Florida Prep kids were on the way back from a field trip to Orlando when one of the vehicles flipped along Florida’s Turnpike. A teacher and an 18-year-old senior were killed. Turns out another student, age 17 and possessing only a learner’s permit, was behind the wheel and had fallen asleep. The families of the deceased and an insurance company are suing Brown for negligence.

Meanwhile, Brown openly used a form of corporal punishment that has been banned in Miami-Dade and Broward schools for three decades. Four former students and the music teacher Norris recall that the principal frequently paddled students for misbehaving. In a complaint filed with the DOE in April 2009, one parent rushed to the school to stop Brown from taking a paddle to her son’s behind.

The reporter described the McKay Scholarship program as: “…a perverse science experiment, using disabled school kids as lab rats and funded by nine figures in taxpayer cash: Dole out millions to anybody calling himself an educator. Don’t regulate curriculum or even visit campuses to see where the money is going. For optimal results, do this in Florida, America’s fraud capital.”

The program has doled out over $1 billion in public funds to more than 1,000 schools. What does deregulation mean? “There is no accreditation requirement for McKay schools. And without curriculum regulations, the DOE can’t yank back its money if students are discovered to be spending their days filling out workbooks, watching B-movies, or frolicking in the park. In one “business management” class, students shook cans for coins on street corners.”

Because the schools are private — although accepting publicly funded vouchers — the DOE is not allowed to monitor curriculum. For the same reason, the department claims it can’t bar corporal punishment, despite parents’ complaints that children are being paddled.

Marcus Winters’ colleague Jay Greene at the University of Arkansas defended the McKay Scholarship program by pointing to an anecdote about a child in a public school special-education program in Alabama who was maltreated. Greene disparaged the publication, implying that it is an untrustworthy source, not to be taken seriously. But the writer of the story, Gus Garcia-Roberts was honored by the Society of Professional Journalists, which named him as first-place winner of its Sigma Delta Chi award for public service journalism for a reporter at a non-daily publication.

Unlike Greene’s defense of the McKay Scholarships, the story in the Miami New Times was not an anecdote about the mistreatment of one child. It was a story about a system in which many children are mistreated, the result of a two-month investigation into a state-funded program that has no standards for the schools that receive the state’s most vulnerable children.

Six months after the original story, the newspaper wrote a follow-up. Florida legislators, including sponsors of the vouchers for special education, have vowed to reform the program. “Sen. Stephen Wise, a Jacksonville Republican who originally co-sponsored the program, declared our findings “appalling… I’m amazed that there’s not more scrutiny about where the money is going.” The program’s progenitor, former Florida Senate President McKay, a Republican from Bradenton, concluded: “Somebody better get off their ass and fix those problems.”

Meanwhile, New York legislators need to do something to reform the state’s privatized program of special education for preschoolers. Just weeks ago, the New York Times published an expose about the fraud and corruption in that expensive, scandal-ridden boondoggle.

We will have to wait for court challenges to be resolved before we know whether Bobby Jindal’s voucher plan meets the requirements of both the Louisiana state constitution (which says that public money is for public schools) and the U.S. Constitution, which says nothing about education.

The U.S. Supreme Court did uphold a voucher plan in Cleveland a decade ago, and this blogger analyzes whether Louisiana’s plan meets the same criteria. (Of course, no one now points to Cleveland as an example of the benefits of vouchers, but that’s another story.)

But what we know now is that the offer of vouchers did not provoke a stampede for the exits, as voucher advocates have claimed for more than half a century. We have heard again and again about all those poor kids trying desperately to escape their failing schools. We now know that this claim is false. Only 2% of all those eligible to get a state-funded voucher even asked for one. 98% made a choice to stay where they are.

So much for voucher mythology.

And we also know that many of the voucher schools are poorly equipped, under-resourced, and offer a meager and/or faith-based curriculum that will not prepare children for the 21st century.

Louisiana has become a national laughing stock because of its voucher program. I take that back. Louisiana has become an international laughing stock, as media in other nations published stories about the schools using textbooks saying the Loch Ness monster proves that evolution never happened.

Whether it passes muster in court is important, because of the implications for similar raids on the public budget. But ultimately we have learned something perhaps even more important: The public is not clamoring for vouchers, and if we want to create a future for our children and our society, we should build the best public schools in the world.