In the latest Ohio state budget, there are big giveaways to religious and private schools. The Legislature expanded the state’s voucher programs. Originally, vouchers were supposed to “save poor kids from failing public schools,” but in the new expansion, vouchers are available to high school students who never attended a public school. That is, they subsidize students in religious and private schools. Period.

In the only evaluation of the Ohio voucher program, sponsored by the rightwing Thomas B. Fordham Institute, students who used vouchers fell behind students who stayed in the public schools.

These programs are simply a transfer of public dollars frompublic schools to private schools, with no benefit to students.

Jan Resseger writes here about the latest betrayal of the people of Ohio and the public schools that most children attend, despite the availability of many charters and vouchers.

She begins:

Ohio has five voucher programs. Two of them are for students with autism and other disabilities, and their enrollment depends on the incidence of these conditions and parents’ awareness of the availability of voucher funds to pay for private programs. A third voucher program—the Cleveland Scholarship Program—one of the oldest in the country—is for students in Cleveland.

This blog post will focus on the last two—EdChoice and EdChoice Expansion. They are statewide Ohio school voucher programs designed specifically, according to the Republican lawmakers who have designed and promoted these programs, to enable students to escape so-called “failing” schools. It is important to remember that those same legislators have failed adequately to fund the public schools in Ohio’s poorest school districts, and those same legislators have looked at state takeover as another “solution” (besides expanding vouchers and charter schools) for the students in those districts. Ohio education policy for school districts serving very poor children is defined by punishment, not support.

EdChoice and EdChoice Expansion vouchers rob the public schools of essential dollars needed to educate the majority of Ohio’s students who remain in public schools. And the vouchers are used primarily by students enrolled in religious schools. Through EdChoice and EdChoice Expansion vouchers, the state is sending millions of tax dollars out of the state’s public education budget and out of the coffers of local school districts to fund the religious education of students who would likely never have enrolled in public schools in the first place.

The problem just got worse this summer when the Ohio Legislature passed a two year budget which radically expands both programs. The Ohio Association of School Business Officials (OASBO) recently published an update on its website to inform school treasurers about what just happened. OASBO reports: “HB 166 (the new state budget) expanded the EdChoice Scholarship program in multiple ways.”

Changes in the EdChoice voucher program: Although legislators have always said the purpose of vouchers is to provide an “escape” from so-called failing schools, the new budget provides that high school students are no longer required to have been previously enrolled in a public school to qualify for the voucher. OASBO explains: “Generally, students wishing to claim a voucher under the original EdChoice voucher program must have attended a public school in the previous school year. However, HB 166 codifies in law… (that) students going into grades 9-12 need not first attend a public school. In other words, high school students already attending a private school can obtain a voucher.”

Ohio was one of the leading states in the 19th century “Common school movement,” which created the American public school as a guarantee of free public education for every child. It is now leading the movement to demolish that promise and renounce the state’s proud history. It should go without saying that the state’s Republican leaders have never put a referendum on the ballot to ask the people of Ohio whether they approve of this massive diversion of public funds to religious and private schools. They know it would be rejected.

The Ohio State Constitution, Article 6, Section 2 and 3

Text of Section 2:
School Funds

The General Assembly shall make such provisions, by taxation, or otherwise, as, with the income arising from the school trust fund, will secure a thorough and efficient system of common schools throughout the state; but no religious or other sect, or sects, shall ever have any exclusive right to, or control of, any part of the school funds of this state.

Text of Section 3:
Public School System, Boards of Education

Provision shall be made by law for the organization, administration and control of the public school system of the state supported by public funds: provided, that each school district embraced wholly or in part within any city shall have the power by referendum vote to determine for itself the number of members and the organization of the district board of education, and provision shall be made by law for the exercise of this power by such school districts.

Betsy DeVos has awarded more than $200 million to the IDEA charter chain to expand in Texas and beyond. IDEA plans to swamp San Antonio, El Paso, and other cities.

IDEA promises that all students will graduate and go to college, but it doesn’t promise that all students will make it to senior year, or that they will make it in college (earlier studies by Ed Fuller, then at the University of Texas, now at Penn State, found that IDEA graduates had high dropout rates from college).

Read this study of IDEA to learn more.

 

Texas Charter Schools – Perception May Not Be Real

IDEA Public Schools: Remove the “Rose–Colored Glasses” and Many RED FLAGS Appear

By:  William J. Gumbert

 

IDEA Public Schools (“IDEA”) is the fastest growing privately-operated charter school in Texas and its rapid expansion in local communities is funded and controlled by “special interests” that desire to “privatize” public education.  With promotions of a “100% College Acceptance Rate” and students being “Accepted to the College or University of Their Choice”, a full-time staff is employed to advocate for IDEA in local communities and to aggressively recruit “economically-disadvantaged” parents dreaming of a better life for their children.

Ann Landers said: “Rose-colored glasses are never made in bifocals.  Nobody wants to read the small print in dreams”.But with the education of children and millions of taxpayer dollars at stake, the small print is vitally important. Part 4 of this 5–part series removes the “rose-colored glasses” that are inherent in the promotions of IDEA Public Schools to provide parents, taxpayers and communities an opportunity to review the potential RED FLAGS that appear when the light is solely focused on the facts of the rapidly expanding, privately-operated charter school.

Overview, Growth, Taxpayer Funding and Financial Benefits: As a privately-operated charter, IDEA has been approved by the State to separately operate in community-based school districts with taxpayer funding.  Since opening with 150 students in 2000, IDEA has been consistentlyfocused on expanding its footprint. In this regard, IDEAstrategic growth plan states it will serve 100,000 students by 2022 as new campuses are opened in Austin, El Paso, Houston, Midland/Odessa, Rio Grande Valley, San Antonio, Tarrant County, Louisiana and Florida. At 100,000 students, IDEA would be the 31st largest school system in the United States.

With an appointed board in the Rio Grande Valley, the expansion of IDEA is orchestrated without the involvement of local communities and taxpayers.  IDEA’s growth is solely controlled by its appointed board, the State and its private donors.  With the legislature supporting the expansion of privately-operated charter schools, the State recently approved IDEA to open 21 additional campuses across Texas.

IDEA Public Schools – Annual Taxpayer Funding

IDEA’s flexibility to expand has resulted in more and more taxpayer funding. Since its first graduating class of 25 students in 2007, IDEA’s taxpayer funding has increased from $14.9 million to approximately $440 million per year.  This represents an increase in taxpayer funding of 2,853% in only 13 years.  

 

IDEA’s growth has also proven to be lucrative for its leadership team.  As disclosed on its 2017 IRS Form 990, the Chief Executive Officer and Superintendent collectively received financial benefits totaling $968,208 in year 2017/18.  In addition, 8 other IDEA administrators received financial benefits totaling between $219,070 – $466,006.  On average, IDEA’s Central Office administrators have a salary of $200,249, while the statewide average salary for Central Office administrators in all Texas public schools is $102,300.

Other benefits for IDEA’s leadership team include free travel for family members to IDEA events and the potential use of IDEA’s private airplane secured through a long-term lease.  That’s right, a taxpayer-funded “charter” school targeting underserved communities uses a private plane for “charter” flights.

Special Interests are Controlling and Directing IDEA’s Expansion – Not Communities and Taxpayers: As a privately-operated public school, IDEA’s expansion is not subject to the approval of local communities. Rather, IDEA’s expansion is controlled, directed and funded by “special interests” that desire to “privatize” public education.  IDEA’s growth strategy proves this: “new regional expansions are the result of community supported education reform groups soliciting and inviting IDEA to open in their region and concurrently offering substantial startup and operational funding…”.  

As shown below, IDEA has received financial commitments totaling over $150 million from private donors to expand in various regions of the State. It is important to emphasize that these financial commitments are contingent upon IDEA following the criteria specified by the donor (not parents, communities or taxpayers), which includes the opening of a specified number of new IDEA campuses in each region.

Private Donor

Commitment to IDEA

Expansion Region

Permian Strategic Partners

(Scharbauer and Abell-Hanger Foundations)

$ 55,000,000

Midland/Odessa

Charter School Growth Fund

(Gates and Walton Family Foundations)

$  23,800,000

Rio Grande Valley

KLE Foundation

$  23,558,800

Austin

CREEED Foundation (Hunt Family Foundation)

$  17,000,000

El Paso

Laura and John Arnold Foundation

$    9,500,000

Houston

Sid W. Richardson Foundation

$    5,774,000

Tarrant County

Kleinheinz Family Foundation

$    5,774,000

Tarrant County

Ewing Halsell Foundation

$    5,500,000

San Antonio

Walton Family Foundation

$    5,417,800

Tarrant County

Choose to Succeed and City Education Partners

(George W. Brackenridge Foundation)

$   4,528,351

San Antonio

 

 

IDEA Reduces the Funding of Community-Based School Districts by an Estimated $350 Million Per Year:   IDEA’s expansions are typically promoted with much publicity and fanfare.  But such announcements routinely fail to mention the negative financial impact to local school districts that result from IDEA’s expansion. In this regard, Newton’s Third Law – “for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction”, applies to education funding. In most cases, there is not any additional funding provided for IDEA to operate in communities as local public education funding is finite. As IDEA enters a community, the available funding must be divided amongst IDEA and the existing community-based school districts.  In other words, the funding provided to IDEA will directly reduce the funding and ability of community-based school districts to simultaneously serve students. At this time, it is estimated that IDEA’s expansion in local communities has reduced the funding of community-based school districts by $350 million per year.

IDEA Has Lower Teacher and Principal Experience and Larger Class Sizes: Most parents likely prefer for their child to attend a school that deploys lower “student to teacher” ratios and smaller class sizes. Parents are also likely to prefer teachers and principals with more experience. But IDEA’s“education model” defies these logical preferences. According to Texas Academic Performance Reports (“TAPR”) published by the Texas Education Agency (“TEA”), IDEA’s average class size in the 3rd grade is 28.9 students or 9.9 more students than the statewide average. In addition, while IDEA publicly advertises that it has “Expert Teachers”, the average experience of IDEA’s teachers is only 1.9 years and 90.9% of IDEA’s teachers have 5 years of experience or less.   In comparison, the average teacher experience for all Texas public schools is significantly higher at 10.9 years.  Teacher turnover has also been historically high at IDEA with 22.1% of teachers leaving each year, which is 33.1% higher than statewide average. 

Maybe IDEA has figured out how to achieve its promoted results with larger class sizes, lower experienced staff and higher teacher turnover.  But if a child was needing to see a doctor, I think most parents would prefer a doctor with 10.9 years of experience, fewer patients and longevity within the community.

COMPARISON OF IDEA PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND STATE AVERAGE – TEXAS PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Teacher and Principal Experience, Class Size and Turnover

 

 

 

State Average – Texas Public Schools

Description

IDEA

Public

Schools

19.0 Students

CLASS SIZE – GRADE 3

28.9 Students

18.7

NUMBER OF STUDENTS PER TEACHER

15.1

10.9 Years

AVERAGE TEACHER EXPERIENCE

1.9 Years

37.3%

TEACHERS WITH 5 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE OR LESS

90.9%

6.3 Years

AVERAGE EXPERIENCE – SCHOOL PRINCIPALS

2.7 Years

16.6%

ANNUAL TEACHER TURNOVER

22.1%

 

 

IDEA’s Per Student Expenditures for Instruction and Student Services are Significantly Below Statewide Average:  Like a household or a business, the expenditures of a public school can provide insight into the priorities of the school. Once again, IDEA’s unique model defies the norm. In comparison to all Texas public schools, IDEA spends:

▪ 17.3% less per student on instruction;
▪ 91.2% less per student on career and technical training;
▪ 65.5% less per student on extra-curricular activities to supplement the education of students;
▪ 43.6% less per student on students with disabilities; and
▪ Zero dollars to educate students with a discipline history as such students are excluded from enrolling at IDEA.

COMPARISON OF IDEA PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND STATE AVERAGE

Per Student Expenditures

 

 

 

However, IDEA does spend 99.7% more per student on “School Leadership/General Administration”.  It is interesting to note that in comparison to the statewide per student average, the lower dollar amount that IDEA spends of “Instruction” is essentially equal to the higher dollar that IDEA spends on “School Leadership/General Administration”.

State Average – Texas Public Schools

Description

IDEA

Public

Schools

$ 5,492

INSTRUCTION

$ 4,543

 62.7%

INSTRUCTION EXPENDITURE RATIO

50.9% 

$    299

EXTRA-CURRICULAR ACTIVITIES

$    103

$    296

CAREER AND TECHNICAL TRAINING

$     26

$     75

ALTERNATIVE EDUCATION

$      0

$ 908

SCHOOL LEADERSHIP/GENERAL ADMINISTRATION

$ 1,813 

$ 174

SOCIAL WORK, HEALTH AND COMMUNITY SERVICES

$     62

$ 1,157

STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES

$   652

 

IDEA Serves a Lower Percentage of “At Risk”, “Special Education” and “Disciplinary” Students: It is true that IDEA serves primarily “economically-disadvantaged” students.   But every “economically-disadvantaged” student is unique; and some students require more attention and resources. These include students that are categorized by the State as “At Risk” of dropping-out, “Special Education” due to a physical or learning disability and those with a “Disciplinary” history.   

IDEA Public Schools and Community-Based School Districts Targeted for Expansion

2017/18 Enollment Demographics

While IDEA publicly promotes that it is “Open to All Students”, IDEA’s enrollment eligibility criteria states that it may “exclude” students with a “Disciplinary” history.  In 2017/18, IDEA enrolled zero “Disciplinary” students and as such, IDEA is not really open to all students. In addition, data published by TEA demonstrates that IDEA serves a significantly lower percentage of “At Risk” and “Special Education” students than the community-based school districts from which they recruit students.  While there could be many reasons for this, it may be that IDEA is designed to only appeal to a certain segment of students in the communities they operate within.

Student Description

Austin ISD

Cypress-Fairbanks

ISD

El Paso ISD

Fort Worth ISD

Ector County ISD

Northside ISD – (San Antonio)

IDEA Public Schools

At Risk

51.3%

44.7%

56.3%

77.8%

57.4%

47.0%

45.9%

Special Education

10.9%

8.0%

10.7%

8.3%

8.4%

11.6%

5.2%

Disciplinary Placement

1,140

1,131

1,049

674

555

1,374

0

 

IDEA Has a Small Number of Graduates and an Alarming High School Student Attrition Rate:  While any high school graduate is to be celebrated, the actual number of IDEA graduates remains relatively small for a charter that has been approved by the State to expand to 83,000 students.  Based upon information published by TEA, in years 2015-2017 IDEA only averaged 571 graduates, which is comparable to the number of graduates at Coronado High School in El Paso ISD.   

IDEA PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Graduation Summary and High School Student Attrition – Classes of 2015-2017

 

 

Additionally, the high attrition rates of IDEA high schoolstudents indicate that its “educational model” may not be fulfilling the needs of all students.  As shown below, 24.8% of students enrolled in an IDEA high school during years 2015-2017 did not make it to graduation.  In each year, an average of 202 students left IDEA to attend another Texas public high school. In other words, only 3 of every 4 high school students graduate from IDEA as 1 of every 4 students leaves to enroll at a community-based school district or other Texas public high school.

Graduating

Class

Beginning 9thGraders

No. of Students – Transferring to Another Texas Public School

Actual Graduates

Change – 9thGraders Less Actual Graduates

Percentage Change – 9thGraders Less

Actual Graduates 

2015

747

224

539

–208

–27.8%

2016

670

181

500

–170

–25.4%

2017

865

200

675

–190

-22.0%

3-Year Average

761

202

571

–189

-24.8%

 

IDEA’S “100% College Acceptance Rate” is a False and Misleading Promotion:   IDEA’s promoted legacy is that “100% of (Students/Seniors/Graduates) are Accepted to College” and they have even promoted in formal documents that “100% of Graduates are Accepted to the College or University of Their Choice”.  But based upon the facts listed below, these promotions are simply not true and are “materially misleading” to prospective parents, many of which are “economically-disadvantaged”.

▪ First, IDEA does not disclose that its college acceptance rate is artificially manipulated by its graduation requirements, which REQUIRES students to be accepted to a 4-year college/university in order to graduate.

 

▪ Second, IDEA fails to disclose its high student attrition rate as 1 of every 4 students enrolled in an IDEA high school transfers to another Texas public high school prior to graduation.

 

▪ Third, IDEA does not disclose that its number of graduatesis relatively small, ranging from as few as 25 students to 571 students in 2017, and are not comparable to the community-based school districts it operates within. Statewide, over 300,000 students graduate from Texas high schools each year.

 

▪ Third and most importantly, 125 IDEA graduates applied to a 4-year Texas college/university in years 2012-2016and were not accepted according to latest data published by “tpeir-Texas Education Reports”,

 

▪ Fourth, the misleading nature of the statement that “students are accepted to the college or university of their choice” speaks for itself and such a statement raises thequestion of IDEA’s real motivations.

IDEA Graduates Have a Lower College Graduation Rate: In recent years, IDEA has attempted to broaden its appeal by promoting its unique model and curriculum is preparing students for success in college.  For example, IDEA’s Student Handbook and IMPACT Magazine that is prepared for students, parents and supporters includes the following statements:

▪ “IDEA has focused on raising the achievement levels and expectations of students who are underserved so they have the opportunity to attend and succeed in college”;

 

▪ “Since inception, IDEA has promised countless families that we will get their child to and through college”; and

 

▪ Vision: To ensure the state of Texas reaches its fullest potential, IDEA will become the region’s largest creator of college graduates.

Despite these statements, the college graduation rate of IDEA students is significantly lower than college bound students graduating from community-based school districts in the geographic areas it serves. According to “tpeir – Texas Education Reports”, only 36.9% of IDEA’s 2012 class of 122 students that enrolled in a 4-year Texas college/university had graduated by 2017.  In comparison, the college graduation rate for college-bound students in community-based school districts targeted by IDEA for expansion ranged from a minimum of 50.2% to a high of 84.1%.

 

IDEA Public Schools and Community-Based School Districts Targeted for Expansion

Class of 2012 Enrolling and Graduating From 4-Year Texas College/University by 2017

 

Description

Austin ISD

Cypress-Fairbanks

ISD

El Paso ISD

Fort Worth ISD

Ector CountyISD

Northside ISD (San Antonio)

IDEA Public Schools

Enrolled

872

1,409

1,129

525

190

1,120

122

Graduated

603

1,185

567

323

145

872

45

Graduation Percentage

69.1%

84.1%

50.2%

61.5%

76.3%

77.8%

36.9%

 

 

IDEA Graduates Have Lower Success During Initial Year of Attending a 4-Year Texas College/University:  There may be many contributing factors for the lower college graduation rate of IDEA students and unfortunately, poverty may be one.However, information published by the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board indicates poverty is not the only one.

Of the 467 trackable graduates within IDEA’s class of 2018 that enrolled in a 4-year Texas public college/university, 37% had a GPA below 2.0 and an additional 21% had a GPA below 2.5 in their initial year.  In other words, despite IDEA’s promoted focus on preparing students to succeed in college, 58% of IDEA’s 2018 graduates had a GPA below 2.49 in their initial year of attending a 4-year Texas public college/university.

 

 

Closing: As IDEA Public Schools expands in your communityat the direction of privately funded “special interests” and your community relinquishes control of certain schools and taxpayer funding to the privately-operated charter, you deserve to know the facts.

To me, the facts do not support IDEA’s self-proclaimedsuccess as many RED FLAGS appear when the “rose-colored glasses” are removed from IDEA’s promotions.  In addition, the facts are very similar to the circumstances of previousattempts to “privatize” public services that failed to fulfill theirpromises.  In this regard, the factual similarities include the promotion by “special interests”, lower expenditures to deliver public services, fewer public services, deployment of lessexperienced staff, higher administrative costs, employment of full-time promotional staffs and misleading advertisements, targeting of prospective customers, high turnover and the denial of service to certain customers.  

But these are only my thoughts and with the future of children and communities at stake, I encourage you to do a little homework and form your own conclusions.  Afterall, it’s your students, your schools, your tax dollars and your community.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8bMZiGFYbRFTjZfYm5ZVnZFVmlFZUw4ZWRhOFYyZWFXaENJ/view

The Clark County Education Association (Las Vegas) announced that teachers will strike on September 10 if they can’t reach a settlement with the district before then.

ON TAP Today from the American Prospect
AUGUST 20, 2019

Meyerson on TAP

How the Media Should Cover Corporations Now.

Yesterday’s restatement of corporate purpose from the Business Roundtable is a clear acknowledgment that America’s economic pooh-bahs have realized they’re about as popular as a strain of bacteria. There is much to be said about this about-face, in which the Roundtable said that the purpose of American corporations is no longer to maximize shareholder value at the expense of all other corporate stakeholders, but rather to treat those stakeholders—including employees, consumers, and communities, as well as shareholders—as equals. I’ll say more at greater length later this week.

For now, though, here’s a suggestion to the business page editors of American newspapers: Now that shareholder value isn’t the be-all and end-all of corporate purpose, you need to supplement your business coverage with indices of more than a corporation’s share prices. How about posting the median wage of its employees, and the ratio of CEO pay to median worker pay alongside the daily share value? How about posting (it’s OK to use abbreviations) whether a particular corporation offers defined benefit pensions (DBFs) or 401(k)s, paid sick days (PSDs—you get the point), paid family leave, and paid vacation time—for starters. How about listing the number of U.S. employees and whether a company is unionized or not?

Obviously, media outlets devoted to Milton Friedman’s nostrums, which have done more to destroy the American middle class over the past 40 years than any other body of thought, will have no interest in listing more than the share price. But the general welfare of the vast majority of the American people depends primarily on wages and benefits, not share values. How about conforming your economic coverage to ’muricans’ actual needs? ~ HAROLD MEYERSON

!

Copyright (C) 2019 The American Prospect. All rights reserved.
THE AMERICAN PROSPECT | 1225 I Street NW, Suite 600 | Washington, D.C. 20005 | U.S.A.

Steve Bullock entered the Democratic primary race late, and he starts at the back of the pack.

He needs to have 130,000 individuals contributions in order to qualify for the next debate.

I am asking you to send Steve Bullock $1 to keep him on the stage and to encourage him to talk about what he has done to improve public schools in Montana.

What he has going for him is two things:

1) he is the only candidate in the stage who won re-election in a red state that went for Trump by 20 points. In other words, he knows how to connect to people as a problem-solver who listens. He proved that he can win in a red state.

2) he has a solid pro-public education record. Montana has only two charter schools and both are under the direct supervision of local school districts. They exist because the district needs them, not because an entrepreneur or a charter chain has decided to open a charter.

Steve Bullock is unabashedly pro-public education and pro-union. NPE Action examined his record and gave him high marks for his commitment to public schools.

I am not asking you to support Steve Bullock. I have not endorsed him or anyone else.

I encourage you to send him $1 so you can be counted as a contributor and help him earn a place in the next big debate.

When teachers in West Virginia launched the Education Spring of 2018, one of their demands was “no charter schools.” The state’s public schools are already underfunded, and public school teachers had low pay compared to nearby states. The teachers understood that the addition of charter schools would mean fewer resources for public schools. Given that West Virginia is a largely rural state, there was no need or demand for a parallel school system of private contractors.

The legislature and governor agreed to the teschers’ demands but proceeded to double cross them by passing a charter law.

Charter advocates were thrilled. Another conquest for privatization.

But now charter advocates are “perturbed.” In fact, they are truly dismayed and having a hissy fit. They are downright ticked off.

It seems West Virginia law allows only school districts to authorize charters.

That is very very bad in charter land because districts are unlikely to welcome entrepreneurs, amateurs, and corporate raiders to tap their resources and cherrypick the students they want.

The National Alliance for Public [sic] Charter Schools won’t provide any assistance because they are so displeased. Its crack TFA alum, Emily Schultz, expressed her displeasure with West Virginia law; she previously was in charge of charters for the state of Alabama (which has a grand total of two charter schools).

Imagine that! A local school district having the right to decide who can open on their turf and poach their students!

When then Governor Christie and then Mayor Cory Booker persuaded billionaire Mark Zuckerberg to give $100 million to impose corporate reform on Newark, performance pay for teachers was the heart of their plan. Pay the “best” teachers for getting high scores, eliminate “bad” teachers, and Newark schools would be transformed.

In a major blow to the corporate reform movement, the latest teacher contract in Newark just eliminated performance pay.

It didn’t work in Newark, and it hasn’t worked anywhere else. It is a zombie idea. Teachers aren’t holding back, waiting for a bonus to goad them on. They are doing the best they know how. With help and support, they can improve, but not because of rewards and threats.

https://www.chalkbeat.org/posts/newark/2019/08/15/merit-pay-was-the-heart-of-a-revolutionary-teachers-contract-in-newark-now-the-cory-booker-era-policy-is-disappearing/

In 2012, Newark teachers agreed to a controversial new contract that linked their pay to student achievement — a stark departure from the way most teachers across the country are paid.

The idea was to reward teachers for excellent performance, rather than how many years they spent in the district or degrees they attained. Under the new contract, teachers could earn bonuses and raises only if they received satisfactory or better ratings, and advanced degrees would no longer elevate teachers to a higher pay scale.

The changes were considered a major victory for the so-called “education reform” movement, which sought to inject corporate-style accountability and compensation practices into public education. And they were championed by an unlikely trio: New Jersey’s Republican governor, the Democratic-aligned leader of the nation’s second-largest teachers union, and Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, who had allocated half of his $100 million gift to Newark’s schools to fund a new teachers contract.

“In my heart, this is what I was hoping for: that Newark would lead a transformational change in education in America,” then-Gov. Chris Christie said in Nov. 2012 after the contract was ratified.

Seven years later, those changes have been erased.

Last week, negotiators for the Newark Teachers Union and the district struck a deal for a new contract that scraps the bonuses for top-rated teachers, allows low-rated teachers to earn raises, and gives teachers with advanced degrees more pay. It also eliminates other provisions of the 2012 contract, which were continued in a follow-up agreement in 2017, including longer hours for low-performing schools.

“All vestiges of corporate reform have been removed,” declared a union document describing the deal.

Fraud after fraud is associated with virtual charter schools, especially when they are created by entrepreneurs with the purpose of making money. They do make money, but they don’t educate students. Why do legislators and governors allow this scam to proliferate? Every educator should shout their outrage at the ripoffs, happening in state after state. Virtual charter schools are the epitome of “education reform” as hoax.

John Thompson of Oklahoma describes the Oklahoma scam here.

An Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation affidavit alleges that Epic Charter Schools’ co-founders, David Chaney and Ben Harris, split at least $10 million in profits from 2013 to 2018. The Epic scandal offers some unique insights into both the for-profit charter’s culture and the nature of the school privatization movement, as well as the downsides of online instruction in an age of corporate school reform.

Chaney and Harris allegedly recruited “ghost students” from homeschools and sectarian, private schools “for the purpose of unlawfully diverting State Appropriated Funds to their own personal use.” Epic established a $800 to $1000 per student learning fund for students who were not on the State Department of Education (SDE) “conflict list,” meaning that they were not enrolled in a public school; the state would have known of the illegal dual enrollment had names appeared in both lists. Those students were known as “members of the $800 club,” and their supposed instructors were known as “straw teachers.”

Affidavit: Epic Charter Schools used ‘ghost students’ to embezzle state funds

The following are details that reveal crucial facts relevant to online charters across the nation.

First, the OSBI search warrant cited a case which apparently reveals intent to defraud. A convicted felon, identified as LDW, saw Epic as an opportunity for an “economic windfall.” LDW and her uncertified staff did not require students to work the hours required by the state to earn credit for a full school day. And then there was an interesting twist to the LDW story.

LDW’s research told her that dual enrollment was illegal. So, she converted her school into a“learning center” under the “Epic Model.” LDW made a “‘vague reference” and “implied” that she “‘may have” learned about the Epic model from the Epic website.” Apparently, she justified the acceptance of the $800 per student learning fund money not as “tuition,” but as “before and after care” and “tutoring fees.” Parents didn’t necessarily know or consent to the new model, but LDW sent a document entitled “General Assurance” to David Chaney asserting that she “was not doing anything ‘illegal.’”

The OSBI thus seems to be presenting the case that Epic was illegally draining money from the state, and that Chaney and Harris helped choreograph the illegalities.

Second, Epic’s state funding expanded dramatically, up to $112 million annually, as public schools endured huge budget cuts. Epic also used, or misused, the state’s charter conversion law to take over rural school districts through what one superintendent calls “predatory marketing,” using misleading advertising in “aggressive attempts to attract students and teachers from surrounding school districts even in the middle of the academic year.” And it planned to expand further. Epic had sought to take over the troubled Swink district, but that and the plan to expand in Texas and Arkansas have been put on hold.

Public School’s Switch to Charter Allows Epic to Operate Rural District

https://www.tulsaworld.com/news/local/education/southeastern-

Probe threatens Oklahoma virtual school expansion into Texas

So, Oklahoma was on the path towards even larger online charter scandals, such as in California, Ohio, Florida, and Indiana. And the investigation of the $180 million Florida school and the $40 Indiana fraud might be especially pertinent. It’s not just the way that their virtual school operators “shrug off blame.” More importantly, Florida and Indiana privatizers have the ears of many Oklahoma “reformers.”
Two Indiana virtual schools face swift closure as they shrug off blame for enrollment scandal

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/texas/article/Probe-threatens-Oklahoma-virtual-school-expansion-14277159.php
https://chalkbeat.org/posts/in/2019/07/25/two-indiana-virtual-schools-face-swift-closure-as-they-shrug-off-blame-for-enrollment-scandal/

And, third, that brings us to the Oklahoma Council for Public Affairs, Governor Stitt, and legislators who see choice as the panacea which could make Oklahoma a “Top Ten” state. Earlier this summer, the OCPA was bragging about the agenda they would push next year. It then touted Stitt’s support for vouchers and Florida’s education reform plan. In addition to claiming that reforming the state’s funding formula could produce transformative gains, it praised Indiana’s reforms. The OCPA’s claims that fixing Oklahoma’s imperfect but basically good funding formula could fix our schools on the cheap are completely divorced from reality.
https://www.ocpathink.org/post/a-next-generation-school-agenda-for-oklahoma

https://www.ocpathink.org/post/gov-stitt-are-we-done-absolutely-not

Oklahomans paying to educate ‘ghost students’ in numerous districts

Fourth, After Epic’s scandal became public, however, it’s taken alt truth to a new level. It first doubled-down on the politics of personalized vilification of educators and opponents.
Epic quickly replied to Jennifer Palmer’s journalism in Education Watch with insults but without facts. It claimed that the Oklahoma Watch article “implies that ALL Epic’s administrators are evil, skanky people hell bent on destruction of Oklahoma’s public education system.” Epic also argued that Palmer’s work linking such gamesmanship with incentives tied to accountability metrics is “more fiction than a Steven King novel.” They also called it “nefarious.”
After the OSBI’s search warrant was revealed, however, Epic’s responses have become completely bizarre. Whether you believe it needs some updating or not, Oklahoma’s funding formula is based on solid evidence and logic. But the OCPA and Sen. Gary Stanislawski, the Chair of the Senate Education Committee, say that the “weighted average” for funding different types of students in different grades is a system that funds “ghost students.” Equally absurd, the American Legislative Exchange Council, the OCPA, and Sen. Stanislawski claim that the “daily membership” formula funds “ghost students.” Worst of all, the Education Chair buys into the spin about Oklahoma’s formula, “It’s a legal way to rob other school districts.”
It must be stressed that the tactic of answering fact-based charges about “ghost students” with made-up attacks on solid, established funding systems for being schemes to fund made-up “ghost students” is not new and preceded the Oklahoma scandal. The OCPA drew on ALEC’s “Report Card on Education,” praising the way “Indiana Seizes the Hammer, Enacts Comprehensive Reform.” Not surprisingly, it promoted vouchers, charter expansion, undermining teachers’ rights, A-F Grade Cards, and “The Way of the Future: Digital Learning.” If the governor or legislative leaders would bother to follow the OCPA link to the 2012 ALEC report, they would learn that included no evidence that ghost students existed or that improvements resulted from their changes.

Fifth, in fact those “reforms” failed. During the four years after reforms were implemented, the four key tests on the reliable NAEP test scores showed gains of .25 points per year, meaning that student performance remained basically flat. Since they were supposed to be a civil rights campaign against the “low expectations” perpetrated by bad teachers, who were poorly trained and not held accountable by school systems, and defended by bad teachers unions, it is especially important to remember that Indiana’s economic achievement gap increased from 2013 to 2017.

NAEP State Profiles

NAEP State Profiles

Sixth, these alt facts lead to one of the worst aspects of ideology-driven, market-driven reform. Online charters like Epic inflict financial harm on schools. They help some students but hurt many more. Some of the worst damage, however, is inflicted on the principles of public education and our democracy.

Epic et.al have undermined public schools by slandering educators and education advocates. Their statistical and financial gamesmanship has been bad enough. It is their willingness to say anything and to falsely demonize opponents that has most corrupted our constitutional democracy. And that may be the saddest truth about the tragic results of the school privatization era.

The Education Research Alliance at Tulane University has accomplished a spectacular feat with its latest report about the “academic progress” (or lack thereof) of the all-charter district in New Orleans. The report claims that the disruption strategy of school takeovers and closures is responsible for the academic improvements in the district, but at the same time admits “The average school improved from the first to the second year after it opened, but school performance remained mostly flat afterwards. Schools starting off above the state average saw slightly declining performance in later years.” Furthermore, “quality peaked around 2013 and has either stagnated or started to decline during 2014-2016.”

So, here is the New Orleans model: Close almost all public schools. Replace them with private charters. Fire all the teachers. Replace most of the teachers with inexperienced, ill-trained TFA recruits. Close low-performing charters and replace them with other charters. Keep disrupting and churning. In the first two years, scores will go up, then stall. By year eight, “quality” will stagnate or decline. The schools will be highly stratified and racially segregated. The few high-performing schools will have selective admissions.

Here is the report, released this morning.

This report should be read in tandem with the latest state scores, which shows the all-charter district lagging far below state average scores, actually declining. Most charter schools in New Orleans, as detailed in this link prepared by a pro-charter organization, are very low-performing. The high-scoring schools have selective admissions.

New Orleans is one of the lowest performing districts in one of the lowest-performing states.It is a model of how privatization increases stratification and segregation. It should not be copied elsewhere.

But the report claims the success of the venture in school closings and privatization! Remember that the Education Research Alliance won a $10 million grant from Betsy DeVos after its report last year claiming the success of the privatization experiment.

Here is the press release for today’s report:

Study shows average public school quality has increased in New Orleans since Hurricane Katrina as a result of school closures, takeovers, and charter openings

New Orleans – The quality of New Orleans’ public schools improved considerably after Hurricane Katrina as a result of performance-based closures and takeovers, as well as charter openings, according to a new study from Education Research Alliance for New Orleans (ERA-New Orleans) at Tulane University. The study also found that variation in school quality has decreased, which means fewer students are in very low-performing schools.

Now an all-charter district, New Orleans public schools have returned to the control of the local school board. The city’s education leaders face challenging decisions about the district’s role in in school improvement, especially when and how the district should help support low-performing schools or take over these schools. This study provides insight into how these decisions can affect school quality.

“There are two main paths to improving the city’s schools: improving the ones we have or replacing them,” said ERA-New Orleans Director and lead author Douglas Harris. “Our findings suggest that we’ve been more successful with closing and taking over low-performing schools.”

The study’s authors analyzed data from 2002-2016 and found that the average New Orleans public school improved from the first to the second year after opening, but school performance remained mostly flat after the second year.

The study also examined factors beyond academic achievement to better understand how the city’s schools have evolved.

“The number of extracurricular activities that schools say they offer has increased over time,” co-author and ERA-New Orleans research analyst Alica Gerry said. “Also, there may have been a slight upward trend in the variety of school options in the city after the reforms, though this could just reflect school marketing rather than actual program offerings.”

“Students now have access to a wider range of higher quality schools than they did before, even in the first few years of reform,” Harris said. “School closures and takeovers should be a last resort, but they also show some promise when schools are consistently low-performing.”

The study’s authors are Douglas Harris (Tulane University), Lihan Liu (Tulane University), Alica Gerry (Tulane University), and Paula Arce-Trigatti (Rice University).

The novice journalist is likely to read the claims made about New Orleans—that outcomes improved because of charters and closing schools with low scores—and assume that this strategy of disruption is the key to good results. But unless they read the report closely, they may not notice that gains ended after the first or second year of an experiment now in its 15th year.

Expect more headlines about the New Orleans “miracle,” about the stagnation of market-based reforms in a city where most schools “perform” far below state averages.

One of my favorite columnists is Teresa Hanafin of the Boston Globe, who writes the daily Fast Forward, which always cites interesting tidbits from the Old Farmers’ Almanac, plus her observations on the news:

Trump has another Golf Recovery Monday, with nothing on his public schedule, although it may last more than one day since it’s actually a Vacation Recovery.

A few things from the weekend:

— Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell, European countries that are our allies, and executives, editors, and reporters at various and sundry US newspapers and TV networks have been working together to secretly develop a nefarious plan to wreck the economy so that Trump won’t be reelected. Oh, sorry — I should have said that’s the latest paranoid conspiracy theory Trump is spouting.

— Millions of US residents who were ineligible to vote in the 2016 election voted anyway, and a good number of them voted many times, costing Trump New Hampshire’s four electoral votes (Hillary Clinton beat him there) as well as the popular vote (Clinton received almost 2.9 million more votes than Trump). Oh, sorry — I should have said that’s another paranoid conspir … oh, never mind.

— On Thursday evening, the Log Cabin Republicans — a collective of LGBTQ members of the GOP — changed their mind about Trump and endorsed him in the 2020 election. They didn’t give him the nod in 2016, but this time around, they said he has advanced LGBTQ rights and helped the GOP move past “culture wars” during his tenure.

Those poor saps.

The very next day, Trump asked the Supreme Court to let companies fire workers just for being transgender. This isn’t any sort of religious thing. This is any company, any time, no special reason other than the gender identity of an employee.