Sign up for our newsletter

Gov. Larry Hogan reshapes schools, utility boards

The president of Marylanders to Prevent Gun Violence is doing something she has never done before: organizing volunteers to monitor the state’s Handgun Review Permit Board.

The board, which hears appeals from people who have been denied gun permits, is one of at least three in the state that oversees hot-button issues and now has a majority of its members appointed by first-term Gov. Larry Hogan, a Republican in a mostly Democratic state.

“We want to make sure the people who got on the board are voting with Maryland laws and not their personal philosophies,” said group President Jen Pauliukonis, explaining why the volunteers will take minutes of meetings and record each decision by the board. “We’re doing this because of the new appointees and because of our concern that Governor Hogan was trying to weaken our concealed-carry laws through the appointments.”

Hogan appointees also hold the majority on the state Board of Education and the Public Service Commission, which over the next several years are expected to make weighty decisions on everything from the role of standardized testing in schools to the expansion of charter schools, wind power and net metering, a system that allows customers to offset the cost of power drawn from solar panels that are connected to public-utility power grids.

Advocates from both sides of the political spectrum say they are watching closely to gauge the impact of those appointments.

Sen. Paul G. Pinsky (D-Prince George’s), vice chairman of the Senate Education, Health and Environmental Affairs Committee, said he thinks there is a “strong possibility” that the appointees could steer Maryland away from the progressive policies the state has become known for.

“I don’t want to write them off and say the plague has come to Maryland,” Pinsky said of the new members. “I just don’t think it has played out yet. It’s too early to tell what the effect will be.”

Matt Clark, a spokesman for Hogan, said the advocates seem to be “worried about something that might not happen,” adding that the boards and commissions are independent bodies and the Hogan administration “does not have the authority to make any demands on their decisions.”

Jeanne Allen, the founder of the pro-charter-school Center for Education Reform, said she is waiting to see whether the new school board is willing to “push the envelope” on education reform.

“I’m cautiously optimistic,” said Allen, who has advocated for bills making it easier to start charter schools in Maryland. At the same time, she said she worries that only some, not the majority of the new board, are willing to make the type of drastic changes she says she believes are needed to improve education in the state.

Political science professor Todd Eberly said the appointments are an important way for Hogan to advance his agenda in a state where Democrats control both chambers of the legislature by veto-proof majorities.

“Making conservative appointments doesn’t risk his popularity like a high-stakes legislative battle,” said Eberly, a political science professor at St. Mary’s College of Maryland. “If you are trying to effect change in state government, you look to areas where you have . . . a freer hand.”

Clark said the governor, who served as an appointments secretary under former governor Robert L. Ehrlich (R), sought the “most qualified, best possible candidates” for each of his appointments. He noted that each appointee must be confirmed by the Senate Executive Nominations Committee when the legislature is in session, although it is common practice for people appointed between legislative sessions to occupy their seats on an interim basis until confirmation hearings can be held.

“These folks have been scrutinized and cleared the hurdle,” Clark said. “So any questions that may be out there about those individuals about positions on policies have been put out there.”

Earlier this year, Marylanders to Prevent Gun Violence fought against Hogan’s appointment to the handgun review board of Richard Jurgena, a gun rights advocate who had publicly questioned the constitutionality of the state’s handgun permit law.

Jurgena’s contention that Maryland’s law requiring a “good and substantial reason” to get a concealed-carry permit was unconstitutional was troubling to many members of the Senate, which rejected his nomination.

Pauliukonis said her group took note of a report in The Washington Post before the 2014 elections in which gun rights advocates said Hogan had promised them he would do what he could as governor to expand access to firearms. Hogan disputed those claims, however, and Clark said the governor has repeatedly made clear that he does not plan to roll back the state’s strict gun laws.

“The firearms community has been watching” the handgun review board under the Hogan administration — just as it did under previous administrations, said Dan Blasberg, president of Maryland Shall Issue.

Asked whether he was hopeful that decisions from the new board would favor the firearms community, Blasberg said: “All we want, all we’ve ever wanted, is for the board to make its decisions based on Maryland law and statute, not based on personal feelings.”

Meanwhile, environmentalists lashed out at Hogan in June when he appointed Del. Anthony J. O’Donnell (R-Calvert), a lawmaker who has opposed major environmental initiatives, to the Public Service Commission. O’Donnell is expected to assume his post on an interim basis later this summer.

Tiffany Hartung, a spokesman for the Maryland Climate Coalition, said she was troubled by O’Donnell’s appointment and the governor’s appointment of Michael T. Richard, a former Hogan aide. She said she feared the appointees could undermine the expansion of renewable energy in Maryland.

O’Donnell, a longtime employee of Baltimore Gas & Electric, has been an outspoken critic of rate increases. During his 12 years in the House of Delegates, he has voted against bills that allowed offshore wind energy and that pushed for new standards in renewable energy usage to fight against climate change.

Richard, who served as a deputy chief of staff during the first part of Hogan’s term, left that post in January to become an interim member of the Public Service Commission. His confirmation hearing in March ran into trouble when the Senate committee became aware of emails Richard had sent to the governor’s office about commission business after taking his seat on the panel.

Richard gave information to his former colleagues about an offshore wind-power company’s application for renewable-energy credits and sought information from them as the commission was weighing a ruling on a solar-energy project.

He was eventually confirmed after a delay and following assurances from Richard that he was simply helping with the transition of his former job and keeping the governor’s staff updated on the status of various deliberations without divulging sensitive information.

Hogan also triggered complaints from teachers unions and proponents of traditional public schools earlier this year when he chose a leader in the charter school movement and other charter and private school advocates to join the state’s Board of Education.

The governor has appointed Chester Finn, a longtime advocate for charter schools and the co-founder of Edison Learning, a for-profit education group; Andy Smarick, who helped co-found the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools; Stephanie R. Iszard, the principal at Cornerstone Christian Academy in Prince George’s County; and Laura Weeldreyer, a consultant who works on charter school conversions.

“It appears the question is not how can we put students in a better position to be successful, but how can we help someone make a profit,” said Sean Johnson, the assistant executive director at the Maryland State Education Association.

Pinsky, who fought against the bill to expand charter schools, said he has met with many of the new board members and says he believes they share some common ground.

“I think we disagree on charter schools, and the legislature has put its imprint on where we think it should go,” he said. “We will have to take it issue by issue.”

Crazy Compliance Requirements for Ohio Charter Schools

Charter school sponsors will be spending the better part of July submitting documents for a new evaluation process that some argue is cumbersome and makes it impossible to receive perfect marks.

The new evaluation framework – which was created by an advisory panel following a discovery last summer that the previous ratings were being calculated illegally – grades sponsors on academic performance, quality and compliance.

Charter school advocates initially took issue with the academic piece of the assessment because traditional schools were provided safe harbor from report card scores. They’re now turning their ire toward a list of compliance requirements that were released last week.

The list includes 319 state laws and rules pertaining to charter schools that sponsors must provide evidence they’re complying with. Previously, documentation was required for only 23 components in the compliance portion of the evaluation.

To top it off, the state’s 36 sponsors – some of which oversee dozens of schools – were given one month to submit compliance documentation to the Department of Education.

Peggy Young, president of the Ohio Association of Charter School Authorizers, said it will be impossible for some sponsors to gather potentially tens of thousands of documents and check compliance with every law in such a short time frame.

“It’s going to take so much of our time that we can’t even focus on the things that we want to or should be focusing on,” she said.

Sponsors are supposed to be autonomous from the schools they oversee, but some of the compliance requirements would require them to get involved in daily operations and spend a significant amount of time in the buildings, she added.

There are also items on the list that sponsors are not qualified to certify, such as proof that there is no lead in the paint or that certain fire codes are met, said Jennifer Robison, associate director of Buckeye Community Hope Foundation.

As the sponsor of more than 40 schools, the foundation will likely have to beef up its staff and possibly contract with professionals in certain fields to ensure that all compliance measures are being met, she said.

Sponsors want to be compliant in all areas, Ms. Robison said, but the evaluation should be more like an audit that takes random samples instead of requiring sponsors to provide documentation to support every law on the books.

“I feel like we’re being held to a completely different standard as a public school than all the traditional public schools and this is not what we should be spending our time and focus on. It should be on improving the schools, helping the schools, making sure they’re providing a quality education to students – not whether they have a flag five feet in length,” she said, referring to item number 209 on the compliance list.

A number of sponsors have replied to ODE’s email that detailed the compliance requirements with similar concerns and claims that they won’t meet the July 25 deadline.

Read the full article here (registration required).

See the full list of compliance requirements here.

Screen Shot 2016-07-01 at 12.37.11 PM

Education Reformers Reflect at 25

A quarter-century on, challenges loom for the school reform movement.

by Rachel Cohen
American Prospect
June 29, 2016

It’s been a quarter-century since the nation’s first charter school opened in Minnesota, prompting many self-proclaimed reformers to step back and reflect on their movement’s progress. Charters educated 2.5 million students this past year, in 6,700 schools across 43 states. Programs enabling students to attend private schools with vouchers are expanding. And in February, Teach for America celebrated its 25-year anniversary with a summit in Washington, D.C.—noting that of their 50,000 teachers and alumni, 40,000 are still under 40.

But challenges loom for the movement—politically and philosophically. Some tensions can be chalked up to growing pains: a nationwide bipartisan coalition is bound to disagree at times, and certainly policy implementation can be far more contentious than passing legislation. Transforming the public education system, reformers have found, turns out to be hard, messy work.

But the problems run deeper than that. Internally, two main camps of reformers—market-driven advocates and accountability hawks—have been butting heads increasingly over goals and political priorities. For a long time, these two groups seemed to be one and the same—“choice and accountability” have always been buzzwords for the movement. But over time, the divisions between Team Choice and Team Accountability have grown more apparent. Today, some veteran choice advocates, those who have been pushing market-driven reforms for the last 25 years, have expressed feelings of being hemmed in, and in some cases crowded out, by others who are demanding formal checks and balances.

Jeanne Allen, the president of the Center for Education Reform, is one such frustrated choice advocate. “Reformers have become our own worst enemy,” she declared at an event at the National Press Club earlier this month. Her group organized the event to release its new manifesto, outlining challenges Allen sees within education reform, and steps allies must take to get their movement back on track. “If we’re to be honest with ourselves, we must acknowledge that our efforts to drive change have hit a wall,” she said. In Allen’s view, reformers saw more progress during their first nine years, than over the last 16.

Her manifesto cites a declining interest in Teach for America, decreasing enthusiasm for the education technology sector, and slower overall charter school growth. She says that officials who authorize charters have grown too overbearing, stifling flexibility and innovation. And she calls on the reform movement to get back on offense—to focus on “opportunity and upward mobility”—so they can begin rebuilding momentum.

The full article here.

North Carolina Paves Path to Expand Choice

Details about North Carolina’s proposed budget that would vastly expand choices for children:

North Carolina legislature proposes budget strong
on K-12 education
Expands Opportunity Scholarship Program, Increases Teacher Pay, Increases Funding for Special Needs School Choice Program

from The American Federation for Children
June 28, 2016

The American Federation for Children, the nation’s voice for educational choice, today applauds the North Carolina House and Senate for their proposed budget strengthening K-12 education and expanding educational opportunity in the state. The budget would significantly increase funding for the North Carolina Opportunity Scholarship Program to give scholarships to nearly 36,000 low-income students over the next 10 years. It also would increase overall K-12 spending by $500 million, including for teacher salaries and the Children with Disabilities Scholarship Grant.

“North Carolina is committed to providing all children with a quality education, and we are pleased with their decision to increase funding for those students and families who are most in need of educational choice well into the future,” said Betsy DeVos, chairman of the American Federation for Children. “We join our allies at Parents for Educational Freedom in North Carolina (PEFNC) in thanking Senator Phil Berger, House Speaker Tim Moore and legislative leadership for giving low-income and special needs families greater access to school choice.”

The North Carolina Opportunity Scholarship Program currently serves over 3,600 children from low-income families. The proposed expansion of program funding would help to meet the widespread demand for scholarships. Funding would increase from $44 million for the 2017-18 school year to almost $145 million for the 2027-28 school year – allowing over 36,000 students to receive a scholarship through the program.

“Today, with more than 22,300 applications submitted for the Opportunity Scholarship Program since its inception in 2013, this proposed budget is an acknowledgement to the thousands of working class families who never gave up on this program in hopes of it being a real game-changer for their children…With hopeful passage of this budget and signature by our governor, North Carolina will palpably demonstrate that this state will no longer allow income and geography to remain barriers to ensuring that all children – especially those who happen to be low-income or disabled – have the opportunity to the best education our state has to offer,” said Darrell Allison, president of Parents for Educational Freedom in North Carolina (PEFNC).

The proposed budget will now go to the House and Senate floor for votes and then to the Governor’s desk.

Historic Expansion of Teacher Pay and Opportunity Scholarships for Low-Income Families in Proposed State Budget Plan

from Parents for Educational Freedom in North Carolina
June 28, 2016

Parents for Educational Freedom in North Carolina (PEFNC) applauds the North Carolina House and Senate for their proposed budget which has a strong, comprehensive focus on K-12 public education. This budget increased K-12 spending by over $500 million and dramatically boosted teacher salaries. The budget also includes a massive funding expansion of the North Carolina Opportunity Scholarship Program that provides private school scholarships worth up to $4,200 to low-income and working class families.

“I, along with thousands of North Carolina families, thank Senator Phil Berger and House Speaker Tim Moore and leadership in both bodies for rightly compensating our valued teachers of North Carolina and for the generous budget designed for the Opportunity Scholarship Program. The compromise budget, in an effort to meet future parental demand for the Program, increases funding from $44,840,000 in 2017-18 (over 10,000 students) to nearly $145 million in 2027-28, or nearly 36,000 students,” said Darrell Allison, president of Parents for Educational Freedom in North Carolina.

“It’s hard to believe that this program was figuratively on life-support just three short years ago plagued with multiple court challenges and legal stoppages and injunctions. Today, with more than 22,300 applications submitted for the Opportunity Scholarship Program since its inception in 2013, this proposed budget is an acknowledgement to the thousands of working class families who never gave up on this program in hopes of it being a real game-changer for their children. Likewise, I salute our state leaders for answering the call. With hopeful passage of this budget and signature by our governor, North Carolina will palpably demonstrate that this state will no longer allow income and geography to remain barriers to ensuring that all children – especially those who happen to be low-income or disabled – have the opportunity to the best education our state has to offer,” said Allison.

The budget now heads to both the House and Senate for floor votes and onto the governor’s desk for approval.

Additional education initiatives PEFNC would like to thank the legislature for including in its budget are:

  • Children with Disabilities Scholarship Grant: The budget increases the amount by $5.8 million to over $10 million to provide additional scholarships for children with disabilities for the several hundred families who were currently on the waiting list. This will help families offset the costs of approved educational expenses for their special needs child, which could include private school tuition, tutoring, and other therapeutic services.
  • Teacher Pay Increase: Average teacher salaries will rise about 4.7 percent raising the average teacher salary in North Carolina to more than $50,000 this year and above $54,000 over the next three years.
  • Teacher 3rd Grade Reading Bonus: Program for third-grade teachers whose students surpass on state-required reading tests. A third-grade teacher can earn up to a $6,500 bonus under this budget proposal whose students excelling at state and district level.

 

Hillary Is Right on Innovation!, Say Education Reformers

The best way to improve the U.S. education system is through innovation and opportunity.

WASHINGTON, DC (June 29, 2016) — The Center for Education Reform (CER) today released the following statement from Jeanne Allen, founder and chief executive, applauding Hillary Clinton’s “innovation agenda” for higher education:

“Hillary’s innovation-focused agenda is exactly what higher education needs. Her emphasis on how different forms of learning can empower young people and provide greater opportunity embraces a notion that reformers have long advocated: that one model doesn’t fit all students.

“Indeed, once upon a time, Hillary supported substantive changes to the status quo. In 1996, she wrote in her book, It Takes a Village, that she found the charter school ‘argument persuasive.’ Presumably, the First Lady would have favored the pro-charter policies her husband put forward, including legislation that he said would put America ‘well on [its] way to creating 3,000 charter schools by the year 2000.’

“And yet, in 2015, Secretary Clinton seemed to take an opposite point of view, repeating an oft-used but inaccurate portrayal of charters: ‘Most charter schools — I don’t want to say every one — but most charter schools, they don’t take the hardest-to-teach kids, or, if they do, they don’t keep them,’ she said.

“The innovations in higher education Hillary is calling for today actually originated in charter schools and have taken hold at all levels of schooling. We call on her to embrace once again the needed, widespread changes to the status quo and to be a leader in ensuring that the principles of innovation and opportunity are embedded throughout all levels of education.”

For more information about how innovation can transform education, see CER’s recently released manifesto, Here Is Everything That’s Wrong With the U.S. Education System — And How to Fix It.

 

The Center for Education Reform does not endorse candidates, but we will always recognize when someone’s on the right side of parent power and excellence for kids. 

A Terrible Day for Teachers’ Rights

Statement from CER Founder & CEO on Supreme Court Denial of Petition to Rehear Friedrichs Case

WASHINGTON, DC (June 29, 2016) — The following statement was issued today by Jeanne Allen, founder and CEO of the Center for Education Reform, on the Supreme Court’s denial of a petition to rehear the Friedrichs v. California Teacher’s Association et al. case:

“It’s disappointing that freedom for teachers and their rights will have to wait another day. As we celebrate twenty-five years of charter schools and the innovation they brought to education — which were largely initiated by teachers seeking more autonomy to provide diverse learning opportunities for children — it’s unfathomable that we can still deny teachers the right to make their own decisions about how and under what conditions they should work.

We cannot succeed as a nation in educating our children if we cannot ensure teachers are involved in decisions about where and how they teach. We are thankful to Rebecca Friedrichs and her colleagues for bravely raising this issue, and all who worked to fight for teacher freedom. The fight for teachers’ rights must continue.”

Hillary Embraces Innovation-Focused Agenda For Higher Education

The best way to improve the U.S. education system is through innovation and opportunity.

Press Release
June 29, 2016

WASHINGTON, DC — The Center for Education Reform (CER) today released the following statement from Jeanne Allen, founder and chief executive, applauding Hillary Clinton’s “innovation agenda” for higher education:

“Hillary’s innovation-focused agenda is exactly what higher education needs. Her emphasis on how different forms of learning can empower young people and provide greater opportunity embraces a notion that reformers have long advocated: that one model doesn’t fit all students.

“Indeed, once upon a time, Hillary supported substantive changes to the status quo. In 1996, she wrote in her book, It Takes a Village, that she found the charter school ‘argument persuasive.’ Presumably, the First Lady would have favored the pro-charter policies her husband put forward, including legislation that he said would put America ‘well on [its] way to creating 3,000 charter schools by the year 2000.’

“And yet, in 2015, Secretary Clinton seemed to take an opposite point of view, repeating an oft-used but inaccurate portrayal of charters: ‘Most charter schools — I don’t want to say every one — but most charter schools, they don’t take the hardest-to-teach kids, or, if they do, they don’t keep them,’ she said.

“The innovations in higher education Hillary is calling for today actually originated in charter schools and have taken hold at all levels of schooling. We call on her to embrace once again the needed, widespread changes to the status quo and to be a leader in ensuring that the principles of innovation and opportunity are embedded throughout all levels of education.”

For more information about how innovation can transform education, see CER’s recently released manifesto, Here Is Everything That’s Wrong With the U.S. Education System — And How to Fix It.

 

The Center for Education Reform does not endorse candidates, but we will always recognize when someone’s on the right side of parent power and excellence for kids. 

NEWSWIRE: June 28, 2016 — What’s next for Charter Schools?

We’re on the ground in Nashville, TN this week at the National Charter Schools Conference, and from panel discussions to side conversations the message for a New Opportunity Agenda is clear:  Charter schools must get back to their roots of being innovative learning opportunities for children.

QUOTABLE. A few of the best remarks overheard so far at #NCSC16:

If we have the courage to bring down Jim Crow laws then we should have the same courage to change education. The problem I have with the edreform movement is that we’re too soft. We will fight until hell freezes over, and then we will fight on the ice.Roland Martin

Cl9xig6WEAAUg3p

We must not only remember where we have been, but UNDERSTAND where we’ve been. We have to understand and remember the bigger idea of why charter schools exist and were created in the first place.  — Howard Fuller

Cl97j-hWEAA6SFO

Charter schools are kind of like Snoop Dogg. Nobody ever thought he’d be mainstream.  Now charter schools are mainstream. But we have to go back to selling mix tapes out of the back of a car.  — Howard Fuller

tumblr_static_84p8ssvkqkg04owsggow4g8g81

THE FIRST LAW. As we celebrate the nation’s first charter school law created in Minnesota 25 years ago, Joe Nathan with the Center for School Change reminds us of the simple yet compelling five-page law that allowed for opportunities for charter schools to flourish.

CmC4rBwWAAEI_8Q

CHARTERS AS INNOVATION. Ted Kolderie, author of “The Split Screen Strategy: Improvement + Innovation” and one of the founding fathers of edreform, reminded us that charter schools were founded with the intention of being something totally different from traditional district schools. Charters were to have freedom in exchange for accountability, in order to get to the end goal of radically improving children’s lives. But now, charter schools are dangerously close to becoming the very thing they sought to change. “Regulation is at odds with radical change,” reflected Kolderie. And that’s precisely why many gathered yesterday to discuss how to get back on track an edreform movement that’s lost steam, so that all of our nation’s children can access excellent education opportunities.

Cl-wCrKWgAAcK_D

New Data Shows 98% of 2016 Boston Charter High School Graduates Have Been Accepted to College

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
June 22, 2016

CONTACT:
Eileen O’Connor
eileen@keyserpublicstrategies.com
617-806-6999

BOSTON, MA – New data from Boston’s six public charter high schools shows that 98.5% of 2016 graduates were accepted into college; 89% were accepted to a four-year university. Each of the six public charter high schools in Boston sent more than 90% of their 2016 graduates to college.

An analysis of the most recent postsecondary data reveals that hard fought academic gains by Boston charter school graduates continue to be leveraged after high school. More than 46% of the 2009 charter graduating class had earned a postsecondary degree by spring 2016 in comparison to 19.8% of 2009 graduates from non-exam, open enrollment high schools in the Boston Public Schools (BPS). Even when you include graduates from BPS elite exam schools, which have rigorous entrance requirements, the percentage of BPS graduates who earned a college degree by spring 2016 stood at 30%.

At a time when a college education is more important than ever, Boston’s public charter schools – which serve a student body that is 89% Black and Latino – have a proven track record of preparing students for success and closing the achievement gap. According to Stanford University’s Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO), public charter school students in Boston are learning at double the rate of Boston district school students, making two years worth of academic progress in English and math for every year they’re enrolled in a public charter school.

According to new data from the six public charter high schools in Boston:

  • MATCH High School, Codman Academy High School, the Academy of the Pacific Rim, and Boston Preparatory High School each had 100% of 2016 graduates accepted to college.
  • 98% of Boston Collegiate Charter School graduates were accepted to college.
  • 93% of City on a Hill graduates were accepted to college.
  • The colleges and universities that students were accepted to are among the nation’s best, including: Babson College, Bates College, Bentley University, Boston College, Brandeis University, Bridgewater State University, Brown University, Bucknell University, Colby-Sawyer College, College of the Holy Cross, Curry College, Dartmouth College, Davidson College, Emmanuel College, Loyola University Maryland, Merrimack College, Newbury College, Northeastern University, Providence College,  Quinnipiac University, Simmons College, Smith College, The George Washington University, University of Connecticut, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Boston, Dartmouth, and Lowell, University of New Hampshire at Durham, Vassar College, Wesleyan University, Wheaton College, and Wheelock College.

“We applaud the students, faculty, and staff of Boston’s public charter high schools for their tremendous achievement,” said Eileen O’Connor, a spokesperson for Great Schools Massachusetts. “This latest data highlights the need to expand access to  public charter schools so that more children can have access to the longer school day and intensive personal attention that public charter schools provide. As this new data shows, public charter schools are closing the achievement gap and helping more Boston children gain access to college.”

“This latest data shows what’s possible for Boston students when they’re given a high quality education,” said Thabiti Brown, Head of School at Codman Academy in Dorchester. “Expanding access to public charter schools will give more children the opportunity to attend public high schools that prepare them for success in college and beyond.”

Great Schools Massachusetts is a statewide coalition of parents, community groups, public charter schools, business leaders and education advocates committed to providing families with equal access to public charter schools. More than 34,000 children in Massachusetts remain stuck on public charter school waiting lists due to arbitrary enrollment caps, including more than 13,000 children in Boston alone. New charters are also frozen in Lawrence, Holyoke, Fall River, and other urban districts where traditional public schools are underperforming and parents have shown a clear demand for public charter schools. Great Schools Massachusetts is committed to providing families with equal access to public charter schools.

The Great Hope – and Great Fear – of School Reform in New Orleans

by Evan Smith
Opportunity Lives
June 21, 2016

Out of tragedy, an opportunity emerged.

For decades the city of New Orleans was failing its children. The statistics make plain the reality of the situation: About 62 percent of students were enrolled in failing schools. And more than half of all students didn’t even graduate from high school.

Then came Hurricane Katrina, which destroyed lives and washed away much of the city’s education infrastructure, leaving in its wake widespread destruction of property and a historic exodus of city residents.

In that void, a small group of educators came together to rebuild.

“Sometimes it takes a tragedy to help remind us what’s important — and not to take it for granted,” notes a recent manifesto from the Center for Education Reform. “Nowhere is this more obvious for the education reform movement than looking at New Orleans.”

In many ways — unpleasant as it sounds — the storm’s aftermath offered the perfect ecosystem in which to try something new, something better, for the sake of empowering the city’s historically overlooked children.

So in a partnership with the state of Louisiana, education reformers and local community leaders ushered in a movement of autonomous charter schools to fill the void, and the results speak for themselves.

“Since Katrina, [New Orleans] schools have produced what some experts believe to be the most rapid academic improvement in American history — and created a reform model other cities are trying,” wrote David Osborne, a senior fellow and director at the Progressive Policy Institute.

Screen Shot 2016-06-22 at 2.30.28 PM

Today, more than 92 percent of kids in the Big Easy attend charter schools. Of those students, three-quarters are graduating high school on time, while the percentage of students testing at grade level has gone up by 77 percent, according to the Center for Education Reform.

Simply put, the New Orleans transformation is the “most radical overhaul of any type in any school district in at least a century,” according to Tulane University economist Douglas Harris.

What’s even more striking about the New Orleans story is that this rebirth brought on by charters had not only improved student achievement — it would appear to be replacing the old system altogether.

“For education reformers — the people who dreamed of remaking not only schools, but re-imagining school districts and entire education systems — New Orleans reminds us what is possible,” notes the CER manifesto. “Parents, regardless of their means and their zip code, are finally getting to choose what’s best for their children.”

At least that’s the way it looked for awhile.

But as the Center of Education Reform’s Jeanne Allen humbly admitted to Opportunity Lives, “If we as a movement are to be honest with ourselves, we must knowledge that our efforts to drive change have hit a wall.”

“More was accomplished in the first nine years of the education reform movement than in the past 16,” Allen added.

That stunted progress is true for New Orleans as well.

“Perhaps the most troubling sign of reform’s place in the decade is the sudden unraveling of the New Orleans revolution,” the manifesto notes.

Screen Shot 2016-06-22 at 2.31.38 PM

While reformers had hoped the clear statistical evidence of New Orleans rebirth was proof enough to justify a replication of its system in other cities, what they have come to see as reality is a pattern of assault from all sides by opponents of such change.

And nowhere is frustration over this situation more blatant than on the editorial page of the New Orleans Times-Picayune.

“Twenty years after Louisiana’s first charter school opened, you’d think the state’s educational establishment would’ve accepted the independent and innovation charters represent,” the Times-Picayune editorialized recently. “But judging by the slew of legislation filed this year to curb the growth of charters, that isn’t the case.”

With bills being introduced in Louisiana to limit the state Board of Elementary and Secondary Education’s power to grant charters, bills that will take funding away from charters and bills that forbid charter boards from contracting with for-profit operators, it is a clear attack on the very idea of charters as a whole.

And it would appear that the entire justification for this assault is not based on the desired improvement of students, or providing parents with access to good schools, but simply because Gov. John Bel Edwards believes school districts should get the final say on charters.

To that notion — as well as the idea that charters are not clearly a better path, and that school choice isn’t a fundamental right, and that student success isn’t dependent on school choice — the editorial board of the Times-Picayune has one simple response:

“We disagree.”

When it comes to creating opportunity for Louisiana students, the past decade of charter implementation has given more children hope than ever before, the editorial board wrote. And lawmakers should never get in the way of dreams.